Bellarmine · Apologia pro Responsione sua · Apology for His Answer to the Book of James, King of Great Britain, Entitled Triplici Nodo Triplex Cuneus
Chapter 10: On the Seat and Duration of Antichrist
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. XII, Apologia pro Responsione sua ad Librum Jacobi Magnae Britanniae Regis, an apology of 1609. The Latin source text is public domain; this English rendering is released with the site. Scripture quotations follow Bellarmine's Vulgate citations, rendered in Douay-Rheims wording where he quotes exactly. Click “Show the Latin” for the original (raw OCR of the scan; scanning errors remain — the scan itself is the authority).
Sixth, on page 60, he passes to the Apocalypse, and says that from chapters 13 and 17 of the Apocalypse it is manifestly gathered that the seat of Antichrist will be Rome; for in chapter 13 Antichrist is described under the figure of a monstrous beast which had seven heads and ten horns. Then in chapter 17 it is explained, where he is called the great harlot, who sits upon many waters, and sits on the monstrous beast, and who is named the great city, and Babylon; and that by Babylon Rome is understood, the papists themselves, he says, everywhere admit. But although the king labours much here, yet the matter is very easy. For the beast which is described in chapter 13 of the Apocalypse and the great harlot which is described in chapter 17 are not the same, nor does Scripture anywhere confound the beast with the harlot. The beast, then, is Antichrist, and his seat will be Jerusalem, not Rome. For in express words in chapter 11 John says that it is that city in which their Lord was crucified, which city is spiritually called Egypt and Sodom, but properly is Jerusalem; and in this all the Fathers agree, as I noted above; and besides them there is Lactantius, book 7, chapters 15 and 17, where he says that the chief kingdom of Antichrist will be in Syria, where Judea is. Likewise Saint Jerome and Theodoret in the commentary on chapter 11 of Daniel say that Antichrist will pitch his tents in the region of Jerusalem, and at last be killed on the Mount of Olives. Lastly, Saint Irenaeus, book 5, clearly teaches that Antichrist will reign at Jerusalem. But the harlot who is described in chapter 17, and is called the great city which has rule over the kings of the earth, and is also called Babylon both in that chapter and at the beginning of chapter 18, is Rome itself, but heathen Rome, not Christian Rome, as Saint Jerome writes in express words in book 2 against Jovinian: To you I speak, he says, who have blotted out by the confession of Christ the blasphemy written on your forehead. And in that chapter Saint John describes the destruction of the Roman empire on account of the persecutions against Christians; for so the vision of chapter 17 begins: Come, I will show thee the condemnation of the great harlot, who sitteth upon many waters, with whom the kings of the earth have committed fornication. And below he calls the city drunk with the blood of the saints, and with the blood of the martyrs of Jesus. So unless the king shows that the beast of chapter 13 and the woman of chapter 17 signify the same thing, he will never prove that the seat of Antichrist will be Rome, or that he who sits at Rome is Antichrist. But what the king brings about the time of forty-two months, which by our opinion is the space of three years and a half in which Antichrist is to reign, is not to the point; for this time is found in chapters 11 and 13, where the time of the beast, which is Antichrist, is described; but it is not found in chapter 17 or 18, where it is a matter of the woman and Babylon, by which Rome, or the Roman empire, is signified.
