Inveniuntur enim in sacra Scriptura multa quae ad idem pertinent sicut pseudoprophetae et pseudoapostoli et pseudochristi: quae omnia in falsitatem sonant et ad idem pertinent, unde de eis idem est iudicium, quod patet ex hoc quod habetur II Petr. II, 1: fuerunt et pseudoprophetae in populo, sicut et in vobis erunt magistri mendaces. Prophetae autem et apostoli officium est ut sit mediator inter Deum et populum, verba Dei populo annuntians, sicut habetur II Cor. V, 20: pro Christo legatione fungimur tanquam Deo exhortante per nos. Unde ex duobus dicitur aliquis falsus propheta vel falsus apostolus: In the Sacred Scripture we find other expressions of the same kind, such as false prophets, and false Christs. The following words of St. Peter, but false prophets also arose among the people, just as there will be false teachers among you (2 Pet 2:1), apply to all these disseminators of falsehood. For the office of a preacher and an apostle, is to be a mediator between the Lord and his people, by preaching the Word of God. Thus St. Paul says: so we are ambassadors for Christ, God making his appeal through us (2 Cor 5:20). Now a man may be a false apostle or a false prophet for one of two reasons. primo ex hoc quod a Deo non est missus, prout dicitur Ier. XXIII, 21: non mittebam prophetas et ipsi currebant, non loquebar ad eos et ipsi prophetabant; First, he may not be sent by God: I did not send the prophets, yet they ran; I did not speak to them, yet they prophesied (Jer 23:21). secundo ex hoc quod verba Domini non proponunt sed falsa de suo corde confingunt, unde in eodem cap. dicitur: nolite audire verba prophetarum qui prophetant vobis et decipiunt vos; visionem cordis sui loquuntur non de ore Domini. Second, a false apostle or prophet will proclaim not the Word of God, but his own inventions: do not listen to the words of the prophets who prophesy to you, filling you with vain hopes; they speak visions of their own minds, not from the mouth of the Lord (Jer 23:16). Et Ez. XIII, 6, haec duo tanguntur: vident, inquit, vana et divinant mendacium dicentes: ait Dominus, cum Dominus non miserit eos. Et additur tertium, quod ad pertinaciam falsitatis pertinet cum subditur: et perseveraverunt confirmare sermonem. Unde cum Ieremias quasi falsus propheta condemnaretur, haec duo a se removit, Ier. XXVI, 15, inquiens: in veritate misit me Dominus ad vos – quantum ad primum – , ut loquerer in auribus vestris omnia verba haec – quantum ad secundum – . Both these two accusations are brought against false prophets and apostles in the following words of Ezechiel 13:6: they have spoken falsehood and divined a lie; they say, "says the Lord," when the Lord has not sent them. Alluding to the pertinacity of such false teachers, the Prophet adds: and yet they expect him to fulfil their word. When Jeremiah was condemned as a false prophet, he hastened to exculpate himself from both these charges. He said: in truth the Lord sent me to you. This refers to the first accusation. He adds: to speak all these words in your ears. This is his defence against the second charge (Jer 26:15). Et haec duo in novo Testamento pseudoapostolos constituunt, The false apostles of the New Testament were recognisable likewise by these two characteristics, videlicet quod non mittuntur a Domino namely, first that they were not sent by God, et quod falsam doctrinam disseminant. and second that they propagated false doctrine. Intelliguntur autem a Domino mitti etiam qui a praelatis Ecclesiae mittuntur, unde Augustinus ad Orosium: apostolus interpretatur missus. Apostolorum quatuor sunt genera: a Deo, a Deo per hominem, et per hominem tantum, et ex se; a Deo sicut Moyses, a Deo per hominem sicut Iesus Nave, per hominem tantum sicut nostris temporibus multi favore vulgi in sacerdotium subrogati sunt, ex se sunt ipsi pseudoprophetae; et postea subiungit: illum cognosce missum a Deo quem non paucorum hominum laudatio vel potius adulatio eligit, sed illum quem vita et mores optimi et apostolicorum exactio commendat sacerdotum. Quod etiam pseudoapostoli dicantur illi qui doctrinam haereticam disseminabant, patet ex hoc quod habetur in Glossa Gal. I, 7 super illud Nisi sint aliqui qui vos conturbent, Glossa: hi erant pseudoapostoli, qui dicebant aliud evangelium esse et aliud legem Moysi; et Marc. XIII, 22 super illud Exurgent pseudochristi et pseudoprophetae etc. dicit Glossa: de haereticis accipiendum est qui contra Ecclesiam venientes se christos esse mentiuntur, quorum primus est Simon magus, extremus Antichristus. Now preachers bearing a commission from the bishops of the Church are sent by God. St. Augustine, in his Epistle to Orosius, interprets the word "apostle" as signifying send. There are, he says, four kinds of apostles. Those sent by God, those sent by God by means of man, those sent by man alone, those who are sent by their own inclination. Moses was sent by God, Joshua by God and man. They who in our times are raised by