Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Antichrist · On the Roman Pontiff, Book III
Chapter 17: On Gog and Magog
Our translation, from the Latin of the Opera Omnia (Paris: Vivès, 1870–74), vol. II, De Antichristo, On Antichrist (On the Roman Pontiff, Book III). 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).
The first opinion, or rather error, is of the Jews, who teach that Gog is Antichrist, and Magog the innumerable Scythian nations which lie hidden within the Caspian mountains. And that Gog, that is Antichrist, will come with Magog, that is with the army of the Scythians, at that very time in which the Messiah will first appear in Jerusalem; and that then a battle will be joined in Palestine, and there will be so great a slaughter in the army of Gog that for seven years the Jews will not cut wood from the trees to build a fire, but will burn the spears and shields and like instruments which will lie everywhere with the corpses; and that thereafter will be golden ages, etc.
This opinion Jerome relates on chapter 38 of Ezekiel, and Peter Galatinus, Book 5, chapter 12 against the Jews, and Rabbi David Kimchi in his Commentary on the Psalms passim. But the Jews erred in two things. First, that they think the battle of Gog and Magog will be in the first coming of Christ, confounding the first with the second; whereas the Scriptures openly teach that in the first coming Christ came in humility, and was to be immolated as a meek sheep, as is plain from Isaiah 53 and elsewhere. Secondly, that they think Antichrist will come against them, and fight with their Messiah; whereas Antichrist will in fact be their Messiah, and will fight for the Jews against the true Christ, our Savior.
The second opinion is that of Lactantius, Book 7, chapters 24, 25, and 26, who thinks that the battle of Gog and Magog will be a thousand years after the death of Antichrist. For he teaches that, six thousand years being finished from the founding of the World, Antichrist will come and reign three years and a half; that then Antichrist will be killed, Christ will appear, there will be a resurrection, and the Saints will reign with Christ here on earth a thousand years, in the utmost peace and tranquillity, the unbelievers meanwhile being indeed exterminated, but serving peaceably; and, these being finished, that the Devil will again be loosed, and a most atrocious war stirred up of all the nations which for a thousand years had served the Saints, against those same Saints; and that this is the battle of Gog and Magog, of which Ezekiel and John speak; but that a little after all the impious will be divinely killed, and then there will be the second resurrection, and the World utterly renewed.
This opinion was also of many of the Ancients, as Papias, Justin, Irenaeus, Tertullian, Apollinaris, and certain others, as Jerome relates on chapter 36 of Ezekiel, and Eusebius, Book 3 of the history, last chapter. But it has long since been exploded as a proven error. For the Lord, Matthew 24 and 25, openly teaches that after the persecution of Antichrist the last judgment will straightway follow, and all the good will go into eternal life, all the evil into eternal fire; and accordingly there will be no battles after another thousand years, nor ever thereafter.
The third opinion is that of Eusebius, who, Book 9 of the Evangelical demonstration, chapter 3, thinks that Gog is the Roman Emperor, and Magog his Empire. But it rests on a false foundation. For he draws this opinion from chapter 24 of Numbers, where, according to the version of the Seventy, we read: Gog shall be exalted as a kingdom, and his kingdom shall be increased: God led him out of Egypt, etc. Where the Scripture seems to say that when Christ shall return out of Egypt, in the time of His infancy, then the kingdom of Gog shall be exalted; but it is established that, when Christ was an infant, no kingdom was exalted but that of the Romans.
But without doubt the edition of the Seventy Interpreters is corrupted in this place; for in Hebrew there is had not Gog, but Agag: and the sense is, according to Jerome on chapter 38 of Ezekiel, “and Saul, the first King of Israel, shall be taken away because of Agag” — that is, because he will sin by not killing Agag. Or, according to others, “Saul shall be exalted above Agag” — that is, he will prevail over and overcome Agag himself. Both are true. And it is certain that that place of Numbers is understood of the kingdom of the Jews, not of Christ or the Romans; for it begins: How beautiful are thy tabernacles, O Jacob, and thy tents, O Israel, etc.
The fourth opinion is of others, who by Gog and Magog understand the battles of the Devil and his Angels formerly waged in heaven with the good Angels — which Jerome refutes, as destroying the letter, on chapter 38 of Ezekiel.
