A17182:46
A commentary upon the second epistle of S Paul to the Thessalonia[n]s In the…A commentary vpon the seconde epistle of S Paul to the Thessalonia[n]s In the…
A commentary upon the second epistle of S Paul to the Thessalonia[n]s In the which besides the sum of our faith, there is sincerely handled [and] set forth at large, not only first co[m]myng up [and] rising with the full property [and] dominion, but also the fall and utter confusion of the kingdom of Antichrist: that is to say of Machomet [and] the bishop of Rome.A commentary vpon the seconde epistle of S Paul to the Thessalonia[n]s In the which besydes the summe of oure faythe, ther is syncerelye handled [and] set forth at large, not onely fyrst co[m]myng vp [and] rysyng with the full properyte [and] dominion, but also the fall and vtter confusion of the kyngdome of Antichriste: that is to say of Machomet [and] the byshop of Rome.
Printed in Southwark : In S. Thomas hospital by James Nicolson, 1538Printed in Southwarke : In S. Thomas hospytall by Iames Nicolson, 1538
Title page typeset from the transcription.
Modern spelling is a reading aid: the words are the author’s, only the spelling is modernized. Original shows the page as printed, with the transcription marks.
But some man will say,1 thou makest two horns: Machomet and the Bishop of Rome: where as Daniel maketh mention but of one only. But except that the Bishop of Rome, being bold of the help of the Frenchmen, had broken the power of the Emperor of the East, he would surely more strongly have put to flight and persecuted the multitude of the Saracens. On the other side if that the Saracens with their running in, had not kept the Emperor in the East parties, the power neither of the Bishop of Rome, nor of the Lombards, neither yet of the Frenchmen, could not have increased so greatly in the West parties. Therefore each of them gave an occasion unto other both for to overcome & to reign. in so much that of the Empire of Rome ⟨image 31⟩little did remain but a bare name only For the Bishop of Rome keepeth the city of Rome, & the great Turk Constantinople. Now both of them impugn Christs institutions & laws a like: both of them do persecute Christen men, defending their own laws, & such as hold with them. Wherefore I could not make two horns of them that are so like. Ye & the kingdom of the Perses & Medes is figured under the image of one beer indifferently, although they seem to be twain. And so in the .xi. chapter, the same Daniel prophesying of the self same Antichrist, and beginning at the Empire of Rome, saith not: An arm shall stand out of him, but arms shall stand out of him, & shall defile the sanctuary of strength, &c. But you have now the beginning and going forward of Antichrist: here followeth now a clearer exposition of his disposition and kingdom, by his deeds and properties.
But some man wyll say,1 thou makest two hornes: Machomet and the Byshope of Rome: where as Daniel maketh mencion but of one onelye. But excepte that the Byshop of Rome, beynge bolde of the helpe of the Frenchemen, had broken the power of the Emperoure of the Easte, he wolde surely more strongly haue putte to flyght and persecuted the multytude of ye Sarracens. On the other syde yf that the Sarracens wyth theyr runnnyge in, had not kepte the Emperoure in ye Easte partyes, the power nother of the Byshope of Rome, nor of the Lombardes, nother yet of the Frenchmen, could not haue encreased so greatly in the Weste partyes. Therfore eche of them gaue an occasion vnto other bothe for to ouercome & to raygne. in so muche that of the Empyre of Rome