public favour to the priesthood are sent by man alone. False prophets are sent by none; they go forth at their own desire. The saint adds: he should be considered as sent by God, who is not chosen out by human praise or flattery, but who is recommended by the excellence of his life and by the wishes of apostolic priests. Those who preached heretical doctrine were likewise called false apostles. This we know by the testimony both of St. Paul and of the Gloss, on his words. When the Apostle writes: there are some who trouble you and want to pervert the gospel of Christ (Gal 1:16), the Gloss comments: these were the false apostles who said that the Gospel was opposed to the law of Moses. Again, on the words, false Christs and false prophets will arise and show signs and wonders (Mark 13:22), the Gloss says: this verse is to be understood as referring the heretics who attacked the Church, declaring that they were Christs. The first of these impostors was Simon Magus; the last will be antichrist. Ad hoc autem quod aliquis non missus praedicet vel falsam doctrinam proponat ex aliqua mala radice movetur, utpote vel ex avaritia lucrum quaerens vel ex superbia seu inani gloria; contingit etiam huiusmodi homines gratia Dei desertos per multa vitia diffluere et magna et parva. Non tamen ex omnibus his radicibus vel huiusmodi vitiis dicuntur pseudoapostoli vel pseudoprophetae, quia non omnis qui propter lucrum praedicat vel propter favorem mundi pseudoapostolus est; alias non esset differentia inter mercenarium et pseudoapostolum: qui enim aliud quam fructum animarum et honorem Dei per praedicationem quaerunt, mercenarii dicuntur, sive vera sive falsa annuntient et sive missi et sive non missi, sed pseudoapostoli vel pseudoprophetae dici non possunt nisi quando non sunt missi vel falsa annuntiant. Similiter etiam non omnes peccatores qui verbum Dei annuntiant vel sacramenta ministrant sunt pseudoapostoli vel pseudoprophetae; veri enim praelati sunt veri apostoli, qui tamen peccatis exigentibus interdum peccatores inveniuntur. He who preaches without, any commission to do so, or teaches false doctrine, does so inspired by some bad motive, either of covetousness, or pride, or vain glory. Such men are deprived of the grace of God; and consequently commit sins, more or less heinous. But everyone who preaches for the sake of gain or popularity is not, necessarily a false apostle or false prophet; otherwise there would be no distinction between a hireling and a false apostle. They who preach for the sake of anything save of the glory of God and the good of souls are hirelings; let their preaching be true or false, authorised or unauthorised. But such men cannot be called false prophets, unless they either bear no commission, or teach false doctrine. In the same way, every sinner who administers the sacraments, or preaches the Word of God, is not necessarily a false apostle or a false prophet. For true prelates are true apostles; although at times they may be sinful. In hoc ergo detractorum contra quos agimus insipientia sive malitia ostenditur quia religiosos pseudoapostolos vel pseudoprophetas nominare praesumunt ex quibusdam signis, quorum quaedam peccata levia sunt, quaedam vero gravia non tamen ad duo praedicta pertinentia, utpote quia quaerunt honorem proprium, quia quaerunt de inimicis vindictam et quaedam alia huiusmodi: quae etiam si omnia congregata essent in aliquo homine praedicante, non tamen eum pseudoapostolum constituerent vel ostenderent, dummodo vera praedicaret et missus. De falsitate autem praedicationis nihil proponere audent; sed de hoc quod dicunt eos praedicare non missos, quod ad rem pertinet, quam inaniter dicant patet ex his quae supra dicta sunt, cum de eorum praedicatione ageretur: unde relinquitur in hoc eos esse mendaces quod eis tantum crimen imponere praesumunt, religiosos pseudoapostolos nominando. Possent autem eadem astutia vel ipsimet vel quilibet alii de simili crimine infamari; cum enim pseudoapostoli multa egerint quae etiam alii peccatores agunt, et interdum etiam iusti licet ex alia causa, in promptu esset arguere: pseudoapostoli leguntur hoc vel illud fecisse, unde et illi qui hoc vel illud faciunt sunt pseudoapostoli reputandi. Sed in hoc argumento manifeste vanitas inveniretur, ut ex dictis patet. Thus, the detractors of religious who call them false prophets or false apostles are, by their own words, convicted of folly or malice. For the fact that religious may be guilty of sins more or less heinous, such as seeking their own glorification, taking vengeance on their enemies, and the like, cannot make them false prophets or false apostles, provided that they bear a commission to preach, and that they teach true doctrine, The enemies of religious do not presume to question the orthodoxy of their preaching. To the arguments against the right of religious to preach, we have already fully replied. It remains then for us to say that those who accuse religious of