The fifth is that of Theodore Bibliander, whom Chytraeus follows in his Commentary on chapter 20 of the Apocalypse. Bibliander, then, in table 14 of his Chronology, where he accurately discourses of Gog and Magog, at last teaches that the prophecy of Ezekiel and of John does not pertain to the same time; but that the prophecy of Ezekiel was fulfilled in the time of the Maccabees, and Gog and Magog were Alexander the Great and his successors the Kings of Syria and Egypt, who waged many battles with the Jews and were at last overcome by the Maccabees; but that the prophecy of John was fulfilled in the time of Pope Gregory VII and some following Pontiffs, and Gog and Magog were the Pontiffs and other Christian Princes and armies, who long fought against the Saracens for the recovery of the holy land and the sepulchre of the Lord.
The first part of this opinion is also Theodoret's, on chapter 38 of Ezekiel; but it cannot be defended. First, because without doubt the prophecy of Ezekiel and of John is one and the same, and accordingly both are to be fulfilled after the coming of Christ. For, first, John says that the army of Gog will come from the four corners of the earth, and Ezekiel says the same, expressly naming that in the army of Gog there will be Persians from the East, Ethiopians from the South, Tubal, that is Spaniards, from the West, and Togormah, that is Phrygians, from the sides of the North. Next, John says that, fire being sent down from heaven, this army will be destroyed; and the same asserts Ezekiel at the end of chapter 38: Fire and brimstone I will rain upon him, and upon his army. Finally, John subjoins to this battle immediately the renewal of Jerusalem, that is, the glorification of the Church; and similarly Ezekiel, from chapter 40 to the end of the book, treats of nothing but the wonderful renewal of Jerusalem.
Moreover, it is proved, secondly, that the prophecy of Ezekiel was not fulfilled in the time of the Maccabees. For Ezekiel 38, it is said to Gog, in the last of the years thou shalt come; but Alexander the Great with his came in the midst of the years. Next, Ezekiel openly says that in the army of Gog there will be Ethiopians, Libyans, Spaniards, Cappadocians, etc., who yet never fought against Jerusalem, and especially in the time of the Maccabees; for the Syrians and Egyptians alone fought against the Maccabees. Finally, Ezekiel describes such a victory against Gog and Magog that thereafter no enemies were to be feared, but there would be an end of all battles. But such was not the victory of the Maccabees against the Kings of Syria and Egypt; for the Jews never utterly overcame the King of Syria and Egypt, and a little after the Jews were again vexed and taken by the Romans, and never freed themselves from their hands, as Augustine deduces and proves, Book 18 of the City of God, chapter 45. The prophecy of Ezekiel, then, was not fulfilled before the times of Christ.
The other part of Bibliander's opinion, which is proper to him, is not only false but also impious. For, first, John says that the battle of Gog and Magog will be against the camp of the Saints and the beloved city, that is, against the true Church of God; but the war of the Christians for recovering the holy land was wholly against the Mohammedan Saracens — unless perhaps Bibliander will have the Mohammedans to be the true Church of God and the camp of the Saints. Next, John says that the men in the army of Gog will be from the four corners of the earth; but in the Christian army there were none but Westerners and Northerners, that is, French, Germans, Italians. Moreover John says that, the war of Gog and Magog being finished, Jerusalem will straightway be renewed and glorified, but the Devil, and Antichrist, and the false prophets will be cast into eternal fire; but the war of the Christians for the holy land is long since finished, and yet we see no Jerusalem renewed, nor the Devil and false prophets cast into Tartarus. For now, as even the adversaries confess, the Devil and false prophets chiefly flourish.
Moreover God Himself, by manifest signs and wonders, both at Antioch of Syria and in other places, plainly showed that that war was pleasing to Him. Of which see William of Tyre, Book 6 on the holy war, and Paulus Aemilius, Book 4 on the affairs of the Franks. Finally Saint Bernard, whom the same Bibliander in his Chronicle calls Saint or Divine, where he treats of the times of Eugene III, was, besides other holy men, one of the chief authors of that war; for he, both by words and by miracles, persuaded an infinite multitude of French and Germans to set out to that war, as he himself indicates at the beginning of Book 2 on Consideration. And the Author of the life of the same Bernard, Book 2, chapter 4, writes that blessed Bernard, after the battle was fought, enlightened a certain blind man, in testimony that he had preached that war in the name of God.