Seventh, on pages 63 to 66, the king disputes on the space in which Antichrist will reign. And since we, from Daniel, chapters 7 and 12, and from the Apocalypse, chapters 11, 12 and 13, and from the common opinion of the Fathers, have taught that Antichrist will reign three years and a half, from which it manifestly follows that the Roman Pontiff is called Antichrist by the innovators without any likelihood, since by their opinion he has reigned for many centuries, the king tries to evade the sentences of sacred Scripture, on the ground that in them a certain number is to be taken for an uncertain. But that is wont to have place when some one number, and that a perfect one, is written, as when in Apocalypse 7 twelve thousand sealed are described from every tribe of the children of Israel; and when in Apocalypse 20 the dragon is said to be bound for a thousand years. But in this place, since the time of Antichrist is most accurately described by years, by months and by days, it is a wonder if to anyone a certain number seems to be set for an uncertain. For he is said to be going to reign for a time, and times, and half a time, that is, a year, two years and half a year, which make three years and a half. Likewise for forty-two months, which give the same number. Lastly for one thousand two hundred and sixty days, which are forty-two months, or three lunar years and a half. But what most moves us so to understand the Scriptures is the unanimous consent of the Fathers, who wrote before the innovators raised a dispute with us on this matter. Saint Irenaeus, book 5: “Antichrist will reign,” he says, “three years and six months, and then the Lord will come from heaven.” Saint Hippolytus the martyr, oration on the consummation of the world: “Three years and a half,” he says, “Antichrist will reign upon the earth.” Saint Cyril, catechesis 15: “He will reign,” he says, “three years and a half only, which we say not from apocryphal books, but from the prophet Daniel.” Saint Jerome in the commentary on chapter 7 of Daniel: “Time,” he says, “signifies a year; times, according to the propriety of the Hebrew speech, which too has a dual number, prefigure two years; but half a time, six months, in which the saints are to be given up to the power of Antichrist.” Saint Augustine, book 20 of the City of God, chapter 23: “That the most savage kingdom of Antichrist against the Church, though to be endured for a small space of time, until by the last judgment of God the saints receive the everlasting kingdom, even one who reads these things half asleep is not allowed to doubt; for that a time, and times, and half a time, are one year, and two, and a half, and thereby three years and a half, becomes clear also by the number of days set afterwards; sometimes in the Scriptures it is declared also by the number of months.” Lastly the same is taught by Theodoret on chapter 7 of Daniel, and almost all the expositors of the Apocalypse, Primasius, Bede, Anselm, Haymo, Arethas, Richard and Rupert.
But, says the king: “For as to that literal interpretation, which all the papists follow, of three years and six months, by which they would have that time fall exactly in the last days of all, excepting forty-five before the second coming of the Lord, it is plainly repugnant to the whole New Testament”; and he proves it repugnant from chapter 24 of Matthew, where we read: Of that day and hour no one knoweth, not the angels, but the Father alone; and in the same place, and elsewhere often, the Lord exhorts to watching, because that day will overwhelm men unprepared and secure. And in this very Apocalypse it is twice repeated that that day will come as a thief in the night; all which things would be false if men certainly knew that forty-five days after the death of Antichrist the Judge would come. I answer: if this argument is worth anything, it is worth most against Saint Jerome; for