Bellarmine · Apologia pro Responsione sua · Apology for His Answer to the Book of James, King of Great Britain, Entitled Triplici Nodo Triplex Cuneus
Chapter 12: On the Four Visions of Saint John in the Apocalypse by Which, in the King's Opinion, Antichrist Is Designated
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).
At the end of the disputation the king sets about explaining four visions of Saint John in which he thinks the description of Antichrist is contained. These visions we too shall briefly examine. The first vision, then, is found in Apocalypse, chapter 6, where Saint John, having seen one horse white, a second red, a third black, saw a fourth pale; this pale horse the king teaches is Antichrist, on whose authority he does not say. I, when I had set myself to consult the interpreters of this passage, found almost as many opinions as there are authors. Saint Augustine writes that by the red, black and pale horse are signified three scourges, famine, war and pestilence. Saint Anselm and Richard would have understood by the same three horses the persecutions of pagans, heretics and false brethren. Others prefer that the rules of three Caesars, Nero, Titus and Domitian, are signified. So without any injury to the king we can say that this vision does not pertain to Antichrist; especially since by the common opinion of all expositors it is a matter of Antichrist a little after in the same chapter, in the opening of the sixth seal, where is revealed the last and gravest persecution to come near the end of the world. From which we understand that it is false what the adversaries say, that Antichrist has already reigned a thousand years and more, unless perhaps the last persecution were to last beyond a thousand years.
The second vision is found in chapter 9, where at the sound of the fifth trumpet a star falls from heaven and opens the pit of the abyss, whence an army of locusts goes forth; and then at the sound of the sixth trumpet an army of horsemen advances, horrible and innumerable, trampling and laying waste everything. And in this vision indeed we agree well enough that by the falling star and the locusts are understood the forerunners of Antichrist; by the army of horsemen is signified the army of Antichrist. But we believe that by the falling star Luther is signified, by the locusts the Lutheran and Protestant heretics and the other sectaries of this time; but the king would have understood by the falling star someone of eminent dignity in the Church, who, though he ought to have been the light of the world, deserting his office, set up a kingdom for himself, and in that way the seat of Antichrist began to be raised. And we indeed can easily show how Luther fell, in what year, on what occasion, with what noise, and what army of locusts he led out of the pit of the abyss. But the king will not easily teach who was that ecclesiastical person of eminent dignity who, deserting his office, set up a kingdom for himself and prepared a seat for Antichrist. He affirms indeed, page 99, that Boniface III was that man who first named himself universal bishop, which is the title of Antichrist. But, by the king's good leave, Boniface did not name himself universal bishop, but was so called by the emperor Phocas, in the way that Saint Gregory was called universal bishop by the patriarch of Alexandria, Saint Gregory himself being witness in the epistle to Eulogius, which is the 30th of book 7, first indiction. In the way also that to Saint Leo, more than a hundred years older than Gregory, the synod of Chalcedon offered the title of universal patriarch, as the same Saint Gregory witnesses in the epistle cited a little before. Wherefore if that title offered by others makes an Antichrist, not Boniface III but Saint Leo I will have to be called Antichrist, so that it will have to be said that Antichrist reigned even in the first five hundred years. But, Boniface asked of Phocas and obtained, on the witness of Anastasius, that the Roman Pontiff alone be called universal. I answer that Boniface asked of Phocas and obtained that he should restrain Cyriacus, bishop of Constantinople, who was unduly usurping to himself the title of universal bishop, which by right is owed to the Roman Pontiff alone. But neither Boniface nor his successors used this title, naming themselves rather in their epistles servants of the servants of God. Add that Boniface III set up no kingdom for himself, since in nothing did he depart from the humility of his predecessors, nor did he desert his ecclesiastical office, since in that very short space of eight months in which he sat on the Apostolic throne he gathered a council of bishops at Rome, and instituted many things which seemed to pertain to the reformation of the clergy. So altogether gratuitously did the king make Boniface III, rather than any other of his predecessors, Antichrist, or the forerunner of Antichrist. The king adds in the same place that the doctrine of Antichrist is declared in the same chapter 9 of the Apocalypse, where it is said that the rest of men, who were not slain by these plagues, did not do penance from the works of their hands, that they should not adore devils and idols of gold and silver and brass and stone and wood, which neither can see, nor hear, nor walk; nor did penance from their murders, nor from their sorceries, nor from their fornications, nor from their thefts. From these the king gathers that the papists follow the doctrine of Antichrist, since Vasquez the Jesuit teaches that devils are to be worshipped; and the other papists everywhere worship images of gold, silver, brass, stone and wood; besides they commit murders, use sorceries, when by Agnus Deis of wax they put out fire, and by blessed shirts and relics of various kinds and prayers preserve men from the onset of engines of war, the force of flame, the violence of iron, the stroke of lightning and other dangers of that kind; they fornicate, both spiritually by idolatry, and carnally on account of the marriage forbidden to clerics, monks and nuns; lastly they are guilty of theft, both because they steal from God the titles of honour to confer them on their Antichrist, and because by jubilees, indulgences, relics and like tradings they heap up money.