The sixth opinion is that of the Magdeburgians, Century 1, Book 2, chapter 4, column 435, where they teach that Gog and Magog are the kingdom of the Saracens, or Turks. Which opinion is plainly opposed to the opinion of Bibliander, and therefore is better, or rather less bad. But yet it is absolutely false, since Gog will come in the last of the years, and will not last long, as is plainly gathered from John and Ezekiel; but the kingdom of the Saracens began long ago, and has lasted hitherto nearly a thousand years, which certainly can in no way be called a short time.
The seventh is that of blessed Ambrose, Book 2 on the Faith, last chapter, that Gog is the Goths, who devastated many provinces of the Roman people. Blessed Jerome mentions this opinion in the Hebrew Questions on Genesis chapter 10, and says: “Whether it be true or not, the outcome of the battle will show.” And now indeed the outcome of the battle has shown that it was not true; for after the wars of the Goths no renewal of the Church followed, nor did all wars cease.
The eighth is that of Saint Jerome himself on chapter 38 of Ezekiel, who, seeing the difficulty of the matter, the literal sense omitted, expounded it mystically of the heretics. For he will have Gog, which to the Hebrews is “a roof,” to signify the heresiarchs, who like a roof are lifted up and proud; but Magog, which is interpreted “from the roof,” to signify those who believe the heresiarchs and are subject to them, as a building to its roof. This opinion, taken for a mystical sense, is most true, but not literally. For Ezekiel 38 says that Gog will come in the last of the years, and John, Apocalypse 20, says that the same Gog will come after a thousand years; but by the name of a thousand years all Catholics understand the whole time which is from the coming of Christ to Antichrist; since therefore Gog will not come but about the end of the World, and the heretics began at the beginning of the Church, the Apostles still living, it is established that properly and literally Gog does not signify the heretics.
It must be known also that Jerome, when he says that Gog is interpreted “a roof,” and Magog “from the roof,” does not mean that Gog and Magog are altogether the same to the Hebrews as to us “a roof” and “from the roof,” but means that they are as it were the same. For properly to the Hebrews a roof is not Gog, but gag; and from the roof they do not say Magog, but miggag.
The ninth opinion is that of blessed Augustine, Book 20 of the City of God, chapter 41, who by Gog understands the Devil, who is as it were a great roof, that is, a great house, in which all the evil dwell; but by Magog he understands the army of Antichrist gathered out of the nations of the whole world. Which opinion is without doubt most true and to be embraced, in so far as it refers Gog and Magog to the times of Antichrist — both because all the Catholic authors who write on the Apocalypse follow him, as Arethas, Primasius, Bede, Haymo, Rupert, Richard, Anselm, and others; and also because all that is said by Ezekiel and John of Gog and Magog most rightly suits Antichrist. For then there will truly be the last and greatest persecution, and after it Jerusalem will be renewed, that is, the Church will be glorified, nor will any battles thereafter be heard of. But in so far as by Gog he understands the Devil, it does not seem true; for John says that the loosed Devil will call together Gog and Magog to battle; therefore the Devil is one thing, Gog another.
Our opinion, then, which is the tenth, contains three things. First, we assert that the battle of Gog and Magog is the battle of Antichrist against the Church, as Augustine rightly taught. Secondly, we say that it is very probable that by Gog is signified Antichrist himself, by Magog his army. For Ezekiel perpetually calls Gog a prince, and Magog he calls a land, or nation. Thirdly, we say that it is probable that Gog is named from Magog, not the reverse — so that Antichrist is called Gog because he is the prince of the nation which is called Magog; and moreover that the army of Antichrist is called Magog from the Scythian nation, not because it will consist of those Scythians whom the Jews feign to be beyond the Caucasus and the Caspian sea, but either because a great part of the army of Antichrist will consist of barbarians sprung from Scythia, as Turks, Tartars, and the rest, or (which I rather think) because it will be an army monstrous and very cruel; for whom we wish to call savage, we call Scythians.
For that Magog in fact signifies a Scythian nation is plain from Genesis 10, where we read that the second son of Japheth was called Magog, from whom the region Magog was named, which his posterity inhabited, which region to be Scythia Josephus teaches, Book 1 of the Antiquities, chapter 11, and Jerome in the Hebrew Questions on Genesis 10. For as from the three sons of Cham, that is, Chus, Mizraim, and Chanaan, were named Ethiopia (Chus), Egypt (Mizraim), and Palestine (Chanaan), so altogether from Magog, son of Japheth, was named Scythia (Magog). And that Ezekiel, naming Magog, had regard to the nation named from Magog, son of Japheth, is plain, because in the same place he adds as companions to Gog other nations named from other sons or grandsons of Japheth, as Gomer, Togormah, Mosoch, Tubal, etc. Let us conclude, then, that the battle of Gog and Magog is the last persecution which Antichrist will stir up against the Church in the whole World.