being false apostles or false prophets are themselves guilty of falsehood. They may, with the same deceitfulness, accuse others of the same crime. The fact that false apostles have done many things which other sinners and even just men have done, is no reason for calling those other men false apostles also. We have, however, already shown the fallacy of such an argument. Capitulum 23 Chapter 23 Quomodo dicunt religiosos esse lupos latrones et penetrantes domos The enemies of religious accuse them of being wolves and robbers and of creeping into houses Nunc videndum est quomodo religiosis crimina imponant quae Ecclesia toto temporis sui processu patitur, utpote quod dicunt eos esse lupos, latrones et penetrantes domos. We must now examine the grounds on which religious are accounted responsible for all the evils which have ever overtaken the Church. The enemies of religious accuse them of being wolves and robbers and of creeping into houses. Quod enim sint fures et latrones per hoc ostendere volunt quia, ut dicunt, non intrant per ostium in ovile ovium, dum confessiones audiunt et praedicant et docent aliunde quam per ostium. Ex quo manifeste insipientiae convinci possunt, quia ostium Christus est, ut per Glossam ibidem patet; nec praelatus ostium dici potest, unde Glossa ibidem dicit quod ostium est sibi soli Christus retinuit. Non ergo intelligitur intrare non per ostium qui non intrat per praelatum, sed qui non intrat per Christum, sicut Iudaei, gentiles, philosophi, pharisaei et haeretici, ut ibidem Glossa exponit. For they say that they enter the fold (that is, by preaching, and hearing confessions) by a door which is not the legitimate one. By this assertion, they prove their own folly. For, as the Gloss reminds us, Christ is the door. No prelate is the door; for, as the Gloss adds, Christ has reserved this office to himself. Hence they who do not enter the fold by the door are Jews, Gentiles, philosophers, Pharisees and heretics, who enter not by Christ; not those who do not enter by means of a bishop. Isti ergo fures dicuntur quia quod alienum est suum dicunt, idest oves Dei suas faciunt non convertendo ad doctrinam Christi sed ad suam; latrones, quia quod furantur occidunt retrahendo a fide, ut ex verbis glossarum ibi accipi potest. Et tamen dato quod fures et latrones dici deberent qui Christum annuntiant secundum veram doctrinam non per praelatos Ecclesiae, quam hoc sit a religiosis alienum ex praedictis manifeste apparet, nisi illum errorem aliquis sapiat quod episcopus vel papa non sit immediatus praelatus cuiuslibet qui parochiali subditur sacerdoti. Religious are called thieves, because they are accused of stealing what is not their own, by converting the sheep of Christ not to his doctrine, but to their own tenets. They are called robbers, because they are accused of slaying the sheep which they steal. The words of the Gloss are, interpreted in this sense. But, granted that it be justifiable to say that those who preach Christ truly, but without permission from a bishop, are thieves and robbers, this accusation cannot, as we have already shown, be made with regard to religious, unless we hold that a bishop or the pope is not the immediate superior of anyone under the jurisdiction of a parish priest. Lupos autem rapaces eos dicunt per hoc quod accedunt ad ministrandum fidelibus Christi alimenta spiritualia, intrinsecus autem intendunt refici de bonis carnalibus eorum, sicut lupi accedunt ad oves ut de carnibus earum reficiantur: in quo etiam manifeste decipere convincuntur. Manifeste enim Ioan. X, 12 Dominus distinguit inter mercenarium et lupum, hoc autem quod lupo imponunt Glossa mercenario attribuit quae sic dicit: mercenarius est qui quaerit quae sua sunt, non quae Christi, qui servit Deo non propter Deum sed pro aliqua mercede; illi ergo qui in hoc tantum offendunt quod intendunt temporalia accipere et pro eis praedicant, mercenarii sunt non lupi, nisi ipsi vel corporaliter vastent per potentiam sicut tyranni, vel spiritualiter dissipent sicut diabolus et eius ministri haeretici, ut per Glossam ibidem patet. Hoc etiam apparet ex hoc quod dicitur Act. XX, 29: scio quoniam intrabunt post discessionem meam lupi rapaces in vos, Glossa: haeretici callidi in fraude, fortes in disputatione, crudeles in occisione; hoc etiam quod habetur Matth. VII, 15: intrinsecus autem sunt lupi rapaces Glossa exponit quod specialiter hoc intelligitur de haereticis qui venenato animo et intentione nocendi lupi sunt rapaces vel exterius si copia datur persequendo vel interius corrumpendo. Quomodo etiam hoc sit temerarium iudicium iudicare de aliquibus quod carnalia principaliter intendant, quamvis spiritualia seminantes carnalia accipiant, ex dictis patet. Religious are likewise termed ravening wolves; because they are said to minister to the spiritual needs of the faithful, in order to fatten on their material goods, just as wolves devour sheep. In this, they are clearly deceived. Our Lord