To all these the answer is most easy and most ready: that the king is vehemently mistaken when he refers those words of the Apocalypse to the doctrine of Antichrist, and when he strives to fit that doctrine to Catholics as their own. For first, the interpreters of this passage, Anselm, Richard and others, agree that the words cited above signify nothing else than that with Antichrist there will perish for ever not only the Christians whom he has deceived by his arts, but also the pagans who have not done penance from idolatry and the worship of devils. For the gods of the Gentiles are devils, Psalm 95; and the things which the heathens sacrifice, they sacrifice to devils, and not to God, 1 Corinthians 10. And besides, the Jews, who have not done penance from murders, sorceries, fornications and thefts; for the Jews beyond others are given both to fornications, and above all to thefts, publicly increasing their wealth by usury. Then, how can it be that the doctrine of Antichrist is to worship devils and idols of all kinds, when Daniel writes of him, chapter 11, that Antichrist will fight against all gods, that he alone may be held God? But it is a wonder that so great a king did not hesitate to write those things of Vasquez the Jesuit which by a mere inspection of the book cited by him are understood to be false; for the king cites the third book of Vasquez on the worship of adoration, disputation 1, chapter 5. But in that place Vasquez treats this question, whether he is to be counted an idolater who has adored a devil appearing to him under the image of the Crucified. And he answers that he is not to be held an idolater, but deluded, if he thought that he who appeared to him was truly Christ, and intended to adore Christ alone, and invincibly did not know that a devil lurked under that image. Is this to teach the worship of the devil? What if a royal servant should come forth clothed in royal robes, and be adored as king by the ignorant; would the unskilled adorers be held guilty of treason, or rather be laughed at as deluded? And this is the argument by which the king wished to prove that the papists are worshippers of devils. On the worship of images nothing is to be added to what we discussed above; for it is well enough established that images of the saints are neither idols, nor adored as gods. Murders, sorceries, fornications and thefts we do not deny are found among Catholics; but neither will the king deny that they are frequent in his kingdom among his Protestants. But if it could be proved that in the Catholic Church these things are taught to be lawful and just, and not rather forbidden and punished as unjust and unlawful, then the adversaries would say something; but from crimes and wickednesses common to the whole human race to gather that the doctrine of Antichrist is among the papists alone is inept and ridiculous. But the papists alone put out fire by Agnus Deis of wax; and that is like sorcery. I answer: divine miracles are seen among the papists alone; but the invocation of the divine name, and the priestly blessing by which the waxen lambs are consecrated, cannot be attributed to sorceries, unless God is held for the devil. For those are sorceries which have their force from the invocation of the devil, and a certain pact entered into with the devil himself. But he who condemns the miracles which are done by shirts and other relics ought also to condemn the miracles which, on Luke's witness in Acts of the Apostles, chapter 19, were done by the handkerchiefs and aprons of Saint Paul; and which, on Saint Augustine's witness, book 22 of the City of God, chapter 8, were done by the relics of Saint Stephen; and very many others of that kind, with which the books of the holy Fathers are full. Nor yet do we approve, but condemn and reject, the superstitious prayers which some sometimes use against arms or lightning, with unknown characters and the invocation of devils. Of the multitude of monks and nuns I shall say only this, that institutes of that kind cannot be censured unless all the Fathers of the first five hundred years are censured. Certainly if anyone reads either the epistles of Saint Jerome on the keeping of virginity, and on the death of Paula, to Eustochium; or the book of Saint Augustine on the morals of the Church; or the books of Saint John Chrysostom against the detractors of the monastic life, he will see that there were so many thousands of monks and nuns in that first Church that he can deservedly say that the sects of the Lutherans and Calvinists, whence these institutes are wholly banished, have nothing in common with the primitive Church. Lastly, what the king says about heaping up wealth by the artifice of jubilees and indulgences shows well enough that he has given more credit to the calumnies of Luther and like innovators than to simple truth. Certainly at this time, if alms to be given are prescribed to those to whom indulgences are granted, it is left to the will of each to what needy persons he pleases to give alms.
There follows the third vision, which is found in Apocalypse, chapter 13, where a certain horrible beast is described which will come up from the sea, having seven heads and ten horns. Of which heads one will be struck with a deadly wound, but a little after will rise again to the wonder of the whole earth; to this beast the dragon gave his power. In the same place another beast is described which will come up from the earth, having two horns like a lamb, and this latter beast will do miracles, so as to make fire come down from heaven, to this end, that all may adore the former beast. John adds that no one in those times will have power to sell or buy unless he bears the character of the beast on his hand or on his forehead; lastly John says that the number of the beast will be the number 666. Of this vision the king says much, and tries to twist everything to us Catholics, as adorers and followers of Antichrist. But from this very chapter 13 of the Apocalypse we much more easily and clearly show that Antichrist has not yet come. For when Antichrist has come, all things will be most well known, which is the former beast, which the latter, which the head slain and rising, what his character, what his name; and the rest which are now so obscure that there is need of conjectures and divination. The common exposition of the ancient Catholics is that by the dragon is understood the devil; by the former beast, the whole body of the wicked; by the head of this beast slain and reviving, Antichrist, who will be the last and greatest head of the wicked, and who will feign himself slain, that he may feign a resurrection in imitation of Christ; by the latter beast, the preachers and apostles of Antichrist, who will do miracles to draw men to Antichrist; that as to the character and the number of the name, the matter will be hidden and unknown until Antichrist appears. Let us see now what the king gathers from this vision against Catholics. First, then, he says that by the head of the beast slain and reviving is to be understood Antichrist, who together with the manner of ruling had received a deadly wound from the Goths and Vandals; but soon, the wound being healed, opened his mouth to blasphemies, and had to be adored by the whole earth. And the king adds: “But whether worship and adoration under this same name and title are wont to be paid to each of the Pontiffs when they are inaugurated, no one knows better than our Cardinal.” So he. But the Goths and Vandals inflicted no wound on the Roman Pontiff, but on the Roman emperor, from whom the Goths took Italy and Spain, the Vandals Africa; and the wound can be said to have been healed when