Nor is it an obstacle that Ezekiel, chapter 38, says that for seven years the arms of Gog and Magog will be burned, though it is established that after the death of Antichrist there will be only 45 days until the end of the World, as is gathered from Daniel 12. For Ezekiel does not speak properly, but figuratively, after the manner of the Prophets, nor does he mean that those arms will really be burned for seven years, but that there will be so signal a slaughter that for a very long time the spears and shields of the slain men could suffice to feed the fire, if there were need.
One doubt remains: whether, because of the most cruel persecution of Antichrist, the Faith and religion of Christ is to be utterly extinguished. For Dominic a Soto, in Book 4 of the Sentences, distinction 46, question 1, article 1, altogether believed this would be: “The departure and defection of the whole world from that See will be a sign of the consummation of the age.” And below: “The faith being extinguished by departure from the Apostolic See, the whole World will be vain, and thereafter proceed to no purpose.” And below: “Let mortals therefore tremble at how pestilent is the love of self. For thence remains elation and pride, which at last, under the leadership of Antichrist, will shake the City of God.”
But this opinion, in my judgment, cannot be defended. For, first, it is repugnant to Augustine, who, Book 20 of the City of God, chapter 11, says that the Church will always be unconquered against Antichrist: “Nor will it desert its warfare, which is called by the name of a camp.” Next, it seems to me repugnant also to the Gospel; for Matthew 16 we read: Upon this rock I will build my Church, and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. But how will they not prevail, if they utterly extinguish it? Likewise Matthew 24 the Lord says of the ministers of Antichrist: They shall show great signs, insomuch as to deceive (if possible) even the elect. Where the Lord wished to signify that there will be at that time many elect who will not suffer themselves to be seduced by the miracles of Antichrist. Finally, all the Writers who speak of the persecution of Antichrist — as Ezekiel, Daniel, Paul, John, and all the Fathers cited above — say that the victory of that war or persecution will at last be with the Church. And indeed reason itself teaches the same. For who would believe that in that battle, in which with all their camps God and the Devil, Christ and Antichrist, will fight, God is to be conquered by the Devil, and Christ by Antichrist?
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XVII. De Gog et Magog. Prima igitur sententia, sive potius error est Judaeorum, qui docent, Gog esse Anti- christum, Magog esse gentes Scythicas in¬ numerabiles, quae latent intra Caspios mon¬ tes. Venturum autem esse Gog, id est, An- tichristum cum Magog, id est, cum exercitu Scytharum, illo ipso tempore quo Messias primum apparebit in Hierusalem ; et tunc praelium committendum in Palaestina , et tantam stragem futuram in exercitu Gog, ut per septem annos Judaei non sint caesuri ligna ex arboribus ad ignem struendum, sed crematuros hastas, et clypeos, et similia in¬ strumenta, quae jacebunt ubique cum cada¬ veribus, et deinceps futura saecula aurea etc. Refert hanc opinionem Hieronymus in c. XXXVIII Ezech. et Petrus Galatinus lib. V, cap. 12 cont. Jud. et Rabbi David Khimhi in Com. Psal. passim. Sed Judaei in duobus erant. Primo, quod putant praelium Gog et Ma¬ gog futurum in primo Christi adventu, con¬ fundentes primum cum secundo ; cum tamen Scripturae aperte doceant, in primo adventu Christum venturum in humilitate, et tam¬ quam ovem mansuetam immolandum , ut patet