he, explaining those words of Daniel, chapter 12, Blessed is he that waiteth, and cometh unto a thousand three hundred thirty-five days: “Blessed,” says Saint Jerome, “is he who, Antichrist being killed, waits out forty-five days above the number fixed beforehand, in which the Lord and Saviour is to come in his majesty; but why after the killing of Antichrist there is a silence of forty-five days belongs to the divine knowledge; unless perhaps we should say: the delay of the kingdom of the saints is the proof of patience.” So Saint Jerome, a great papist, from whom we lesser papists learned this exposition. Nor does anything follow from it against the Gospel. For we truly do not know the day and hour of the judgment, as even the angels from heaven do not know it; since, as we are ignorant when Antichrist will come, it is necessary also that we be ignorant of the day of judgment, which will follow the destruction of Antichrist. But those who will be found among the living in the times of Antichrist will easily be able to know that the day of judgment and the consummation of the world are not far off, since the Lord said, Matthew 24: And immediately after the tribulation of those days the sun shall be darkened, and so on; and soon: And they shall see the Son of man coming in the clouds; and a little after: When you shall see all these things, know ye that it is nigh, even at the doors. And the Apostle agrees with the Gospel, 2 Thessalonians 2, when he says of Antichrist: whom the Lord Jesus shall kill with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming. But neither will they certainly know the day nor the hour; because even if forty-five days, on Daniel's witness, are to be waited after the death of Antichrist, yet Scripture does not say that the day of judgment is not to be put off longer. So those men will know that the day of judgment is not to be expected before the forty-fifth day from the slaying of Antichrist; but whether it is to be deferred longer they will not know. And as in the days of Noah very many were unbelieving, although Noah both by word and by example, that is, by the building of the ark, preached the flood to come, and unprepared and yawning they were overwhelmed by the flood; so will it be in the last days: the servants of God will preach that the day of judgment is not far off, nay, is at hand and imminent; yet the children of this world, after their usual manner, will think of the things which are of the world, and when they least think it, the Son of God the Judge will come.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
caput x. De sede et duratione Antichristi. Sexto pag. 60, transit ad Apocalypsim, ac dicit ex cap. xm. et xvn. Apocalyp. manife¬ ste colligi, sedem Antichristi fore Romam, nam cap. xm. describitur Antichristus sub figura prodigiosa} bestiae, quae habebat ca¬ pita septem, et cornua decem. Deinde cap. xvn. explicatur, ubi meretrix magna appel¬ latur, quae sedet super aquas multas, et pro¬ digiosae bestiae insidet, quaeque civitas mag¬ na, et Babylon nominatur, per Babylonem autem Romam intelligi, ipsi, inquit, Pontifi¬ cii passim admittunt. Sed quamvis rex hic multum laboret, ta¬ men res facillima est. Nam non est idem be¬ stia, quae describitur cap. xi. Apocalyp. et meretrix magna, quae describitur cap. xvn., neque usquam Scriptura bestiam cum mere¬ trice confundit. Igitur bestia, Antichristus est (c) e;usque sedes Hierusalem erit , non Roma. Disertis enim verbis cap. xi Joannes dicit, urbem illam esse, in qua Dominus eo¬ rum crucifixus est, quae urbs spiritualiter dicitur ^Egyptus, et Sodoma, proprie autem Hierosolyma est ; et in hoc conveniunt om¬ nes Patres, ut supra notavi : et praeter illos adest Lactantius lib. vii. cap. 15. et 17, ubi dicit, regnum Antichristi praecipuum futu¬ rum esse in Syria, ubi Judaea est. Item S. Hieronymus, et Theodoretus in comment. ad cap. xi. Danielis, dicunt Antichristum