Justinian recovered Italy and Africa. So if he on whom the wound was inflicted, and a little after healed, is Antichrist, not the Roman Pontiff but the Roman emperor will be Antichrist. But if it does not please him that the emperor be called Antichrist, as in truth he is not Antichrist, let the king acquiesce in the exposition of Saint Gregory, book 11, epistle 3, of Primasius, Bede, Haymo, Anselm, Richard and Rupert on chapter 13 of the Apocalypse, who all with unanimous consent teach that Antichrist will pretend that he has received an incurable wound, and has been slain, and a little after has risen from the dead by his own power, that he may so much the more easily be held for God and adored. But since no one of the Roman Pontiffs has ever feigned death and resurrection, nor wished to be held for God and adored, from this alone it can be understood how far from the truth are those who boast that the Pontiff is Antichrist. But, says the king, the Cardinal will not deny that Pontiffs are adored when they are inaugurated. It is true that the Supreme Pontiffs are adored, but as Vicars of God, not as gods. And the divine Scripture everywhere uses the word adoration for the veneration which is paid to men. For there is scarcely any external adoration which is shown to the true God alone, besides the honour of sacrifice, and the things which pertain to sacrifice, temples, altars, priests. Hence Saint Augustine, book 20 against Faustus, chapter 21, answering Faustus, who had written that we had turned the martyrs into idols, proves that in the Church of Christ the holy martyrs are not adored as gods, because the priest standing at the altar never says, I offer to thee, Peter, or Paul, or Cyprian. Wherefore if the king shows that a sacrifice was ever offered to the Roman Pontiff, or altars raised, or temples dedicated, or priests instituted, as we know was done for certain emperors who wished to be held gods, and as Antichrist will order to be done for himself, then at last we shall grant that the Pontiff is held and adored as God; but while he is honoured with that worship of adoration which befits not God alone, but creatures too, in vain is a calumny built on the name of adoration. Then the king adds that the miracle of the lesser beast, which will make fire come down from heaven, is the very thunderbolt of excommunication, with which the Roman Pontiff terrifies men, and strikes even kings themselves. But this miracle is not attributed in the Apocalypse to the greater beast, which signifies Antichrist, but to the lesser, which serves Antichrist; therefore the Pontiff, who terrifies men with a thunderbolt, will not be Antichrist; and the king will now have to seek who is the Antichrist for whose favour the Pope makes the thunderbolt come down from heaven. Then, Saint John mentions this miracle as a new and unusual thing; but excommunication is a common and known thing, which even the Protestants use, and which the Church had familiar long before that Antichrist, even that fictitious one devised by the innovators, was said to have arisen. Therefore with the common exposition of the ancient writers cited above it is to be believed that true fire will come down from heaven at the command of the ministers of Antichrist, and the words of Scripture are not to be twisted by tropes to excommunications. From which we understand it is a mere fiction that the Pope is Antichrist, since no one of the Roman Pontiffs, either by himself or by his own, has made fire come down from heaven.
Further, the king says that the character of Antichrist is the profession of obedience to the Roman Pontiff. But this is in many ways repugnant to the words of Scripture. For Scripture in Apocalypse 13 signifies that the character of the beast is to be received on the right hand or on the forehead; the profession of obedience is received neither on the right hand nor on the forehead. Then, the character of the beast will be necessary in the whole kingdom of Antichrist for all men, small and great, poor and rich, servants and free. But how many thousands are there in the dominion of the Roman Pontiff who cannot show a profession of obedience? For the profession is wont to be made by those who are promoted to degrees of dignities, or the doctorate, or certain offices; from very many others, and indeed from the greatest part of men, it is not exacted; for although all are bound to obey the Roman Pontiff, yet not all are bound to make that profession in set words and a fixed rite, much less to carry it on the forehead or on the hand. Besides, the same Scripture says that in the whole kingdom of Antichrist no one is to be permitted to buy or sell unless he has the character, or the name of the beast, or the number of his name. But how many Jews are there in the very city of Rome who publicly sell and buy, and have no such character, nor adhere to the Supreme Pontiff? So although many try to divine many things about that character, yet it will not certainly be known what it is until Antichrist has come; unless perhaps it pleases to say with the most ancient writer Hippolytus the martyr that the character of Christ is the sign of the Cross, the character of Antichrist its abolition; by which character the Calvinists are recognized at this time, as forerunners of Antichrist. Lastly, of the number 666 the king says that by that number is designated the Greek name Lateinos; for the letters of this name make this number. And that the Pope is Latin, and rules chiefly among Latins, is most well known. But the name Latin is not written with ei, and without ei it does not give the number 666. Besides, the proper name of Antichrist is designated by the Evangelist, not a name common to many, as Latin is; and by proper name no one of the Pontiffs has been called Latin. Lastly, very many names are found which make that number 666; Arethas noted in the commentary on this passage seven names which give this number; others very many others, of which we have written much in book 3 on the Pontiff, chapter 10. The king adds that by the number 666 can be understood the time at which Antichrist was to appear, since Pope Boniface III, who first usurped the title of Antichrist, sat in the year of the Lord 606. But that number is the number of a name, as Saint John expressly said; therefore it ought not to be twisted to a number of time; then, the number of years from Christ to Boniface does not contain 666, but 606. But, says the king, the time of this number can be begun from the year in which Pompey the Great plundered the temple of Jerusalem. I pass over that this is said gratuitously; this suffices to refute this computation, that from that plundering of the temple to the year of the Lord 606, in which Boniface sat, there are 670 years. So it is necessary either that Saint John was deceived, which cannot be, or that those err who would have the time of the coming of Antichrist designated by the number 666. But what the king says, that sixty years after the death of Boniface III the kingdom of Antichrist was confirmed, and that this is indicated by the number 666, would be something if it could be shown that anything peculiar happened in the year 666, such as some change of government, or the creation of a new Pontiff, or the acquisition of a new title, or anything of that kind. But since the year of the Lord 666 fell in the pontificate of Vitalian, who had already sat some years, and sat peacefully and without any innovation, no reason can be given why that time ought to have been marked by so unusual a revelation; to pass over what I said above, that this number is named by Saint John himself the number of the beast's name, not of time.