Isa. LIII et alibi. Secundo, quod putant, Antichristum venturum contra se, et cum suo Messia pugnaturum ; cum tamen Anti- christus revera ipsorum Messias sit futurus, et pro Judaeis contra verum Christum Sal¬ vatorem nostrum pugnaturus. Secunda opinio est Lactantii lib. VII, cap. 24, 25 et 26, qui existimat, praelium Gog et Magog futuram mille annis post mortem Antichristi. Docet enim ipse, finitis sex mil¬ libus annorum a Mundo condito, venturum (1) Apoc. XVII, 12. - (2) Apoc. XX, 7, Antichristum , et regnaturum tribus annis cum medio ; tunc occidendum Antichristum, appariturum Christum, futuram resurrectio¬ nem, et regnaturos Sanctos cum Christo hic in terris mille annis, in summa pace, et tranquillitate , infidelibus interim quidem exterminatis, sed pacifice servientibus. Qui¬ bus finitis, iterum solvendum Diabolum, et excitandum bellum atrocissimum omnium gentium, quae per mille annos servierunt Sanctis, contra eosdem Sanctos, et hoc esse praelium Gog et Magog, de quo loquuntur Ez. et Joan. sed paulo post divinitus occiden¬ dos omnes impios, et tunc futuram secundam resurrectionem, et Mundum penitus innovan¬ dum. Haec opinio fuit etiam multorum Veterum, ut Papiae, Justini, Irenaei, Tertulliani, Apol¬ linaris, et quorumdam aliorum, ut refert Hieronymus in cap. XXXVI Ezech. et Euse- bius lib. III hist. cap. ult. Sed jamdudum explosa est tamquam error exploratus. Do¬ minus enim Matth. XXIV et XXV aperte docet, post Antichristi persecutionem statim futurum judicium ultimum, et ituros omnes bonos in vitam aeternam, omnes malos in ignem aeternum ; ac proinde non futura post alios mille annos, nec unquam deinceps ulla praelia. Tertia opinio est Eusebii, qui lib. IX de- monst. Evang. cap. 3. existimat, Gog esse Imperatorem Romanum, et Magog Imperium ejus. Sed nititur falso fundamento. Deducit enim hanc opinionem ex cap. XXIV Num. ubi secundum versionem 70, legimus : Ex¬ tolletur Gog regnum , et augebitur regnum ejus : Deus duxit illum ex Adgypto etc. (1). Ubi vi¬ detur Scriptura dicere, quod quando Chris¬ tus redibit ex Aegypto, tempore suae infan¬ tiae, tunc extolletur regnum Gog : constat autem, Christo infante existente, nullum regnum fuisse exaltatum, nisi Romanorum. At sine dubio corrupta est in hoc loco edi¬ tio 70 Interpretum : Hebraice enim habetur, non Gog, sed Agag : MfcD DVi. Et tol¬ letur propter Agag, vel prae Agag Rex ejus. Et sensus est secundum Hieronymum in c. XXXVIII Ezech. et tolletur Saul primus Rex Israel propter Agag, id est, quia pecca¬ bit non occidendo Agag. Vel secundum alios, extolletur Saul prae Agag ; id est, praevale¬ bit et superabit ipsum Agag. Utrumque est verum. Et certum est, locum illum Nume¬ rorum intelligi de regno Judaeorum, non de Christo, vel Romanis : incipit enim : Quam pulchra tabernacula tua Jacob tentoria tua Is¬ rael etc. (2). Quarta opinio 6st aliorum, qui per Gog et Magog intelligunt praelia Diaboli et Angelo¬ rum ejus olim in coelo cum Angelis bonis patrata, quam Hieronymus refellit, tamquam destruentem litteram, in cap. XXXVIII Ezech. Quinta est Theodori Bibliandri, quem se¬ quitur Chytraeus in Com. cap. XX Apoc. Igitur Bibliander tab. 14. suae Chronol. ubi accurate disserit de Gog et Magog, et tan¬ dem docet, prophetiam Ezechielis et Joannis non pertinere ad idem tempus ; sed Ezechie¬ lis quidem vaticinium impletum esse tem¬ pore Machabseorum, et Gog ac Magog fuisse Alexandrum Magnum, et posteros ejus Re¬ ges Syriae et Aegypti, qui cum Judaeis multa praelia commiserunt, et a Machabaeis tan¬ dem superati fuerunt : Joannis autem pro¬ phetiam impletam esse tempore Gregorii VII Papae, et sequentium aliquot Pontificum : ac Gog et Magog fuisse Pontifices, et alios Christianorum Principes et exercitus, qui diu