in re¬ gione Hierosolymorum tentoria fixurum, et tandem in monte Oliveti occidendum. Deni¬ que S. Ireneeus lib. v, perspicue docet, An¬ tichristum Hierosolymae regnaturum. Meretrix autem, quae describitur in cap. xvn. et dicitur civitas magna, quae habet im¬ perium super reges terrae, et vocatur etiam Babylon tum in eo capite, tum initio capitis xviii. ipsa est Roma, sed Roma ethnica, non Roma Christiana, ut disertis verbis scribit S. Hieronymus lib. n. contra Jovinianum : Ad te, inquit, loquor, quae scriptam in fronte * (a) De signis et prodigiis Antichristi. — ( b ) Maraculum quod ridetur a rege, habet exempla, plu¬ rima in sacris litteris. — (c) Sedes Antichristi non erit Roma , sed Hierusalem. 170 APOLOGLE CAP. X. blasphemiam Christi confessione delesti. At¬ que in eo capite describit S. Joannes exci¬ dium Romani imperii, propter persecutiones in Christianos, sic enim incipit visio c. xvn. Veni ostendam tibi damnationem meretricis magnae, quae sedet super aquas multas , cum qua fornicati sunt reges terrae. Et infra, vocat civitatem ebriam de sanguine Sanctorum, et de sanguine Martyrum Jesu. Itaque nisi rex ostendat, bestiam cap. xi. et mulierem cap. xvii. eamdem rem significare , numquam evincet, sedem Antichristi fore Romam, aut qui Romae sedet esse Antichristum. Quod autem rex adducit de tempore qua¬ draginta duorum mensium, quod ex senten¬ tia nostra est spatium trium annorum cum dimidio, quo regnaturus Antichristus est, ad rem non facit, nam hoc tempus habetur cap. xi. et xm, ubi tempus bestiae, quae Antichri¬ stus est, describitur : non autem habetur cap. xvii. vel xviii, ubi de muliere, et Baby¬ lone agitur, per quam Roma, sive Romanum imperium significatur. Septimo pag. 63. 64. 63. et 66. disputat rex de spatio, quo regnabit Antichristus. Et quoniam nos ex Daniele cap. vii. et xn et ex Apocalypsi cap. xi. xn. et xm. et ex com¬ muni Patrum sententia docuimus, (a) Anti¬ christum regnaturum tribus annis cum di¬ midio, ex quo manifeste sequitur, Romanum Pontificem sine ulla verisimilitudine a Nova¬ toribus Antichristum vocari, cum regnaverit ex eorum sententia multis saeculis : rex co¬ natur eludere Scripturae sacrae sententias, quod in eis numerus certus pro incerto acci¬ piendus sit. Sed id solet habere locum, cum unus aliquis numerus, isque perfectus ad- scribitur, ut cum Apocalyp. vii. describun¬ tur ex omni tribu filiorum Israel duodecim millia signati; et cum Apoc. xx. dicitur, draco ligatus per annos mille. At hoc loco cum tempus Antichristi accu¬ ratissime describatur per annos, per menses, et per dies; mirum est si cui certus nume¬ rus, pro incerto poni videatur. Dicitur enim regnaturus per tempus, et per tempora, et dimidium temporis, id est, annum, biennium et dimidium anni, quae faciunt tres annos cum dimidio. Item per menses quadi aginta duos, qui eunulem numerum reddunt. Deni¬ que per dies mille ducentos sexaginta, qui sunt menses quadraginta duo, sive anni lu¬ nares tres cum dimidio. Sed quod nos maxime movet, ut Scriptu¬ ras ita intelligamus, est unanimis 'consensus Patrum, qui ante scripserunt, quam Nova¬ tores de hac re nobis litem moverent. San¬ ctus Irenaeus lib. v. « Regnabit , inquit, Antichristus annis tribus, et mensibus sex, et tunc veniet Dominus de coelis. » Sanctus Hippolytus martyr oratione de consumma¬ tione mundi : « Tres, inquit, annos cum di¬ midio regnabit Antichristus super terram. » Sanctus Cyrillius Catechesi 15:« Regnabit, inquit, tribus annis, et dimidio tantum, quod non ex libris apocryphis dicimus, sed ex Da¬ niele Propheta ». Sanctus Hieronymus in comment. ad caput vii. Danielis : « Tempus, inquit, annum significat; tempora, juxta hebraici sermonis proprietatem, qui et ipsi dualem numerum habent, duos annos prae¬ figurant ; dimidium autem temporis , sex menses, quibus Sancti potestati Antichristi permittendi sunt » . Sanctus Augustinus lib. xx. de Civit. Dei cap. 23. : « Antichristi, in¬ quit, adversus