There remains the fourth vision, from chapter 17 of the Apocalypse, which, the more lengthily it is treated by the king, the more briefly will be dispatched by us. For in that chapter is described a certain great harlot sitting on a beast, whom the king would have to be Antichrist; and on that foundation laid he disputes much of Antichrist, adding also of the unhappy end of this harlot from chapters 18, 19 and 20; all which I think should be passed over, since by that harlot Antichrist cannot be understood; and the foundation being overthrown, the whole building must fall. And that by that harlot Antichrist cannot be understood we prove first from the opinion of the ancient Fathers; for very many Fathers understand by that harlot the whole body of the wicked. So Saint Augustine on Psalm 26, Arethas, Haymo, Richard, Anselm, Bede and Rupert on chapter 17 of the Apocalypse. Others understand ruling Rome, or the Roman empire, such as it was in the time of the Apostles, when it ruled over all nations, and served the errors of all nations. So expound Tertullian in the book against the Jews, and book 3 against Marcion, and Saint Jerome in the epistle to Marcella, and in the other to Algasia, question 11. And the opinion of these authors can be confirmed from this, that Saint Peter in the first epistle, last chapter, signifies Rome, such as it then was, under the name of Babylon. And Saint John calls this same great harlot Babylon; and to explain of what Babylon he speaks, says it is the city which has rule over the kings of the earth, and sits upon seven mountains. Add that by the king's opinion, page 88 and elsewhere, by the beast on which the woman sits Antichrist is understood. For so Saint John speaks, chapter 17: And the angel said to me: Why dost thou wonder? I will tell thee the mystery of the woman, and of the beast which carrieth her, which hath the seven heads and ten horns. The beast which thou sawest was, and is not, and shall come up out of the bottomless pit, and go into destruction. And the king speaks thus: “The eighth, which is the beast that was, and is not, and is to go into perdition, is Antichrist himself.” Now if the beast which carries the woman is Antichrist, how is the woman herself Antichrist? who would bear that the rider be confounded with the horse, so that the rider is said to sit upon himself? Let the king pardon us slower men, then, if we prefer with the expositors to understand one thing by the beast, another by the woman sitting on the beast, rather than with the innovators to confound the beast with the harlot. And let these suffice on Antichrist in this place.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XII.
De qua tuor visionibus S. Joannis in Apocaly¬
psi, quibus Antichristus designatur ex sen¬
tentia regis.
I11 extrema disputatiojic rex quatuor vi¬
siones sancti Joannis explanare aggreditur,
in quibus Antichristi descriptionem conti¬
neri existimat. Eas visiones nos quoque bre¬
viter excutiemus. Prima igitur visio habe¬
tur in Apocal. cap. vi. Ubi S. Joannes cum
vidisset equum unum album, alterum rufum,
tertium nigrum, vidit quartum pallidum :
hunc pallidum equum, Antichristum esse
rex docet, quo auctore, non indicat. Ego
interpretes hujus loci cum consulere insti¬
tuissem, inveni tot sententias, quot fere sunt
auctores. S. Augustinus scribit, per equum
rufum, nigrum, et pallidum significari tria
flagella, famem, bellum et pestem. S. An-
selmus, et Bichardus per eosdem tres equos
intelligi volunt, persecutiones paganorum,
haereticorum, et falsorum fratrum. Alii ma¬
lunt significari imperia trium Ca?sarum, Ne¬
ronis, Titi et Domitiani. Itaque sine ulla
regis injuria dicere possumus, hanc visionem
ad Antichristum non pertinere ; praesertim
cum ex communi sententia omnium Expo¬
sitorum de Antichristo agatur paulo post in
eodem capite, in apertione sigilli sexti, ubi
revelatur (c) ultima, et gravissima persecu¬
tio futura prope mundi finem. Ex quo intel-
ligimus, falsum esse quod adversarii dicunt,
Antichristum jam regnasse annis mille, et
amplius, nisi forte ultima persecutio ultra
mille annos duratura esset.
Altera visio habetur in cap. 9. ubi ad
clangorem quinta? tubae, cadit stella de coelo
et aperit puteum abyssi, unde progreditur
exercitus locustarum, ac deinde ad clango¬
rem sextae tubae procedit exercitus equitum
horribilis, et innumerabilis, omnia concul¬
cans, et devastans. Et in hac quidem visione
satis convenimus, per stellam cadentem, et
{a') Secunda absurditas. — (b) Tertia absurditas, (c) Antichristi persecutio prope mundi finem
erit.
APOLOGIS GAP. XII.
177
locustas, intelligi praecursores Antichristi ;
per exercitum equitum, significari exercitum
Antichisti. Sed nos (a) per stellam caden¬
tem, Lutherum significari credimus, per
locustas, haereticos Lutheranos, et Prote-
stantes,ac caeteros hujus temporis Sectarios :
Rex autem per stellam cadentem, intelligi
vult aliquem eximiae dignitatis in Ecclesia,
qui cum lux mundi esse deberet, munus
suum deserens, regnum sibi erexerit, et eo
modo sedes Antichristi erigi coepta sit.
Et nos quidem facile demontrare possu¬
mus quo modoLutherus ceciderit, quo anno,
qua occasione, quanto strepitu, et quem
exercitum locustarum de abyssi puteo edu¬
xerit. Rex autem non facile docebit, quae
fuerit illa persona Ecclesiastica eximiae di¬
gnitatis, quae deserto munere suo regnum
sibi erexerit, et sedem Antichristo paraverit.
Affirmat quidem pag. 99. (b) Bonifacium III.
fuisse hominem illum, qui primus se nun¬
cupavit universalem Episcopum, qui titulus
Antichristi est.
At, cum bona regis venia, Bonifacius non
se universalem Episcopum nominavit, sed a
Phoca imperatore sic appellatus est, quo
modo S.Gregoriusa Patriarcha Alexandrino
universalis Episcopus dictus est, ipso S. Gre-
gorio teste in epist. ad Eulog. quae est 30.
lib. vii. Indictionis primae. Quomodo etiam
S. Leoni plus centum annis Gregorio anti¬
quiori, Universalis Patriarchae titulum Syno¬
dus Chalcedonensis obtulit, ut idem S. Gre-
gorius in epist. paulo ante citata testatur.
Quare si titulus iste ab aliis oblatus Anti-
christum facit, non Bonifacius III. sed S.
Leo I. Antichristus dicendus erit, ut jam
etiam in primis quingentis annis Antichri-
stum regnasse dicendum sit.