pugnaverunt contra Saracenos pro terra san¬ cta, et sepulcro Domini recuperandis. Prima pars hujus opinionis est etiam Theodereti, in cap. XXXVIII Ezech. sed de¬ fendi non potest. Primo, quia sine dubio una et eadem est prophetia Ezechielis et Joan¬ nis ; et proinde utraque implenda est post Christi adventum. Nam in primis Joannes dicit, exercitum Gog a quatuor angulis terree venturum, et idem dicit Ezechiel, nomina- tim exprimens in exercitu Gog futuros Per¬ sas ex Oriente, AEthiopas ex Meridie, Tubalf id est, Hispanos ex Occidente, et Togorma, id est, Phrygas a lateribus Aquilonis. Dein¬ de Joannes dicit; igne de coelo demisso, hunc exercitum perdendum : et idem asse¬ rit Ezechiel in fine cap . XXXVIII : Ignem , inquit, et sulphur pluam super eum , et super exercitum ejus (3). Denique, Joannes huic praelio subjungit continuo innovationem Hierusalem, id est, glorificationem Ecclesiae, et similiter Ezechiel a cap. XL usque ad fi¬ nem libri nihil tractat, nisi mirabilem inno¬ vationem Hierusalem. Praeterea secundo probatur, prophetiam Ezechielis non fuisse impletam tempore Machabaeorum. Nam Ezech. XXXVIII dici- (1) Num. XXIV, 7 et 8. — (2) Num. XXIV, 5. — (3) Ezech. XXXVIII, 22. tur ad Gog, in novissimo annorum venies : at Alexander Magnus cum suis in medio an¬ norum venit. Deinde Ezechiel aperte dicit, in exercitu Gog futuros iEthiopas, Libyos, Hispanos, Cappadoces etc. qui tamen nun¬ quam pugnaverunt contra Hierusalem, ac praesertim tempore Machabeeorum : soli enim Syri et iEgyptii pugnaverunt contra Macha- baeos. Denique Ezechiel describit talem victo¬ riam contra Gog et Magog, ut deinceps nulli essent timendi hostes, sed esset futurus finis omnium praeliorum. At non talis fuit victo¬ ria Machabaeorum contra Reges Syriae et iEgypti : nam nec Judaei Regem Syriae et iEgypti unquam penitus superaverunt, et paulo post luerunt Judaei rursum a Romanis vexati et capti, nec se unquam de eorum manibus liberaverunt, ut Augustinus dedu¬ cit, et probat lib. XVIII de Civit. Dei, c. 45. Non ergo prophetia Ezechielis ante Christi tempora impleta fuit. Altera pars opinionis Bibliandri, quae pro¬ pria est ejus, non solum falsa, sed etiam im¬ pia est. Nam in primis Joannes dicit, prae¬ lium Gog et Magog futurum contra castra Sanctorum et dilectam civitatem , id est, contra veram Dei Ecclesiam : at bellum Christianorum pro terra sancta recuperanda fuit totum contra Saracenos Mahumetanos, nisi forte velit Bibliander , Mahumetanos esse veram Dei Ecclesiam et castra Sancto¬ rum. Deinde Joannes dicit, homines futuros in exercitu Gog ex quatuor angulis terree : at in exercitu Christiano non erant nisi Oc¬ cidentales, et Aquilonares, id est, Galli, Germani, Itali. Preeterea Joannes dicit, fini¬ to bello Gog et Magog, mox Hierusalem re¬ novandam et glorificandam : Diabolum au¬ tem, et Antichristum, et Pseudoprophetas dejiciendos in ignem aeternum : at bellum Christianorum pro terra sancta jamdudum est finitum ; nec tamen videmus ullam Hie¬ rusalem innovatam, nec Diabolum, et Pseu¬ doprophetas disjectos in Tartarum. Nunc enim, ut etiam adversarii fatentur, Diabolus et Pseudoprophetae maxime vigent. Praeterea Deus ipse manifestis signis et prodigiis tum ad Antiochiam Syriae, tum in aliis locis manifeste ostendit, sibi gratum bellum illud fuisse . De quibus vide Guliel- mum Tyrium lib. VI de bell. sac. et Paulum ^Emilium lib. IV de reb. Franc. Denique S. Bernardus, quem Sanctum si¬ ve Divinum nominat idem Bibliander in Ghron . ubi de Eugenii III temporibus agit, praeter alios sanctos viros, unus fuit ex prae¬ cipuis auctoribus illius belli : ipse enim et verbis, et miraculis suasit infinitae multitu¬ dini Gallorum et Germanorum, ut ad bellum illud proficiscerentur, ut ipsemet