draws a distinction between a wolf and a hireling. The vices which the enemies of religious attribute to wolves, the Gloss attributes to a hireling: a hireling is one who seeks what belongs to Christ, and who serves God, not for his own sake, but in the hope of a reward. Hence they, whose sole crime is to preach for the sake of temporal gain are hirelings. They who physically ill-treat the faithful, as do tyrants, or who spiritually scatter them, as do the devil and heretics, his ministers, are wolves. This is made dear by the words in Acts 20:29, I know that after my departure fierce wolves will come in among you. On this text the Gloss says: these wolves signify heretics, who are insidious, cruel and strong in controversy. Again, the words in Matthew 7:15, they inwardly are ravenous wolves, are specially applied by the Gloss to heretics, who, in the malice of their hearts and in their desire to injure souls, resemble wolves, whether they pursue the faithful by exterior persecution, or deprave them by false teaching. We have already pointed out that it is a rash judgment to assert that a man’s chief motive in ministering spiritually to his neighbour is the hope of reaping material advantage. Dicunt etiam eos esse penetrantes domos per hoc quod confessiones audiunt sine licentia sacerdotum, sic enim penetrant domos conscientiarum: quod probant per quandam expositionem Glossae quae habetur II Tim. III, 6 super illud Ex his sunt qui penetrant domos etc., Glossa: penetrant domos, idest rimantur proprietatem uniuscuiusque et quos idoneos inveniunt ducunt captivos; proprietatem autem cuiusque rimari non possunt nisi confessiones audirent. Quia ergo huic auctoritati multum innituntur, videamus intellectum eius. Religious are accused of creeping into houses because they are said to hear confessions without permission from the parish priests. Thus they creep into men’s consciences. Those who accuse them of so doing quote, in support of their opinion, the Gloss on 2 Timothy 3:6: those who make their way into households, which says that they investigate the qualities of men, and lead captive those whom they judge fitting disciples. Now priests cannot know the characteristics of men, save by confession. As these words of the Gloss are considered, by the enemies of religious, conclusive evidence in support of their accusations, we will examine what is the true meaning of this passage. Praedicit enim Apostolus quod in novissimis diebus instabunt tempora periculosa, erunt homines se ipsos amantes etc.; novissimi autem dies, ut Augustinus dicit in epistola ad Hesychium, quandoque dicuntur etiam ipsa apostolorum tempora, unde illud quod dicitur Ioel. II, 28: in novissimis diebus effundam de spiritu meo etc.: Petrus dicit esse completum in die Pentecostes, Act. II, 17; quandoque etiam novissimus dies dicitur omnium ultimus, Ioan. VI, 55: ego resuscitabo eum in novissimo die. Hic autem oportet ut intelligantur novissimi dies qui sunt illi novissimo propinquiores, eo quod Apostolus in futurum loquitur. Instabunt, inquit, tempora periculosa et erunt homines etc.: quod ad illud pertinere videtur quod habetur Matth. XXIV, 12 quod refrigescet caritas multorum et abundabit iniquitas, unde Glossa ibidem dicit Unde apostolus: erunt homines se ipsos amantes. Non ergo verba Apostoli sunt intelligenda quasi vitia quae connumerat ullo saeculo unquam defuerint, sed quia abundante malitia in futuris temporibus crescent; quidam tamen in primitiva Ecclesia erant qui etiam in illis vitiis abundabant, alias frustra diceret: et hos devita, et quasi Timotheo quaerenti: quomodo possum vitare qui nondum sunt? respondet Apostolus: ex his iam sunt illi qui penetrant domos etc. Illa ergo vitia quae supra posuerat ad futurum pertinere vult, sed hoc quod dicit ex his sunt qui penetrant domos ad praesens: unde dicit: penetrant, non penetrabunt, captivas ducunt, non ducent; nec putandum est hoc loco pro temporis futuri verbis praesentis temporis verba posuisse, ut Augustinus in eadem epistola dicit. Erant ergo in primitiva Ecclesia aliqui ex hoc actu noti quod penetrabant domos etc., quos vult intelligi illis vitiis esse irretitos quae in novissimis temporibus abundabunt. St. Paul foretold that the latter days of the Church would be times of peril, and that there would be men, lovers of themselves. The term “latter days,” writes St. Augustine to Hesychius, is sometimes used of the apostolic times. Thus we read in the prophet Joel 2:28: and it shall come to pass afterward, that I will pour out my spirit on all flesh. St. Peter said that this prophecy was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2:17). Sometimes, however, the latter days are understood as meaning the last day, I will raise him up at the last day (John 6:54). In the passage to which reference has been made, however, the latter days must be taken to mean the time nearest to the last day. For the Apostle speaks of the future, when he says: in the last days