At, Bonifacius a Phoca petiit, et obtinuit,
Anastasio teste, ut solus Romanus Pontifex
universalis diceretur. Respondeo, Bonifa¬
cium a Phoca petiisse, et impetrasse, ut
Cyriacum Episcopum Constantinopolitanum
coerceret, qui titulum universalis Episcopi,
qui soli Romano Pontifici jure debetur, sibi
indebite usurpabat. Sed neque Bonifacius,
neque successores hoc titulo usi sunt, servos
se potius servorum Dei in epistolis nominan¬
tes. Adde quod Bonifacius III. nullum sibi
regnum erexit, cum nulla in re a majorum
suorum humilitate recesserit, neque munus
suum Ecclesiasticum deseruit, cum in bre¬
vissimo illo spatio octo mensium, quo sedit
in Apostolico throno, Concilium Episcopo¬
rum Romae coegerit, et multa instituerit,
quae ad Cleri reformationem pertinere visa
sunt. Itaque gratis omnino rex Bonifacium
HI. potius, quam quemvis alium ex anteces¬
soribus, Antichristum, vel Antichristi prae¬
cursorem fecit.
Addit rex in eodem loco, doctrinam Anti¬
christi declarari in eodem cap. ix. Apocal.
ubi dicitur, residuos homines, qui non sunt
occisi in his plagis, non egisse poenitentiam
ab operibus manuum suarum, ut non adora¬
rent daemonia, et simulacra aurea, et argen¬
tea, et aerea, et lapidea, et lignea, quae neque
videre possunt, neque audire, neque ince¬
dere : nec egisse pcenitentiam ab homicidiis
suis, neque a veneficiis, neque a fornicatio¬
nibus, neque a furtis.
Ex his autem colligit rex(c) Pontificios se¬
qui doctrinam Antichristi, quoniam Yasqucs
Jesuita docet Daemonia esse colenda ; et re¬
liqui Pontificii passim imagines aureas, ar¬
genteas, aereas, lapideas, et ligneas colunt :
homicidia praeterea faciunt, veneficiis utun¬
tur, cum per agnos Dei cereos ignem restin¬
guunt; et per indusia benedicta, et diver¬
sorum generum reliquias, et orationes con¬
servant homines a tormentorum bellicorum
impetu, vi flammae, violentia ferri, ictu ful¬
minum, caeterisque id genus periculis : for¬
nicantur, tum spiritualiter idololatrando ,
tum carnaliter propter prohibitum clericis,
monachis, et sanctimonialibus conjugium,
furti denique rei sunt, tum quod Deo subri¬
piunt titulos honorum, ut eos in Antichri¬
stum suum conferant, tum per jubileca, indul¬
gentias, reliquias, et similes nundicationes
pecunias cumulant.
Ad haec omnia facillima, et expeditissima
responsio est, ( d ) regem vehementer falli,
cum verba illa Apocalypsis ad doctrinam
Antichristi refert, et cum eam doctrinam
Catholicis tamquam propriam accommodare
nititur. Primum enim conveniunt interpre¬
tes hujus loci Anselmus, Richardus, et alii,
verba supra citata, nihil aliud significare,
nisi cum Antichristo perituros in eeternum,
non tantum Christianos, quos ille artibus;
suis deceperit; sed etiam paganos, qui non
egerint poenitentiam ab idololatria, et cultu
{a) Quid per stellam de coelo cadentem signircetur. — (b) Bonifacius III. Pupa optimus, sumina
injuria Antichristi nomine infamatur. — (c) Calumnia varice, longe petitee. (d) Refutatur
calumnia yeneratim.
Tom. XII 12
178
APOLOGLE GAP. XII.
daemoniorum. Dii enim gentium daemonia
sunt. Psal. clv. Et quae immolant gentes,
daemoniis immolant, et non Deo. I Corinth.
x. Et praeterea Judaeos, qui non egerint poe¬
nitentiam ab homicidiis, veneficiis, fornica¬
tionibus et furtis. Judaei enim praeter exteros
et fornicationibus, et maxime furtis publice
per usuras augendo copias suas.
(a) Deinde quomodo potest fieri, ut doctri¬
na Antichristi sit colere daemones, et idola
omnium generum, cum de illo scribat Daniel
cap. xi. Antichristum adversus omnes Deos
pugnaturum, ut ipse solus habeatur Deus?
Mirum autem est, tantum regem ea scribere
non dubitasse de Jesuita Vasque, quae sola
libri ab ipso citati inspectione falsa esse in-
telliguntur, citat enim rex librum tertium
Vasques, De cultu adorationis disp. i. cap.
5. At eo loco Vasques quaestionem illam tra¬
ctat, An censendus sit idololatra qui daemo¬
nem sibi apparentem sub imagine Crucifixi,
adoraverit. Respondet vero, non habendum
idololatram, sed illusum, si existimaverit
eum qui sibi apparuit vere esse Christum, et
solum Christum adorare intenderit, et invin¬
cibiliter ignoraverit sub illa imagine daemo¬
nem latere. Hoccine est docere daemonis
cultum? quid si regius servus indutus regias
vestes prodeat, et ut rex ab ignorantibus
adoretur; num imperiti adoratores majesta¬
tis rei habebuntur, an potius, ut illusi ride¬
buntur? Atque hoc est argumentum quo rex
probare voluit, Pontificios daemonum esse
cultores. De cultu imaginum nihil adden¬
dum est ad ea, quae supra disseruimus,
satis enim constat, imagines Sanctorum,
neque esse idola, neque adorari ut Deos.
(b) Homicidia, veneficia, fornicationes, et
furta non negamus apud Catholicos inveniri,
sed neque rex negabit in suo regno apud
Protestantes suos frequentia esse. Quod si
probari posset, in Ecclesia Catholica doceri
haec esse licita, et justa; et non potius, ut
injusta, et illicita prohiberi, et pun ri : tum
aliquid adversarii dicerent : sed ex flagitiis,
et sceleribus toti humano generi communi¬
bus, coi igere doctrinam Antichristi apud
solos Pontificios esse, ineptum et ridiculum
est.
