Bellarmine · De Controversiis · On Antichrist · On the Roman Pontiff, Book III
Chapter 22: The Ineptitudes of Tilmann Are Refuted
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).
Tilmann Heshusius, in the book which he entitled On the Six Hundred Errors of the Papists — when he ought to have entitled it On the Six Hundred Lies of the Lutherans — made a proper title on Antichrist, which is the 33rd title, and it comprises four errors. So then he says:
First, “The Papists say that Antichrist will come from Babylonia, of the tribe of Dan.” Compendium of Theology, Book 7, chapter 8.
We give thanks to Tilmann, who teaches that the Papists are so ancient and so holy. For if they are Papists who say that Antichrist will come from the tribe of Dan, certainly Papists are Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Ambrose, Augustine, Prosper, Theodoret, Gregory, Bede, Arethas, Rupert, Anselm, and Richard; for all these, as we showed above in chapter 12, teach by common consent that Antichrist will be born of the tribe of Dan. But go on.
Secondly, “The Papists deny that the Roman Pontiff with his fellowship is the true Antichrist, though this is proved and demonstrated by the strongest and plainest testimonies of the divine word.”
But we have not yet seen those testimonies; nor do they anywhere exist in our Bibles, Hebrew, Greek, Latin. For the testimonies which are brought by your writers do not even name the Roman Pontiff.
Thirdly, “They teach that Antichrist will reign only three years and a half.” Compendium of Theology, etc.
Here indeed we render you immortal thanks, that you confess to be Papists not only all the ancient Fathers, but even Daniel the Prophet and John the Evangelist. And truly I pity you and yours, for whom you reserve only the dregs of the Writers, all the learned and approved Fathers being consigned to the Papists. See, if you please, what we taught above in chapter 8, and you will find that Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Cyril, Jerome, Augustine, Theodoret, Primasius, Arethas, Bede, Anselm, Richard, Rupert, and even Daniel and John, taught in express words what you affirm the Papists to teach.
Fourthly, “They teach that Antichrist will be killed on the Mount of Olives.” Compendium of Theology, Book 7, chapter 14.
But here too you make great men Papists. Since that Antichrist is to be killed on the Mount of Olives, Jerome gathers from Daniel and Isaiah themselves, in his Commentary on chapter 9 of Daniel. Theodoret too, writing on the same place, although he does not name the Mount of Olives, yet affirms that Antichrist is to be slain not far from Jerusalem. But let us now see by what arguments you refute the aforesaid errors. For you immediately subjoin an antidote in these words:
“The Papist trifles about Antichrist, because they rest on no testimony of holy Scripture, are to be rejected and detested. For, as Jerome rightly says, what has not authority in Scripture is contemned with the same ease with which it is asserted. And Paul warns us to beware of the traditions of men, Colossians 2: This I say, that no man may deceive you by false reasonings, etc. Likewise: Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy, etc. From the word of God it must be sought what is to be thought of Antichrist, as 1 John 2: Who is a liar, but he who denieth that Jesus is the Christ? This is Antichrist. Likewise 2 Thessalonians 2: The man of sin and son of perdition lifts himself above all that is God, etc. Likewise Matthew 24: There shall arise false christs and false prophets, and shall show signs, etc. Likewise Daniel 11: And he shall make the fortification of the god Maozim, etc. Likewise Apocalypse 17: And I saw a woman drunk with the blood of the Saints, and with the blood of the Martyrs of Jesus. From these testimonies of holy Scripture it plainly appears what is the Christian Faith concerning Antichrist, whom Christ and the Apostles foretold would come. And since it is clearer than the noonday light that each detail most exactly agrees with the Roman Pontiff, no one ought to doubt that that worst Roman tyrant is Antichrist.” Thus he.
It will not be troublesome, I believe, if, for the sake of the ruder sort, we reduce these arguments of yours to the syllogistic form, and thence most plainly conclude the confutation of the errors written above. Thus, then, the first error is refuted: The Papist trifles, because they rest on no testimony of Scripture, are to be rejected and detested; but the Word of God cries: He who denies that Jesus is the Christ, this is Antichrist; therefore it is an error to say that Antichrist will come from the tribe of Dan.