shall come dangerous times. These words agree with those that we find in Matthew 24:12, because wickedness is multiplied, most men’s love will grow cold. The Gloss reminds us of the words of St. Paul, men shall be lovers of themselves. These are not to be understood as meaning that the vice of self-love or any other vice has at any time been absent from the world, but that it will increase in proportion as malice increases. There were in the primitive Church some men tainted with these vices; otherwise St. Paul would not have told Timothy avoid them. And, as if Timothy had asked him, how he was to avoid what did not exist, says the Apostle by way of answer: for among them are those who make their way into households (2 Tim 3:6). The vices which he mentions in the first place were to exist in years to come; but that of creeping into houses was an evil of his own time. He speaks of they who creep, not of they who will creep, and of they who lead captive, not of they who will lead captive. We are not to suppose that although using the present tense, he can have intended his words to be taken in the future tense. For, as St. Augustine says, in the same epistle, there were in the early Church men distinguished by creeping into houses. The words signify men, ensnared by the vices which will flourish in the latter days. Qui autem fuerunt isti expressius exponit ad Tit. I, 10-11 ubi sic dicit: sunt multi inobedientes et vaniloqui et seductores, maxime qui de circumcisione sunt, quos oportet redargui, qui universas domos subvertunt docentes quae non oportet, turpis lucri gratia. Sic ergo hoc quod dicit ex his sunt qui penetrant domos de illis intelligit qui latenter circumibant domos falsam doctrinam disseminando, sive intelligatur de domo conscientiae sive de domo materiali, et captivabant vinculis erroris; unde subiungit Apostolus: homines corrupti mente, reprobi circa fidem. This is more expressly shown by the words in Titus 1:10: for there are many insubordinate men, empty talkers and deceivers, especially the circumcision party; they must be silenced, since they are upsetting whole families by teaching for base gain what they have no right to teach, are meant men who cunningly introduce themselves into families and propagate false doctrine, or those who insinuate themselves into the consciences of men and bind them with the chains of error. Such men St. Paul calls men of corrupt mind and counterfeit faith (2 Tim 3:8). Nec est intelligendum ut ipsi volunt, quod hoc quod dicit reprobi circa fidem accipiatur pro futuro, quasi dicat: Qui nunc penetrant domos in futuro erunt reprobi circa fidem; quod patet tum ex hoc quod dicit praesentialiter hi resistunt veritati, tum ex hoc quod sequitur: sed ultra non proficient, insipientia enim eorum manifesta erit, Glossa: per bonos, praesertim per Ioannem apostolum per quem in Asia destruendos haereticos praedicit. Ex quo etiam patet quod de haereticis Apostolus loquitur; unde dato quod religiosi confessiones audirent sine licentia praelatorum, dummodo haereticam doctrinam non seminarent, istis verbis Apostoli non notarentur. The expression reprobate concerning the faith cannot be understood of men who are to appear in the future. St. Paul does not say: “they who now creep into houses, will be reprobate concerning the faith.” he speaks in the present tense, just as when he says, these resist the truth. Their folly shall be manifest to all men. The Gloss says, that they shall be made manifest by means of the good, and it reminds us that these words were verified, especially by St. John, who overcame the heretics of the East. Thus, it is plain that the words of St. Paul apply to heretics. Hence even were it true that religious hear confessions without any licence from their bishops, the foregoing passage from St. Paul would not be applicable to them, unless they can be proved to teach heretical doctrine. Et sic etiam exclusum est totum eorum figmentum quo confingere nituntur occasione horum verborum, per religiosos qui confessiones audiunt novissimorum temporum pericula imminere. Quomodo autem religiosi licite et utiliter confessiones audiant, supra dictum est cum de hoc ageretur. Hence the whole fabric which has been built upon to prove that religious who hear confessions are responsible for the evils which will hereafter come upon the Church, falls to the ground. We have already proved the right of religious to hear confessions; and we have seen, also, the benefit which results from their so doing. Capitulum 24 Chapter 24 Quomodo dicunt quod nunc quasi e vicino tempora Antichristi immineant The enemies of religious try to prove that the times of antichrist are at hand Iam videamus quomodo mala quae in finali Ecclesia timentur religiosis imponant, dicentes eos esse nuntios Antichristi. Ad quod persuadendum ad duo ostendenda conantur: We will now consider how the enemies of religious attribute to them all the evils which will befall the Church in her