Apocalypsis A brief and learned commentary upon the revelation of Saint John the apostle…Apocalypsis A briefe and learned commentarie vpon the reuelation of Saint Iohn the apostle…

so (when the authority thereof was established) he went about by all possible means to corrupt the sense and meaning of the Author. What and how mighty engines, how cunning and dangerous underminings he hath employed to shake and overthrow the authority of this book, many godly & learned men have long since declared. He hath pretended the uncertainty of the Author, the phrase, stile, and arguments, and hath abused the labour of some good men to bring this his purpose to pass. What? is the Author uncertain of that book which was committed unto the custody of seven Churches, and those the most noble and renowned of all Asia, and preserved of them most religiously? It is a fable. For shall those Epistles which were written unto the only Church of Rome, of Corinth, and the like, be of certain and constant authority from the testimony of that one Church unto which they were written, and shall the authority of that book be called into question (if God will) which was written unto seven Churches? They that pretend incongruity of speech, verily show themselves to be of rude and rustical judgement: who do not think that our speech, as much as may be, ought to be attempered unto the heavenly laws. They object strangeness of the stile, the publication of his own name, & the often repetition of the ⟨image 4⟩same things. O worthy thetoricians! who will not have the stile to differ in a different matter. They think it agreeth with the modesty of S. John to have concealed his name: as if S. John in this argument did not see it more material, that by diverse times expressing of his name, he should (as Daniel did of old time) commend the credit and authority of the book unto posterity of time to come: then by suppressing his name to provide for this imaginary modesty whereof they speak. Is it not as modestly done of S. John, that he doth in express words profess him self the Author of this book: as when in the last chapter of his Gospel, he doth by circumlocution describe him self? Verily in neither book did he err from modesty: but did in both of them, by addition of his name, confirm the credit and authority of his writing, necessarily & for the public good of the Church. That they think the same thing is often repeated, is partly false, and partly where any such repetition is, necessary: which thing our interpretation shall declare.

so (when the authoritie thereof was established) he went about by all possible meanes to corrupt the sence and meaning of the Authour. What and howe mightie engines, howe cunning and daungerous vnderminings he hath employed to shake and ouerthrow the authority of this booke, many godly & learned men haue long since declared. He hath pretended the vncertaintie of the Author, the phrase, stile, and arguments, and hath abused the labour of some good men to bring this his purpose to passe. What? is the Author vncertain of that booke which was committed vnto the custodie of seuen Churches, and those the most noble and renowned of all Asia, and preserued of them most religiously? It is a fable. For shall those Epistles which were written vnto the onely Church of Rome, of Corinth, and the like, be of certaine and constant authoritie from the testimonie of that one Church vnto which they were written, and shall the authority of that booke be called into question (if God will) which was written vnto seuen Churches? They that pretēd incongruity of speech, verily shew themselues to be of rude and rusticall iudgement: who do not thinke that our speech, as much as may be, ought to be attempered vnto the heauenly lawes. They obiect strangenesse of the stile, the publicatiō of his own name, & the oftē repetitiō of the