The second error is thus confuted: As Jerome rightly says, what has not authority in Scripture is contemned with the same ease with which it is asserted; but Paul says: The man of sin and son of perdition lifts himself above all that is God; therefore the Papists err when they deny that the Pope is Antichrist.
The third thus, and more strongly, because from two Scriptures: Paul says: This I say, that no man may deceive you by false reasonings, etc.; but there shall arise false christs and false prophets, and shall show signs, etc.; therefore the intolerable error of the Papists, who say Antichrist will reign three years and a half.
The last thus, and most strongly, because from three Scriptures: Paul warns: Beware lest any man cheat you by philosophy, etc.; but Antichrist will make the fortification of the god Maozim, Daniel 11, and John saw a woman drunk with the blood of the Saints, Apocalypse 17; therefore the Papists err by the whole heaven when they say Antichrist is to be killed on the Mount of Olives.
The candid reader will pardon me for having so ridiculously taken up Tilmann. For the impudence of the man compelled me, who, though he brings forward nothing worthy of confutation, yet so prates, so boasts, as if he had brought forward demonstrations surer and clearer than the Mathematicians'.
Show the Latin (Vives edition, OCR)
CAPUT XXII. Refelluntur ineptia; Tilmanni. Tilmannus Heshusius in lib. quem inscrip¬ sit de sexcentis erroribus Pontificiorum, cum debuisset inscribere, de sexcentis mendaciis LutheranorUm, proprium titulum de Anti- christo fecit, is est 33. titulus, et, complecti¬ tur errores quatuor. Sic igitur ait : Primo, « Pontificii dicunt , Antichristum ex Babylonia de tribu Dan venturum esse. » Compendium Theologiae lib. VII, cap. 8. Habemus gratias Tilmanno, qui tam anti¬ quos et tam sanctos Pontificios esse docet. Nam si Pontificii sunt qui dicunt, ex tribu Dan Antichristum venturum ; certe Ponti¬ ficii sunt Irenaeus, Hippolytus , Ambrosius, Augustinus, Prosper, Theodoretus , Grego- rius, Beda, Arethas, Rupertus, Anselmus, et Richardus : hi enim omnes , ut supra os¬ tendimus cap. 12. communi consensu do¬ cent, Antichristum nasciturum de tribu Dan. Sed perge. Secundo, « Papistae negant, Romanum Pontificem cum suo sodalitio esse verum An¬ tichristum, cum id validissimis et apertissi¬ mis verbi divini testimoniis comprobetur, et demonstretur. » Sed nos ista testimonia nondum vidimus : nec in nostris Bibliis Hebraicis, Graecis, La¬ tinis usquam exstant. Quae enim a vestris testimonia adferuntur, Romanum Pontificem ne nominant quidem. Tertio, « docent, Antichristum tantum tri¬ bus annis cura dimidio regnaturum. » Com¬ pendium Theologiae etc. Hic vero immortales tibi gratias agimus, quod Papistas esse fatearis, non solum om¬ nes veteres Patres, verum etiam Danielem Prophetam, et Joannem Evangelistam . Et sane miseret me tui et tuorum, quibus faecem dumtaxat Scriptorum reservas, omnibus doc¬ tis, et probatis Patribus ad Papistas ablega¬ tis. Vide si placet quae supra docuimus c. 8. atque invenies , disertis verbis docuisse, quod tu Papistas docere affirmas, Irenaeum, Hippolytum, Cyrillum, Hieronymum , Au¬ gustinum, Theodoretum, Primasium, Are- tham, Bedam, Anselmum, Richardum , Ru- pertum, et etiam Danielem et Joannem. Quarto, « docent, Antichristum interfectum iri in Monte Oliveti. » Compendium Theolo¬ giae lib. VII, cap. 