"Now that, besides these scopes that upstart Inquirer
labours to wrest the Revelation to this purpose, as if it should teach, that
R O M E, of old the head of Pagan Idolatry, by an admirable vicissitude was
to bee changed into the Metropolis of the Catholicke Church, that the Romane
Church wot gloriously to triumph both in respectt of the Romane Citie, and
the whole Empire, and that the soveraigne authority of the Romish Pope
should alwayes remaine in the height of honour', is such a filthy and
impudent depravation of this most Sacred Prophesie: that even the Divell
himselfe ought to blush thereat: and I should wonder if these goodly trifles
do not cause laughter, or shame even to the Romish Court it selvse. But
these things a little after are to be more neerly examined, when we come to
the Argument. Enough touching the Order." (p 16)
"The upstart Interpreter of the Revelation (before mentioned) having
thought upon a new Stratagem, I know not whether to curry favour with the
Pope, or the more to harden him to his destruction, doth hence forge to
himself new Oracles touching the Church , and the Monarchicall Empire of the
Pope of Rome, and with his Hypotheses doth wholly stray from the Scope of
this Prophesie, and to speake the truth, doth foully deprave the Argument
thereof.
His Hypotheses or Positions are principally four: 0ne general; Three
Special.
The generall is of the Argument of the whole Revelation: that it describes a
two-fold warre of the Church: one with the Synagogue, the other with
Paganisme, and a two-fold viclory and triumph over both adversaries.
But the former warre with the Synagogue was already fought before the
Prophesie was revealed: and the Synagogue with the Temple lay in ashes. To
what purpose then should this warre have been shewed unto John as being to
come afterward? Like as, faith he, things done are represented in a Comoedie.
As if forsooth, Christ would represent unto John things done, and not
rather, which were to come to passe afterward. As for the latter warre with
Paganisme, although it was then on foot very hot already, and was further to
lie more heavy upon the Christians: notwithstanding a more fierce conflict
by farre with Antichrist was to befall them (not to speake of the Gogish
Warre) by whom the Church (as is prefigured in the Apocalyps) should
grievously be oppressed unto the very last times, and against whom victory
and triumph is promised unto the Saints, the which all Interpreters, the
Papists not excepted, do confesse.
Of his Speciall hypotheses the first is, that in the first eleven Chapters
is represented the rejection of the Jewish Nation, and the desolation of the
City Jerusalem by the Romanes.
The Second: That in the nine following chapters is portended the Empire of
the Romane Church over Rome and the whole world, and the overthrow of
Paganisme: the which forsooth should bee that horrible judgement of the
Great Whore and destruction of Babylon, effected by Constantine the Great
and his Successours.
The Third: That in the two last Chapters under the Type of the Lambes Bride
and the New Jerusalem, is set forth the glorious and triumphant state of the
Romane Church in Heaven.
But these most idle vanities will soon vanish away, if thou doest but even
put them to the Touch-stone, that is, the very Text of the Prophesie; for
Christ did reveale those things to John which should shortly bee done, Chap.
1. 1. and afterward Chap. 4.1. whereas therefore the destruction of
Jerusalem, and rejection of the Jewes, by Alcasars owne confession was
fulfilled XXV yeeres before the Revelation was given.
Who then should believe that Christ would have revealed unto John for a
great mysterie, a History so generally known, under such obscure Types:
Johns Revelation prophesieth of things present and to come, faith Andreas
out of a Treatise of Methodius, intitled Symposium or "Banket".
Therefore the first Hypothesis is undoubtedly false.
Neither is the second more true. For the judgement of the Great Whore, and
the ruine of Babylon is represented not as a grace of conversion, but as a
punishment of whoredom to be inflicted on the kingdom & seat of Antichrist
in the last times. Therefore to interpret this of the conversion of Rome and
Paganisme unto the Faith of Christ, which came to passe three hundred yeers
after Christ under Constantine and his Successours, is to make a mocke of
reason.
The third is no better then the rest. The Spouse of the Lambe, and the New
Jerusalem, is the whole Church of Christ, gloriously triumphing in Heaven,
from whom God hath wiped away all teares: in which shall bee nothing that is
defiled and abominable, as shall be afterward shewed in its place: but that
the now Romane Apostaticall Church, worshipper of Idols, mother of
fornications, and driver, not of Christs, but of the Beast of Antichrist
(while she remains such on earth) should also belong unto the Spouse of
Christ in Heaven shall then be true, when that of the Apostle is false: "Be
not deceived, neither Fornicators, nor Idolaters, nor adulterers, nor
effeminate, nor abusers of themselves with mankinde, nor thieves, nor
drunkards, nor revilers, nor blasphemers, nor extortioners shall enherit the
Kingdom of God. Shall I take the members of Christ, and make them the
members of an harlot: which shall be ad Calendas Graecai, that is, never.
But what need I trouble my self: This new fiction of the Inquirer is
abundantly refuted by the judgement of Ribera, Bellarmine, and other most
acute Doctors of his owne order: although scarcely there be any one of them,
whom be doth not most freely censure.
But of late a certaine learned and judicious Divine
scemeth to have set forth in lively colours the argument of that painfull
and most polished Inquiry, in an Epistle, which I shall here annexe." (pp. 17,18)
IS 1618 USAGE OF "PRETERPERFECT" IN DISTINGUISHING PAST
FULFILLMENT PRECURSOR TO 19TH C. TERM "PRETERISM"?
David Pareus (1618) "The Angell saith.. is come, for,
shall certainly come, by an usuall Enallage of the preterperfect tense
instead of the future." (p 342)
"What Pareus refers to as "preterperfect" is in a modern grammar the second
aorist active indicative. The "dramatic" aorist states a result "on the
point of being accomplsihed" with the emphatic "certitude of a past event,"
although the aorist has "no essentian temporal significance" (John Charles
Hawley ; Dana and Mantey 1955: 198, 193)