At soli Pontificii per agnos Dei cereos,
ignem restinguunt : id autem veneficio si¬
mile est. Respondeo : Miracula divina apud
solos Pontificios conspiciuntur : (c) sed in¬
vocatio divini nominis, et benedictio sacer¬
dotalis, qua cerei agni consecrantur, vene¬
ficiis tribui non possunt, nisi Deus habeatur
pro diabolo. Illa enim veneficia sunt, quae
ex invocatione diaboli, et pacto quodam
cum ipso diabolo inito vim suam habent.Qui
autem miracula, quae per indusia, caeteras-
que reliquias fiunt, damnat, damnare etiam
debet miracula, quse teste Luca in Act.Apost.
cap. xix. fiebant per sudaria, et semicincta
S. Pauli; et quce teste S. Augustino lib.xxn.
de Civ. Dei cap. 8. fiebant per reliquias S.
Stephani ; et alia id genus plurima, quibus
pleni sunt libri sanctorum Patrum. Nec ta¬
men probamus, sed damnamus, et rejicimus
superstitiosas orationes, quas interdum non¬
nulli adhibent adversus arma, vel fulmina,
cum characteribus incognitis, et invocatione
daemonum.
(i d ) De multitudine Monachorum, et San¬
ctimonialium, id solum dicam, non posse
reprehendi ejusmodi instituta, nisi reprehen¬
dantur Patres omnes primorum quingento¬
rum annorum. Certe si quis legat vel episto¬
las S. Hieronymi de custodia Virginitatis, et
de obitu Paulae ad Eustochium ; vel librum
S. Augustini de moribus Ecclesiae, vel S.
Joannis Chrysostomi libros adversus vitupe¬
ratores vitae monasticae ; videbit tot millia
Monachorum, et Sanctimonialium fuisse in
illa prima Ecclesia, ut merito dicere possit,
sectas Lutheranorum,et Calvinistarum,unde
haec instituta penitus exultant, nihil habere
commune cum Ecclesia primitiva
(e) Denique quae rex dicit de cumulandis
opibus per artificium jubilaeorum, et indul¬
gentiarum, satis ostendunt, eum plus fidei
habuisse calumniis Lutheri, et similium no¬
vatorum, xquam simplici veritati. Hoc certe
tempore si eleemosynae faciendae praescri¬
bantur iis, quibus indulgentiae conceduntur;
in arbitrio singulorum relinquitur, ut quibus
egenis libeat eleemosynas faciam.
Sequitur visio tertia quae habetur in Apoc.
crp. xm. Ubi describitur bestia quaedam
horribilis, quae de mari ascendet, habens
capita septem, et cornua decem. Ex quibus
capitibus unum plaga letbali ferietur, sed
paulo post resurget cum admiratione uni-
(a) Refutatur calumnia de cultu drrmonum. — (b) Rfutanhn ' culumnicr rf. homicidiis , aliisque
sceleribus. — (c) Refutatur calumnia dc Aquis Dei ceras. - (d Re/ utatur calumnia de multitudine
Monachorum*, et Sanctimonialium, — [e) Refutatur calumnia dc nundinationibus indulyenuarum.
APOLOGLE GAP. XII.
179
versae terrae : huic bestiae dedit draco vir¬
tutem suam. Ibidem describitur alia bestia,
quae ex terra ascendet, habens cornua duo
similia agni, et haec posterior bestia mira¬
cula faciet, ut ignem de coelo descendere,
ad hunc finem, ut omnes priorem bestiam
adorent. Addit Joannes, neminem illis tem¬
poribus habiturum potestatem vendendi ,
aut emendi, nisi in manu, aut in fronte cha¬
racterem bestiae gerat : denique numerum
bestiae dicit Joannes futurum numerum 666.
De hac visione rex multa dicit, atque om¬
nia detorquere conatur ad nos Catholicos, ut
Antichristi adoratores, et sectatores. Sed (a)
ex hoc ipso c. xin. Apocalypsis, nos multo
facilius, et clarius demonstramus, Anti Chri¬
stum nondum venisse. Quando enim Anti-
christus venerit, notissima erunt omnia, quae
sit prior bestia, quae posterior, quod caput
occisum, et resurgens, quis character ejus,
quod nomen ejus; et caetera quae nunc ita
sunt obscura, ut conjecturis, et divinatione
sit opus.
Communis expositio Catholicorum vete¬
rum est, per draconem intelligi diabolum ;
per priorem bestiam, universitatem impio¬
rum ; per caput hujus bestiae occisum, et
reviviscens, iVntichristum, qui erit postre¬
mum, et maximum -caput impiorum, quique
finget se occisum, ut fingat resurrectionem
ad imitationem Christi ; per posteriorem
bestiam, praedicatores, et Apostolos Anti¬
christi, qui miracula facient, ut ad Antichri-
stum homines allidant : de charactere, et
numero nominis, rem fore abditam, et inco¬
gnitam, donec Antichristus appareat.
Videamus nunc, quid rex ex hac visione
colligat adversus Catholicos. Primum igitur,
per caput bestiae occisum, et reviviscens,
intelligendum esse dicit Antichristum, qui
una imperandi rationum a Gothis, et Van¬
dalis plagam lethalem acceperat; sed mox
curata plaga aperuit os suum ad blasphe-
mias, et ab universa terra adorari debuit.
Et addit rex: « Cultus aut°m, atque adoratio
hoc eodem nomine, ac titulo, soleat ne adhi¬
beri singulis Pontificibus, cum inaugurantur,
nemo Cardinali nostro melius novit. » Haec
ille.