14. At hic quoque magnos viros Papistas facis. Siquidem Antichristum in Monte Oliveti in¬ terficiendum esse, ex ipso Daniele et Isaia colligit Hieronymus in Comm. cap. IX Da- nielis. Theodoretus quoque in eumdem locum scribens, etiamsi montem Oliveti non nomi¬ nat, affirmat tamen, Antichristum non pro¬ cul a Hierosolyma esse necandum. Sed vi¬ deamus jam quibus argumentis errores prae¬ dictos refellas. Subjicis enim continuo anti¬ dotum in haec verba. « Nugae Pontificiae de Antichristo , quia nullo testimonio sacrae Scripturae nituntur, rejiciendae et detestandae sunt. Nam, ut Hie¬ ronymus recte loquitur, quod in Scriptura auctoritatem non habet, eadem facilitate con¬ temnitur, qua asseritur. Et Paulus monet, ut nobis caveamus a traditionibus hominum, Coloss. II. Hoc autem dico , ne quis vobis falsis rationibus imponat etc. Item : Yidete ne quis vos depraedetur per Philosophiam etc. Ex verbo Dei petendum est quid sit de Antichristo sentiendum, ut I. Joan. II : Quis est mendax nisi qui negat Jesum esse Chris¬ tum? Hic est Antichristus. Item II. Thessal. II Homo peccati et filius perditionis effert sese super omnem Deum etc. Item Matth. XXIV : Exorientur Pseudochristi et Pseudo¬ prophetae, et edent signa etc. Item Dan. XI : Et faciet munitionem Dei Moazim etc. Item Apocal. XY1I : Et vidi mulierem ebriam de sanguine Sanctorum, et de sanguine Marty¬ rum Jesu. Ex his sacrae Scripturae testimo¬ niis liquido apparet, quae sit Fides Christiana de Antichristo , quem Christus et Apostoli praedixerunt venturum. Et cum luce meri¬ diana clarius sit , singula exactissime con¬ gruere in Romanum Pontificem; dubitare non debet, quin Romanus ille tyrannus pes¬ simus sit Antichristus. » Haec ille. Non erit molestum, credo, si haec tua ar¬ gumenta propter rudiores ad formam syllo¬ gisticam revocemus, et inde confutationem supra scriptorum errorum apertissime con¬ cludamus. Sic igitur refellitur error primus. Nugae Pontificiae , quia nullo testimonio Scripturae nituntur, rejiciendae et detestan¬ dae sunt : at Yerbum Dei clamat : Qui negat Jesum esse Christum , hic est Antichristus •'(I) igitur error est dicere, Antichristum ex tribu Dan esse venturum. Alter error ita confutatur. Ut Hieronymus recte dicit, Quod in Scriptura non habet auctoritatem, eadem facilitate contemnitur, qua asseritur : sed Paulus ait : Homo peccati et perditionis filius effert sese super omnem Deum (3) : igitur errant Papistae cum negant, Papam esse Antichristum. Tertius sic, et fortius, quia ex duabus Scripturis ; Paulus ait : Hoc autem dico , ne quis vobis falsis rationibus imponat etc. : at exorientur Pseudochristi , et Pseudoprophetae , et edent signa etc. (3) : igitur error Pontifi¬ ciorum intolerabilis est, qui Antichristum tribus annis cum dimidio regnaturum di¬ cunt. Postremus sic, et fortissime, quia ex tri¬ bus Scripturis. Paulus monet : Videte , ne quis vos depraedetur per Philosophiam etc. (4) : atqui Antichristus faciet munitionem Dei Maozim, Daniel XI, et Joannes vidit mulie¬ rem ebriam de sanguine Sanctorum, Apoc. XYII, errant igitur toto coelo Papistae cum dicunt, Antichristum in monte Oliveti esse occidendum. Dabit veniam candidus lector, quod ita ridicule Tilmannum exceperim. Coegit enim me impudentia hominis, qui cum nihil ad- ferat dignum confutatione : tamen ita garrit, ita gloriatur, ac si demonstrationes Mathe¬ maticis certiores et clariores in medium at¬ tulisset.