latter days, by declaring that they are the forerunners of Antichrist. They adduce two arguments, in support of this proposition. primo quod nunc quasi e vicino tempora Antichristi immineant, First, they say that the days of Antichrist are at hand. secundo quia nuntii Antichristi sunt specialiter religiosi qui praedicant et confessiones audiunt; de quibus per ordinem agemus. Second, they say that religious are the emissaries of Antichrist, because they preach and hear confessions. Quod autem non longe sint tempora novissima ex hoc probare volunt quod Apostolus dicit I Cor. X, 11: nos sumus in quos fines saeculorum devenerunt, et I Ioan. II, 18: filioli, novissima hora est, et Hebr. X, 37: qui venturus est veniet, et non tardabit, et Iac. V, 9: ecce iudex ante ianuam assistit. Ex quibus omnibus habere volunt quod, cum a temporibus apostolorum quando haec dicebantur iam tantum temporis sit elapsum, quod nunc prope immineat tempus Antichristi. They try to prove that the latter days of the world are at hand, by the words of St. Paul, they were written down for our instruction, upon whom the end of the ages has come (1 Cor 10:11). They also quote the words of St. John, children, it is the last hour (1 John 2:18). St. Paul writes again: for yet a little while, and the coming one shall come and shall not tarry (Heb 10:37). In James 5:9 we read: behold, the Judge is standing at the doors. Those who quote these texts in support of their arguments maintain that as so long a time has elapsed since the apostolic times, the advent of antichrist must be imminent. Quae quidem verba si sic intelligant ut tempus Antichristi propinquum esse denuntient, eo modo loquendi quo temporis quantuncumque spatium in sacra Scriptura breve solet accipi in comparatione aeternitatis, secundum quem modum dicitur I Cor. VII, 29: tempus breve est, in nullo reprehensibiles inveniuntur; sed tamen haec eorum assertio ad suam sententiam confirmandam efficaciam non habebit, quia videlicet volunt astruere quod nunc sunt cavenda illa pericula quae propinquissimis temporibus Antichristi praedicuntur futura, et quod per religiosos qui nunc sunt evenient, de quibus inquiri volunt a praelatis. Si autem ex his verbis aliquod diffinitum tempus significari volunt, utpote quod Antichristus veniet intra septem annos aut centum aut mille, inveniuntur praesumptuosissimi multis auctoritatibus convicti. We may, of course, gather from these passages that the time of antichrist is at hand. For Sacred Scripture always speaks of time as being very short in comparison to eternity. Thus, in 1 Corinthians 7:29, we read: the appointed time has grown very short. In this sense, the interpretation given to these words by our opponents is not reprehensible. Nevertheless, the texts which they quote cannot be considered as a confirmation of their opinion that the days which are to be dreaded in the days of antichrist are immediately imminent, and that they are caused by the religious of our day, into whose conduct (they say) it the bishops should make enquiries. It is presumption to conclude, from the texts just quoted, that antichrist is to come within some definite period of time, be it seven years, or a hundred, or a thousand years. Dominus enim Act. I, 7 quaerentibus discipulis de hoc ipso respondit: non est vestrum nosse tempora vel momenta quae Pater posuit in sua potestate; ex quo argumentatur Augustinus in epistola ad Hesychium quod si non est eorum nosse, multo minus aliorum. Et Matth. XXIV, 36: de die autem illa et hora nemo scit neque Angeli caelorum, et hoc idem habetur Marc. XIII, 32; et II Thess. II, 2: non moveamini a vestro sensu quasi instet dies Domini. Our Lord said to his disciples, when they asked him: it is not for you to know times or seasons which the Father has fixed by his own authority (Acts 2:7). As St. Augustine writes to Hesychius: if it was not for the disciples to know, much less is it for any others. Again, we read: of that day and hour no one knows, not even the angels of heaven (Matt 24:36). And in 2 Thessalonians 2:2 we read: we beg you, brethren, not to be quickly shaken in mind or excited . . . as though the day of the Lord has come. Et Augustinus ad Hesychium loquens: dixisti: Evangelium dicit: de die et hora nemo scit; ego autem, inquit, pro possibilitate intellectus mei dico neque mensem neque annum adventus ipsius sciri posse: ita enim hoc videtur sonare tanquam non possit sciri quo anno venturus sit, sed posset sciri qua hebdomade annorum vel qua decade; et infra: quod si ne hoc quidem comprehendi potest, quaero utrum sic saltem possit diffiniri tempus adventus eius ut eum venturum dicamus infra istos, verbi gratia vel quinquaginta vel centum annos vel quotlibet seu maioris numeri seu minoris annorum; et infra: si autem nec hoc te comprehendisse praesumis, hoc sentis quod ego. St. Augustine says (Epist. ad Hesychium): you say the Gospel tells us that no man knows that day or hour. I tell you, as far as my