( b ) At Gothi, et Vandali, nullam plagam
Romano Pontifici inflixerunt, sed imperatori
Romano cui Gcthi Italiam, et Hispaniam,
Vandali Africam abstulerunt : plaga autem
curata dici poterit, cum Justinianus Italiam,
et Africam recuperavit. Itaque si is, cui plaga
inflicta est, et paulo post curata, Antichri¬
stus est ; non Romanus Pontifex, sed Roma¬
nus imperator Antichristus erit. Quod si non
placet imperatorem Antichristum vocari,
quemadmodum revera Antichristus non est,
acquiescat rex expositioni S. Gregorii lib. ii,
epistola 3. Primasii, Bedae, Haymonis, An-
selmi, Richardi, et Ruperti in c. xm. Apo-
cal. qui omnes unanimi consensu docent.
Antichristum simulaturum plagam incura¬
bilem se accepisse, atque occisum esse, ac
paulo post a mortuis propria virtute sur-
rexisse, ut tanto facilius pro Deo haberi, et
adorari possit. Cum autem nullus unquam
Pontificum Romanorum mortem, et resur¬
rectionem simulaverit, neque pro Deo ha¬
beri, et adorari voluerit ; vel ex hoc intelli¬
gi potest, quantum absint a veritate, qui
Pontificem Antichristum esse jactant.
At, inquit rex, adorari Pontifices cum
inaugurantur, Cardinalis non negabit. ( c )
Verum est Pontifices maximos adorari, sed
ut Vicarios Dei, non ut deos. Et Scriptura
divina passim utitur voce adorationis pro
veneratione, quae adhibetur hominibus. Vix
enim ulla est adoratio externa, quae soli vero
Deo exhibeatur, praeter honorem sacrificii,
et quae ad sacrificium pertinent, templa,
arae, sacerdotes. Hinc enim S. Augustinus,
lib. xx. contra faustum cap. 2 1 . Respondens
Fausto, qui scripserat nos Martyres in Idola
vertisse ; probat in Ecclesia Christi non ado¬
rari sanctos Martyres, ut Deos, quia sacer¬
dos ad altare constitutus numquam dicit,
offero tibi Petre, vel Paule, vel Cypriane.
Quare si rex ostendet sacrificium Pontifici
Romano fuisse aliquando oblatum, aut aras
erectas, aut templa dedicata, aut Sacerdo¬
tes institutos, quemadmodum factum esse
scimus imperatoribus quibusdam, qui Dii
haberi volebant; et quemadmodum Anti¬
christus sibi fieri jubebit ; tum demum con¬
cedemus Pontificem haberi, et adorari, ut
Deum : at dum eo cultu adorationis hono¬
ratur, qui non convenit soli Deo, sed etiam
creaturis, frustra de nomine adorationis ca¬
lumnia struitur.
Deinde addit rex miraculum bestiae mi¬
noris, quae faciet ignem de coelo descendere;
(a) Obscuritas hujus pro phetim, Antichristum nondum venisse convincit. — (b) Refutatur expo
sitio adversariorum. - (c) Refutatur calumnia de adoratione Ponti/icis.
180
APOLOGLE CAP. XII.
ipsum esse fulmen excommunicationis, quo
Pontifex Romarus homines terret: et ipsos
etiam reges percellit. (") At hoc miraculum
non tribuitur in Apocalypsi bestiae majori,
quae Antichristum significat; sed minori,
quae antichristo deservit : non igitur Ponti¬
fex, qui fulmine homines terret, Antichristus
erit : et rex quaerere jam debebit quis sit
Antichristus, in cujus gratiam Papa fulmen
de coelo descendere facit. Deinde S. Joannes
meminit hujus miraculi, ut rei novae, et in¬
solitae : at excommunicatio res est com¬
munis, et nota, qua etiam Protestantcs utun¬
tur; et quam Ecclesia familiarem habuit
multo ante, quam Antichristus, etiam iste
fictitius, et a novatoribus excogitatus, exortus
diceretur. Ergo cum communi expositione
scriptorum veterum supra citatorum cre¬
dendum est, verum ignem de coelo descen¬
surum ad imperium ministrorum Antichristi,
et non per tropos verba Scripturae detor¬
quenda sunt ad excommunicationes. Ex quo
intelligimus merum esse figmentum, quod
Papa sit Antichristus, cum nullus Pontifi¬
cum Romanorum, neque per se, neque per
suos ignem de coelo descendere fecerit.
( b ) Porro characterem Antichristi esse
dicit rex professionem obedientiae Romano
Pontifici. Sed hoc multis modis repugnat
scripturae verbis Scriptura enim Apocal. xm.
significat, characterem bestiae acciepiendum
in dextera manu, aut in fronte : professio
obedientiae neque in dextera, neque in fron¬
te accipitur. Deinde character bestiae neces¬
sarius erit in toto Antichristi regno omnibus
hominibus, pusillis, et magnis, pauperibus,
et divitibus, servis, et liberis. At quot millia
sunt in ditione Romani Pontificis, qui pro¬
fessionem obedientiaenon possunt ostendere?
Professio enim fieri solet ab iis, qui promo¬
ventur ad gradus dignitatum, aut doctora-
tum , aut certa officia : ab aliis plurimis,
atque adeo a maixima parte hominum non
exigitur, quamvis enim teneantur omnes
Romano Pontifici obedire : tamen non te¬
nentur omnes conceptis verbis , et certo
ritu professionem istam facere, multo mi¬
nus in fronte, vel in manu gestare. Prae¬
terea, eadem scriptura dicit, in toto regno
Antichristi, neminem permittendum emere,
aut vendere, nisi characterem habeat, aut
nomen bestiae, aut numerum nominis ejus.
At quot sunt in ipsa urbe Roma Judaei, qui
publice vendunt, et emunt, nec habent ejus¬
modi characterem, neque summo Pontifici
adhaerent?
Itaque licet multi multa de isto charactere
divinare conentur, non tamen certo scietur
quid sit, nisi cum Antichristus venerit ; nisi
forte placeat cum antiquissimo scriptore
Hippolyto martyre dicere, (c) Christi cha¬
racterem esse signum Crucis abolitionem ;
quali charactere dignoscuntur hoc tempore
Calviani, ut praecursores Antichristi.
