The second book hath two conclusions:one,that St.Peter was Bishop of Rome,and there died;the other,that the Popes of Rome are his successors;both which have been disputed by others.But supposing them true;yet if by Bishop of Rome be understood either the monarch of the Church,or the supreme pastor of it,not Silvester,but Constantine (who was the first Christian emperor)was that bishop;and as Constantine,so all other Christian emperors were of right supreme bishops of the Roman Empire.I say,of the Roman Empire,not of all Christendom,for other Christian sovereigns had the same right in their several territories,as to an office essentially adherent to their sovereignty:which shall serve for answer to his second book.
In the third book he handleth the question whether the Pope be Antichrist.For my part,I see no argument that proves he is so,in that sense the Scripture useth the name:nor will I take any argument from the quality of Antichrist to contradict the authority he exerciseth,or hath heretofore exercised,in the dominions of any other prince or state.
It is evident that the prophets of the Old Testament foretold,and the Jews expected,a Messiah,that is,a Christ,that should re-establish amongst them the kingdom of God,which had been rejected by them in the time of Samuel when they required a king after the manner of other nations.This expectation of theirs made them obnoxious to the imposture of all such as had both the ambition to attempt the attaining of the kingdom,and the art to deceive the people by counterfeit miracles,by hypocritical life,or by orations and doctrine plausible.Our Saviour therefore,and his Apostles,forewarned men of false prophets and of false Christs.False Christs are such as pretend to be the Christ,but are not,and are called properly Antichrists,in such sense as when there happeneth a schism in the Church by the election of two Popes,the one the one calleth the other Antipapa,or the false Pope.And therefore Antichrist in the proper signification hath two essential marks:one,that he denieth Jesus to be Christ;and another that he professeth himself to be Christ.The first mark is set down by St.John in his first Epistle,4.3,"Every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh is not of God;and this is the spirit of Antichrist."The other mark is expressed in the words of our Saviour,"Many shall come in my name,saying,I am Christ";and again,"If any man shall say unto you,Lo,here is Christ,there is Christ,believe it not."And therefore Antichrist must be a false Christ;that is,some one of them that shall pretend themselves to be Christ.And out of these two marks,to deny Jesus to be the Christ and to affirm himself to be the Christ,it followeth that he must also be an adversary of Jesus the true Christ,which is another usual signification of the word Antichrist.But of these many Antichrists,there is one special one,o Antichristos,the Antichrist,or Antichrist definitely,as one certain person;not indefinitely an Antichrist.Now seeing the Pope of Rome neither pretendeth himself,nor denieth Jesus to be the Christ,Iperceive not how he can be called Antichrist;by which word is not meant one that falsely pretendeth to be his lieutenant,or vicar general,but to be He.There is also some mark of the time of this special Antichrist,as when that abominable destroyer,spoken of by Daniel,shall stand in the holy place,and such tribulation as was not since the beginning of the world,nor ever shall be again,insomuch as if it were to last long,no flesh could be saved;but for the elect's sake those days shall be shortened,"(made fewer).
But that tribulation is not yet come;for it is to be followed immediately by a darkening of the sun and moon,a falling of the stars,a concussion of the heavens,and the glorious coming again of our Saviour in the clouds.And therefore the Antichrist is not yet come;whereas many Popes are both come and gone.It is true,the Pope,in taking upon him to give laws to all Christian kings and nations,usurpeth a kingdom in this world,which Christ took not on him:but he doth it not as Christ,but as for Christ,wherein there is nothing of the Antichrist.
In the fourth book,to prove the Pope to be the supreme judge in all questions of faith and manners,which is as much as to be the absolute monarch of all Christians in the world,he bringeth three propositions:the first,that his judgements are infallible;the second,that he can make very laws,and punish those that observe them not;the third,that our Saviour conferred all jurisdiction ecclesiastical on the Pope of Rome.
For the infallibility of his judgements,he allegeth the Scriptures:
the first,that of Luke,22.31,"Simon,Simon,Satan hath desired you that he may sift you as wheat;but I have prayed for thee,that thy faith fail not;and when thou art converted,strengthen thy brethren."This,according to Bellarmine's exposition,is that Christ gave here to Simon Peter two privileges:one,that neither his faith should fail,nor the faith of any of his successors;the other,that neither he nor any of his successors should ever define any point concerning faith or manners erroneously,or contrary to the definition of a former Pope:which is a strange and very much strained interpretation.But he that with attention readeth that chapter shall find there is no place in the whole Scripture that maketh more against the Pope's authority than this very place.The priests and scribes,seeking to kill our Saviour at the Passover,and Judas possessed with a resolution to betray him,and the day of killing the Passover being come,our Saviour celebrated the same with his Apostles,which he said,till the kingdom of God was come he would do no more,and withal told them that one of them was to betray him.