understanding will suffice, that no man can know the month nor the year of the coming of the Lord. This seems as if the words had been understood to mean that, though none can say in what year the Lord will come, it is possible to know in what septet or decade of years his coming may be expected. St. Augustine further says: although we cannot understand this, I would ask you whether we can know the time of the coming of the Lord, so far as to be able to say: he will come within the next fifty, or hundred years, or within some period more or less extended? And again: if you say that you cannot understand, I agree with you. In primitiva etiam Ecclesia, ut Hieronymus narrat in libro De illustribus viris et Eusebius in Ecclesiastica historia, quorundam doctrina est reprobata propter hoc quod adventum domini instare dicebant, sicut et isti nunc dicere videntur. Non ergo potest quantumlibet spatium determinari, parvum vel magnum tempus, quo finis mundi in quo Christus et Antichristus expectantur expectetur. Et propter hoc dicitur I Thess. V, 2 quod dies Domini sicut fur veniet, et Matth. XXIV, 38: sicut in diebus Noe non cognoverunt donec venit diluvium, et tulit omnes, ita erit adventus filii hominis. Unde etiam Augustinus in epistola ad Hesychium proponit tres adventum Domini expectantes, quorum unus citius, alter tardius Dominum putat esse venturum, tertius suam de hoc ignorantiam confitetur; et hunc magis commendat, primum vero magis increpat. Certain men were condemned in the early days of the Church for teaching, as men teach now, that the coming of the Lord was imminent. We have this on the authority of St. Jerome (De illustr. viris), and of Eusebius, (Ecclesiast. Histor.). No period, either long or short, can be determined, in which is to be expected the end of the world, or the coming of Christ or of antichrist. It is for this reason that we are told that the day of the Lord will come like a thief in the night (1 Thess 5:2), and that as in those days before the flood . . . they did not know until the flood came and swept them all away, so will be the coming of the Son of man (Matt 24:38). St. Augustine, in his epistle to Hesychius, speaks of three classes of men who made assertions respecting the coming of our Lord. One class expects him soon; another later; and the third declares its ignorance of the time of his coming. This last opinion meets with the approbation of St. Augustine, and he censures the presumption of the others. Ad astruendam etiam suam intentionem tali ratione utuntur. Ab adventu Christi ultima aetas incepit; aliae vero aetates non duraverunt ultra mille annos: unde cum iam ab adventu Christi multo plures quam mille anni transierint, in brevi huius aetatis est terminus expectandus. Cui rationi obviat Augustinus in libro LXXXIII Quaestionum, quaestione LX, senectus solet etiam tantum tenere temporis quantum reliquae omnes aetates; senectuti autem comparat istam ultimam aetatem, unde concludit: aetas igitur ultima generis humani quae incipit a Domini adventu usque in finem saeculi, quibus generationibus computetur incertum est. Et hoc utiliter Deus voluit latere, sicut in evangelio scriptum est et Apostolus testatur dicens diem Domini tanquam furem esse venturum. Those who say that the second advent is at hand, try to establish the following argument. The last age begins with the coming of Christ. Foregoing ages have not lasted longer than a thousand years. As then much more than a thousand years have elapsed since the coming of Christ, his second coming must be shortly expected. This argument is answered by St. Augustine (83 Quaest. LX) as follows: age is supposed to include a time equal to the aggregate of all the periods that have elapsed. He compares this latter time to old age. Then he concludes by saying: it is thus uncertain by what generations the final period of time, which begins with the coming of our Lord and is to end with the end of the world, is to be counted. God has chosen, for some wise purpose, to keep this hidden. So it is written in the Gospel. St. Paul also declares that the day of the Lord is to come like a thief in the night. Inducunt etiam octo signa quibus propinquum Antichristi adventum ostendere volunt. Those who believe in the speedy coming of Antichrist, say that his appearance is heralded by eight signs. Quorum primum videtur sumi ex hoc quod dicitur Dan. VII, 25, de Antichristo: putabit quod possit mutare tempora, Glossa: in tantam elatus superbiam ut leges et caeremonias mutare conetur; unde cum quidam iam Christi evangelium mutare conentur in quoddam aliud evangelium quod dicunt aeternum, manifeste dicunt instare tempora Antichristi. Hoc autem evangelium de quo loquuntur est quoddam Introductorium in libros Ioachim compositum quod est ab Ecclesia reprobatum, vel etiam ipsa doctrina Ioachim per quam, ut dicunt, evangelium Christi mutatur. Quo supposito, istud signum nullum est quia temporibus apostolorum quidam evangelium Christi mutare