Denique de numero 666, dicit rex, eo nu¬
mero designari nomen graecum Aa tsivoc : nam
litterae hujus nominis faciunt hunc nume¬
rum. (d) Papam autem esse latinum, et apud
latinos potissimum dominari notissimum est.
Sed nomen, latinum, non scribitur per ei, et
sine ei, non reddit numerum 666. Praeterea
nomen Antichristi proprium designatur ab
Evarigelista, non nomen commune plurimus,
ut est, latinus : proprio autem nomine nullus
Pontificum dictus est latinus. Denique inve¬
niuntur nomina plurima , quae numerum
illum 666. efficiunt : notavit Arethas in com-
ment. hujus loci septem nomi»a, quae hunc
numerum reddunt : alii alia plurima , de
quare multa scripsimus in lib. m. de Pontif.
cap. 10.
Addit rex per numerum 666. posse intel-
ligi tempus, quo Antichristus apparere de¬
buit. Siquidem Bonifacius III. Papa, qui
primus Antichristi titulum usurpavit, sedit
anno Domini 606. At (e) numerus ille nu¬
merus nominis est, ut S. Joannes expresse
dixit; non igitur detorqueri debet ad nume¬
rum temporis : deinde numerus annorum a
Christo ad Bonifacium non continet 666. sed
606.
At, inquit rex, potest inchoari tempus hu¬
jus numeri ab anno quo Pompaeus Magnus
templum Hierosolymitanum diripuit. Omitto
id gratis dici : illud ad refutandam hanc
supputationem sufficit, quod ab illa dire¬
ptione templi, usque ad annum Domini 606.
quo Bonifacius sedit, sunt anni 670. Itaque
necesse est, vel S. Joannem fuisse deceptum,
quod fieri non potest, vel (/) errare eos, qui
(a) Refutatur calumnia de fulmine excommunicationis. — (b) Character Antichristi non potest
esse professio obedientiae debilcc Pontifici. — (c) Character Christi signum Crucis : character Anti¬
christi, abolitio crucis. — (d) Refelluntur confecturae de numero nominis Antichristi. — (e) Nume¬
rus 666. non est numerus temporis , sed nominis Antichristi. — ( f) Frustra adversarii supputando
se torquent .
APOLOGLE CAP. XIII.
181
volunt numero 666. designari tempus ad¬
ventus Antichristi. Quod autem rex dicit,
sexaginta annis post obitum Bonifacii III.
fuisse confirmatum regnum Antichristi, at¬
que hoc indicari per numerum 666. aliquid
esset, si posset ostendi aliquid peculiare ac¬
cidisse anno 666. ut aliquam mutationem
regiminis , vel creationem novi Pontificis ,
vel acquisitionem novi tituli, aut aliquid
ejusmodi. Sed cum annus Domini 666. inci¬
derit in Pontificatum Yitaliani, qui jam ali¬
quot annis sederat, et pacifice, ac sine ulla
innovatione sederat : nulla ratio reddi po¬
test, cur tempus illud tam insolita revelatione
notari debuerit, ut omittam, quod supra
dixi, hunc numerum nominis bestiae, non
temporis ab ipso S. Joanne nominari.
Restat visio quarta ex cap. xvn. Apocal.
quae quanto prolixius tractatur a rege, tanto
brevius expedietur a nobis. Describitur enim
in eo capite magna quaedam meretrix insi¬
dens bestiae, quam rex Antichristum esse
vult ; et eo posito fundamento multa dispu¬
tat de Antichristo, addens etiam [de infelici
hujus meretricis exitu ex cap. 18. 19. et 20.
quae omnia praetereunda existimo ; quoniam
per eam meretricem Antichristus intelligi
non potest : et fundamento everso totum ae¬
dificium corruat necesse est.
Non posse autem per (a) eam meretricem
intelligi Antichristum, probamus primo ex
sententia veterum Patrum : Patres enim
permulti per eam meretricem, intelligunt
universitatem impiorum. Ita S. Augustinus
in Psal. xxvi. Arethas, Haymo, Richardus,
Anselmus, Beda, et Rupertus in cap. xvn.
Apocal. Alii intelligunt Romam imperantem,
sive Romanum imperium, quale erat tempo¬
re Apostolorum, cum dominaretur omnibus
gentibus, et omnium gentium serviret erro¬
ribus. Sic exponunt Tertull. in lib. cont. Ju¬
daeos, et lib. ni. cont. Marcionem, et S.
Hieronymus in epist. ad Marcellam, et in
altera ad Algasiam qu. 11. Et confirmari
potest horum auctorum sententia ex eo quod
S. Petrus in epist. priore cap. ultimo Romam,
qualis tunc erat, sub nomine Babylonis si¬
gnificat. Et S. Joannes hac ipsam meretri¬
cem magnam, Babylonem appellat; ac ut
explicet de qua Babylone loquatur, dicit esse
civitatem, quse habet imperium super reges
terree, et sedet super montes septem.
Adde quod ex sententia regis pag. 88. et
alibi, per bestiam, cui mulier’’ insidet, Anti¬
christus intelligitur. Sic enim loquitur S.
Joannes cap. xvii. Et dixit mihi Angelus ,
quare miraris ? ego dicam tibi sacramentum
mulieris et bestiae, quae portat eam , quse habet ^
capita septem , et cornua decem. Bestia , quam
vidisti , fuit , et non est , et ascensura est de
abysso , et in interitum ibit (1). Sic autem rex
loquitur : « Octava, quee est bestia, quee erat,
et non est, et itura est in perditionem, ipse
est Antichristus. » Jam si (b) bestia, quse
mulierem portat, Antichristus est, quomodo
ipsa mulier est Antichristus ? quis ferat
equitem cum equo confundi, ut eques supra
se ipse sedere dicatur; ignoscat igitur rex
nobis tardioribus, si malumus cum exposito¬
ribus, aliud per bestiam, aliud per mulierem
insidentem bestise intelligere, quam cum
novatoribus bestiam cum meretrice confun¬
dere. Atque haec de Antichristo hoc loco
sufficiant.