indicat ini¬ tio lib. II de Consider. Et Auctor vitae ejus¬ dem Bernardi lib. II, cap. 4. scribit, B.Ber- nardum post praelium peractum, caecum quemdam illuminasse in testimonium, quod nomine Dei bellum illud praedicaverat. Sexta opinio est Magdeburgensium, Cent. I, lib. II, cap. 4, coi. 435. ubi docent, Gog et Magog esse regnum Saracenorum, sive Turearum. Quae sententia plane opponitur sententiae Bibliandri : et ideo melior est, vel potius minus mala. Sed tamen absolute est falsa, siquidem Gog veniet in novissimo an¬ norum, nec diu durabit, ut ex Joanne et Ezechiele aperte colligitur : regnum autem Saracenorum jamdudum coepit, et duravit hactenus annos fere mille, quod sane modi¬ cum tempus dici nequaquam potest. Septima est B. Ambrosii lib. II de Fid. cap. ult. Gog esse Gothos, qui multas pro¬ vincias populi Romani vastaverunt. Memi¬ nit hujus opinionis B. Hieronymus in quaest. Hebr. in Gen. cap. X. et ait : « Utrum vera sit necne, exitus prselii docebit. » Et nunc sane exitus praelii docuit, non fuisse veram : neque enim post bella Gothorum ulla inno¬ vatio Ecclesiae secuta est , neque bella om¬ nia cessaverunt. Octava est ipsius S. Hieronymi in cap. XXXVIII Ezech. qui videns rei difficultatem, omisso litterali sensu, mystice exposuit de haereticis. Vult enim Gog, quod Hebraeis est tectum, significari haeresiarchas, qui instar tecti elati sunt ac superbi : Magog autem, quod interpretatur de tecto, significare eos, qui haeresiarchis credunt, eisque subjiciun¬ tur, ut aedificium suo tecto. Haec sententia pro mystico sensu accepta verissima est, non tamen ad litteram. Nam Ezechiel cap. XXXVIII dicit, Aog venturum in novissimo annorum, et Joannes Apoc. XX dicit, post mille annos venturum eumdem Aog : nomi¬ ne autem mille annorum intelligunt omnes Catholici totum tempus, quod est a Christi adventu usque ad Antichristum : cum ergo Aog non sit venturus nisi circa finem Mundi, et haeretici initio Ecclesiae adhuc Apostolis viventibus coeperint; constat, proprie et ad litteram Aog non significare haereticos. Sciendum 'est etiam, Hieronymum, cum dicit Gog interpretari tectum, et Magog de tecto, non velle dicere idem omnino esse He¬ braeis Gog et Magog, quod nobis tectum et de tecto, sed velle dicere, esse quasi idem. Proprie enim Hebraeis tectum non est Gog, sed Gog, 33, et de tecto non dicunt Magog, sed Miggag, 33)3. Nona sententia est B. Augustini lib. XX de Civit. Dei, cap. 41. qui per Gog intelligit Diabolum, qui est instar magni tecti, id est, magnee domus, in qua habitant omnes mali: per Magog autem intelligit Antichristi exer¬ citum ex totius orbis nationibus collectum. Quae sententia sine dubio verissima est et amplectenda, quatenus refert Gog et Magog ad tempora Antichristi ; tum quod eum se¬ quuntur omnes Catholici auctores, qui scri¬ bunt in Apocalypsim ut Arethas, Primasius, Beda, Haymo, Rupertus, Richardus, Ansel- mus, et alii; tum etiam quod omnia quae dicuntur ab Ezechiele et Joanne de Gog et Magog, rectissime conveniant Antichristo. Tunc enim vere erit ultima et maxima per¬ secutio, et post eam innovabitur Hierusa¬ lem, hoc est, Ecclesia glorificabitur, nec ulla deinceps praelia audientur. Quatenus autem per Gog intelligit Diabolum, non vi¬ detur vera : nam Joannes dicit, Diabolum solutum convocaturum esse Gog et Magog in praelium; igitur aliud est Diabolus, aliud est Gog. Nostra igitur sententia, quae decima est, tria continetur. Primo asserimus, praelium Gog et Magog esse praelium Antichristi con¬ tra Ecclesiam, ut recte Augustinus ddcuit. Secundo dicimus, probabile esse admodum, Per Gog significari ipsum Antichristum, per Magog exercitum ejus. Nam Ezechiel per¬ petuo Gog vocat principem, et Magog vocat terram, sive nationem. Tertio dicimus, pro¬ babile esse, Gog dici a Magog, non e con¬ verso, ita ut dicatur Antichristus Gog, quia est princeps gentis quae dicitur Magog : porro exercitum Antichristi vocari Magog a gente Scythica, non quod constet ex illis Scythis, quos Judaei fingunt esse ultra Cau¬ casum et Caspium mare, sed vel quod ma¬ gna pars exercitus Antichristi constabit ex barbaris a Scythia oriundis, ut Tureis, Tar¬ taris, et caeteris, vel (quod magis reor) quia erit exercitus immanis et crudelis valde : quos enim saevos dicere volumus, Scythas vocamus. Nam quod Magog revera Scythicam gen¬ tem significet, patet ex Genes. X, ubi legi¬ mus, filium Japliet secundum dictum esse Magog, ex quo dicta est Magog regio, quam ejus posteri habitarunt, quam esse Scy¬ thiam, docet Josephus lib. I Antiq. cap. 11. et Hieronymus in quaest Hebr. in Genes. X. Nam quemadmodum a tribus filiis Cham, id est, Chus, Mizraim et Chanaham, dicta est vEthiopia Chus ; iEgyptus Mizraim, et Pa¬ laestina Chanaham : sic omnino a Magog fi¬ lio Japliet dicta est Scythia Magog. Quod autem Ezechiel nominans Magog respexerit ad gentem denominatam a Magog filio Ja- phet; planum est, quia ibidem adjungit so¬ cios ipsi Gog alias gentes denominatas ab aliis filiis, vel nepotibus Japliet, ut G orner, Togorma, Mosoch, Tubal, etc. Concluda¬ mus ergo, praelium Gog et Magog esse no¬ vissimam persecutionem, quam in toto Mun¬ do contra Ecclesiam Antichristus excitabit. Neque obstat quod Ezechiel cap. XXXVIII dicit, per septem annos cremanda arma Gog et Magog ; cum tamen constet, post Anti¬ christi mortem non futuros nisi 45 dies us¬ que ad Mundi finem, ut ex Dan. XII colligi¬ tur. Nam Ezechiel non loquitur proprie, sed figurate more Prophetarum, nec vult dicere, revera per septem annos comburenda illa arma : sed tam insignem cladem futuram, ut longissimo tempore sufficere possent ad ignem fovendum hastae, et clypei hominum occisorum, si opus esset. Unum superest dubium : Anne propter saevissimam Antichristi persecutionem extin- guenda sit penitus Christi Fides et religio. Nam Dominicus a Soto in lib. IV sent. dist. 46, quaest. 1, art. 1. id futurum omnino cre¬ didit : « Abscessio, inquit, et defectio totius orbis ab illa Sede, signum erit consumma¬ tionis saeculi. » Et infra : « Extincta fide per discessionem ab Apostolica Sede, to¬ tus Mundus vanus erit , ac deinceps in¬ cassum processurus. » Et infra : « Expa¬ vescant ergo mortales, quam sit pestilens amor sui. Inde enim manet elatio et super¬ bia, quae sub ductu tandem Antichristi Ci¬ vitatem Dei labefactabit. » At haec sententia meo judicio defendi non potest. Nam in primis repugnat Augustino, qui lib. XX de Civit. Dei, cap. 11 dicit, Ec¬ clesiam semper invictam contra Antichris¬ tum futuram : « Nec militiam, inquit, suam deseret, quae vocabulo est appellata castro¬ rum. » Deinde repugnare mihi videtur etiam Evangelio , namMatth. VI legimus : Super hanc petram aedificabo Ecclesiam meam , et portae inferi non praevalebunt adversus eam (1). At quomodo non praevalebunt, si eam peni¬ tus extinguent? Item Matth. XXIV Dominus ait de ministris Antichristi : Dabunt signa magna, ita ut in errorem inducantur, si fieri potest etiam electi (2). Ubi Dominus significa¬ re voluit, electos multos eo tempore futuros qui Antichristi miraculis seduci se non pa¬ tientur. Denique, Scriptores omnes qui de Antichristi persecutione loquuntur, ut Eze- chiel, Daniel, Paulus, Joannes, etPatres om¬ nes supra citati, victoriam illius belli seu persecutionis penes Ecclesiam tandem futu¬ ram dicunt. Et sane ratio ipsa idipsum do¬ cet. Quis enim credat, in eo praelio, in quo totis castris Deus et Diabolus, Christus et Antichristus pugnabunt ; Deum a Diabolo, et Christum ab Antichristo esse vincen¬ dum?