voluerunt, ut patet Gal. I, 6: miror quod tam cito transferimini ab eo qui vos vocavit in aliud evangelium. First, they quote the words of Daniel 7:25 concerning antichrist: he shall think to change the times and the law. That is to say, according to the Gloss, his pride is so excessive that he strives to alter laws and ceremonies. On account of these words the days of antichrist are said to be at hand, because certain men try to alter the Gospel of Christ into another gospel, which they call “eternal.” The Gospel of which they speak is a certain Introduction to the books of Joachim, which is condemned by the Church. Or else it is the doctrine of Joachim, whereby they say the Gospel of Christ is altered. But granted that this hypothesis were true, it would be no token of the approach of antichrist. For even in the days of the apostles, certain men tried to alter the Gospel of Christ. Thus St. Paul says: I am astonished that you are so quickly deserting him who called you in the grace of Christ and turning to a different gospel (Gal 1:6). Secundum signum assumunt ex hoc quod habetur in Psalmo: constitue domine legislatorem super eos, Glossa: Antichristum legis pravae latorem; unde cum doctrina praedicta quam legem Antichristi dicunt sit Parisius exposita, signum est Antichristi adventum instare. Sed doctrinam Ioachim vel illius Introductorii, quamvis alia reprobanda contineat, esse doctrinam quam praedicabit Antichristus falsum est: ipse enim praedicabit se esse Deum, ut habetur II Thess. II, 4: ut in templo Dei sedeat tanquam sit Deus, et quod extollitur supra omne quod nominatur Deus aut quod colitur. Quod si doctrinam Antichristi intelligunt omnem falsam doctrinam sicut et antichristi dicuntur omnes haeretici, tunc istud signum nullum est. Quia a primitiva Ecclesia nullum tempus fuit in quo doctrinae haereticae non proponerentur; unde dicitur I Ioan. II, 18: nunc autem antichristi multi facti sunt: Glossa: Antichristi sunt omnes haeretici. The second sign of the coming of antichrist is supposed to be found in the words of Psalm 9:21: appoint, O Lord, a lawgiver over them. This the Gloss interprets to mean the antichrist, the giver of an evil law. As the doctrine which we have already mentioned, which they call the law of antichrist, was promulgated at Paris, it is thought to be a sign that antichrist is at hand. But it is not true to say that the doctrine of Joachim, or that which is contained in the Introduction to the Gospel of Joachim, however reprehensible it may be, is the doctrine which will be preached by antichrist. For antichrist will proclaim himself to be God. St. Paul says expressly (2 Thess 2:4), so that he sits in the temple of God, showing himself as if he were God. For if, by the teaching of antichrist, all false doctrine is to be understood, just as all heretics are called antichrists; then, the alleged proof of the speedy coming of antichrist is no proof at all. For from the earliest days of the Church there has never been a time in which heretical teaching has not been disseminated. Even now there are many antichrists (1 John 2:18). On these words, the Gloss remarks: all heretics are antichrists. Tertium signum assumunt ex hoc quod habetur Dan. V, 25 et Isai. XXI, 9: visa est in Babylone reproba manus scribentis: Mane, Thecel, Phares; hanc autem scripturam iam dicunt esse visam in Babylone dilecta, scilicet Ecclesia. Mane enim interpretatur numeravit regnum tuum et complevit illud, idest finivit; per scripturam autem supradictam numeratur regnum Christi: dicitur enim quod durabit usque ad mille ducentos sexaginta annos. Thecel exponitur appensus es in statera et inventus es minus habens, quia in scriptura praedicta evangelio Christi praefertur aliud evangelium aeternum. Phares exponitur divisum est regnum tuum et datum est Medis et Persis; et similiter isti dicunt quod regnum Ecclesiae finietur et ad alios transferetur, unde sicut scriptura illa significat terminum Babylonis instare, ita etiam haec scriptura significat terminum Ecclesiae. The third supposed sign of the coming of antichrist is found in the book of Daniel 5:25 and in Isaiah 21:9. We read there the account of the hand that wrote Mane, Thecel, Phares on the wall of Babylon. Those who believe that Antichrist is at hand, maintain that the same prediction which formerly was written up in Babylon is now written in the Church. Mane was interpreted to mean, God has numbered your kingdom and has finished it; and the kingdom of Christ is now numbered, for it has been foretold that it its to endure a thousand two hundred and seventy years. Thecel signified, you art weighed in the balance and found wanting; and the “eternal gospel” is preferred to the Gospel of Christ. Phares meant your kingdom is divided, and is given to the Medes and Persians; and the kingdom of the Church is now finished and given to others. Thus, the writing on the wall signified both the destruction of the Church and the ruin of Babylon.