Ecclesiam saevissimum re¬ gnum, licet exiguo spatio temporis sustinen¬ dum, donec Dei ultimo judicio regnum San¬ cti accipiant sempiternum, qui vel dormitans haec legit, dubitare non sinitur : tempus quippe, et tempora, et dimidium temporis, annum unum esse, et duos, et dimidium : ac per hos tres annos, et semissem, etiam nu¬ mero dierum posterius posito dilucescit : ali¬ quando in Scripturis, et mensium numero declaratur ». Denique idem docent Theodo- retus in cap. vii. Dan., et omnes fere exposi¬ tores Apocalypsis, Primasius, Beda, Ansel- mus, Haymo, Arethas, Richardus et Ruper- tus. At, inquit rex : ( b ) « Nam quod ad littera¬ lem illam interpretationem , quam omnes Pontificii sequuntur, trium annorum et sex mensium, qua volunt illud tempus adamus- sim incidere in dies omnium novissimos, ex¬ ceptis quadraginta quinque ante secundum Domini adventum, plane toti novo testamento repugnat » : repugnare autem probat ex cap. xxiv. Matth. ubi legimus : De die illa , et hora nemo scit , neque Angeli, nisi solus Pater : et ibidem, et alibi soepe Dominus hortatur ad vigilandum, quia dies illa inopinatos, et se- (a) Antichristus tribus annis cum dimidio regnaturus est. — (b) Objectio contra durationem trium annorum cum dimidio. APOLOGLE GAP. XI. 174 euros homines opprimet. Et in hac ipsa Apo¬ calypsi his repetitur, diem illam, ut furem in nocte venturam : quae omnia falsa essent, si certo scirent homines, quadraginta quin¬ que diebus post mortem Antichristi, Judicem esse venturum. (a) Respondeo, si quid haec argumentatio valet, adversus sanctum Hieronymum potis¬ simum valere; ille enim explicans illa verba Danielis cap. xn. Beatus , qui exspectat , et pervenit usque ad dies mille trecentos triginta- quinque : « Beatus », inquit sanctus Hiero¬ nymus, « qui interfecto Antichristo, dies su¬ pra numerum praefinitum quadraginta quin¬ que praestolatur ; quibus est Dominus, atque Salvator in sua majestate venturus : quare autem post interfectionem Antichristi, qua¬ draginta quinque diem silentium sit, di¬ vinae scientiae est : nisi forte dicamus : di¬ latio regni Sanctorum, patientiae comproba¬ tio est. » Haec sanctus Hieronymus, magnus Pontificius, a quo nos minores Pontificii hanc expositionem didicimus. < Neque ex ea sequitur aliquid contra Evan- gelium. Nos enim vere nescimus diem, atque horam judicii, ut etiam nesciunt Angeli de coelo ; quoniam cum ignoremus, quando An- tichristus venturus sit, necesse etiam est, ut ignoremus judicii diem, qui Antichristi inte¬ ritum consequetur. Illi autem, qui Anti¬ christi temporibus in vivis invenientur ; fa¬ cile scire poterunt, non longe abesse diem judicii, et mundi consummationem, cum Do¬ minus dixerit Matth. xxiv. Statim autem post tribulationem dierum illorum sol obscurabitur ete ., et mox : Et videbunt Filium hominis ve¬ nientem in nubibus ; et paulo post : Cum vi¬ deretis haec omnia, scitote quia prope est in ja¬ nuis (i). Et concordat Apostolus» cum Evan- gelio II Thess. ii. cum ait de Antichristo ; quem interficiet Dominus Jesus spiritu oris sui, et destruet illustratione adventus sui. Sed neque illi certo scient diem, neque ho¬ ram ; quoniam etiam si dies quadraginta quinque, Daniele teste, expectandi erunt post mortem Antichristi ; tamen Scriptura non dicit, diem judicii non esse longius proro¬ gandum. Itaque scient homines illi diem ju¬ dicii non esse expectandum ante diem qua¬ dragesimum quintum ab Antichristi caede : sed an diutius differendus sit ignorabunt. Quemadmodum autem in diebus Noe plu¬ rimi fuerunt increduli, quamvis Noe, et verbo, et exemplo, id est, fabricatione arese praedicaret diluvium futurum ; et imparati, et oscitantes a diluvio oppressi sunt : sic erit in novissimis diebus, praedicabunt servi Dei, judicii diem non longe abesse, immo etiam instare, et imminere : tamen filii hu¬ jus saeculi, more solito de iis, quae mundi sunt, cogitabunt, et quando ipsi minus puta¬ bunt, Filius Dei Judex adveniet.