The Restrainer...and the Restrained
2 Thess. 2:1 ¶ Now we beseech you, brethren, by the coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, and by our gathering together unto him,
2 That ye be not soon shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit, nor by word, nor by letter as from us, as that the day of Christ is at hand.
3 ¶ Let no man deceive you by any means: for that day shall not come, except there come a falling away first, and that man of sin be revealed, the son of perdition;
4 Who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, shewing himself that he is God.
5 Remember ye not, that, when I was yet with you, I told you these things?
6 And now ye know what withholdeth that he might be revealed in his time.....
Authors note: this bolded portion is commonly referred to as “the restrainer”, that is, he who with-holds the development, establishment, or appearing of the Antichrist. The modern understanding of these verses, particularly in the futurist paradigm, is that the restrainer is in fact the Holy Spirit. The following evidence however should dispel such thoughts, and reveal the true facts
.....7 For the mystery of iniquity doth already work: only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way.
8 And then shall that Wicked be revealed, whom the Lord shall consume with the spirit of his mouth, and shall destroy with the brightness of his coming:
9 Even him, whose coming is after the working of Satan with all power and signs and lying wonders,
10 And with all deceivableness of unrighteousness in them that perish; because they received not the love of the truth, that they might be saved.
Nearly all commentators are unanimous That the 'restariner', so called, was not named by Paul because it was too dangerous. He had already spoken in person to the Thessalonian church on the matter, so they knew who Paul was writing about...the very power that if it had read that letter, would take no little umbrage to being informed that they would soon be removed from power and another rise up in their stead. The 'restrainer' of course being pagan Rome.
Not a few of the early church fathers wrote on this subject, and all agreed that Rome was the one eluded to in Paul's letter. Let me quote one or three.
Tertullian (160-240)
“‘For the mystery of iniquity doth already work; only he who now hinders must hinder, until he be taken out of the way.’ What obstacle is there but the Roman state, the falling away of which, by being scattered into ten kingdoms, shall introduce Antichrist upon (its
own ruins)? ‘And then shall be revealed the wicked one.”
“On the Resurrection of the Flesh,” chapter 24; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. III, p. 563
There is some debate as to whether the ‘falling away’ referred to here is in reference to the empire, or the church. Some say one, some the other, while some would contend that it can apply equally to both. This author contends that the falling away [spoken of by Paul in 2 Thess. 2:3] is in reference to the church. The falling away transpired when she aspired to political power at the expense of spiritual, thus committing spiritual adultery. (see Revelation 17:2; James 4:4) Either way, Tertullian was certain in his belief that the restrainer was the Roman Empire. That it was Rome itself that inhibited in some way the rise of the antichrist. This was generally accepted throughout the church at that time, and it was common for the church to pray to God that He would keep the Roman power intact in order to keep the antichrist from coming to power in their time. Interesting also is Tertullian’s reference to the ten kingdoms that would result from the break up of Rome. This is a direct reference to Daniel 7 and the ten horns that would grow from the 4th beast, Rome. The Antichrist, according to Bible scholars, was the 11th horn. Tertullian was using the historicist method of prophetic interpretation, that method which viewed prophecy as an historical unfolding throughout history from the time the prophecy was first given, and culminating at the second coming. This is significant when understanding Paul’s letter, because Paul is clear that the Antichrist would appear as soon as Rome moves aside, and that very same Antichrist would still be there to be judged at the second coming. Not futurist, not preterist, but a historicist approach, just like Tertullian.)
Elsewhere, Tertullian states:
“The very end of all things threatening dreadful woes is only retarded by the continued existence of the Roman Empire.”
(“Apology,” chapter 32; Ante-Nicene Fathers, Vol. III, p. 43).
Lactanctius, in the early 4th century wrote:
“The subject itself declares that the fall and ruin of the world will shortly take place; except that while the city of Rome remains, it appears that nothing of this kind is to be feared. But when that capital of the world shall have fallen, and shall have begun to be a street, which the Sibyls say shall come to pass, who can doubt that the end has now arrived to the affairs of men and the whole world? It is that city, that only, which still sustains all things.” (“The Divine Institutes,” book 7, chapter 25; Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. VII, p. 220).
Cyril of Jerusalem (318-386).
But this aforesaid Antichrist is to come when the times of the Roman empire have been fulfilled and the end of the world is drawing near. There shall rise up together ten kings of the Romans, reigning in different parts perhaps, but all about the same time; but after those, an eleventh, the Antichrist, who by his magic craft will seize upon the Roman power, and of the kings who reigned before him, "three he shall humble" and the remaining seven he shall keep in subjection to himself."
(Catechetical Lectures,” section 15, on II Thessalonians 2:4; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. VII, p. 108 [New York: The Christian Literature Company, 1895]).
Much could be said about this quote; he also is clearly linking the prophecy of Daniel to the text of Paul’s, agreeing with other eminent writers of his time that out of Rome would evolve ten kings, 3 of whom the antichrist would subdue. When the restrainer, Rome, was to be taken out of the way, and the horns of Daniel 7 arise, the antichrist would be revealed
Ambrose (died 398)
“After the falling or decay of the Roman Empire, Antichrist shall appear.”
(Quoted in, Bishop Thomas Newton, Dissertations on the Prophecies, p. 463)……
Chrysostum (died 407)
“When the Roman Empire is taken out of the way, then he [the Antichrist] shall come. And naturally. For as long as the fear of this empire lasts, no one will willingly exalt himself, but when that is dissolved, he will attack the anarchy, and endeavor to seize upon the government both of man and of God.”
“Homily IV on 2 Thessalonians 2:6-9,” Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. XIII, p. 389
[New York: Charles Scribner’s and Sons, 1905]…..
.....and finally Jerome (died 420)
“He that letteth is taken out of the way, and yet we do not realize that Antichrist is near.”
(Letter to Ageruchia, written about 409A. D. Letter 123, section 16; Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers, vol. VI, p. 236
Jerome's testimony is interesting, because from his perspective, he had seen and witnessed the fall of Rome, but was yet to see the rise of Antichrist. The reason is that history had not yet revealed who the Antichrist actually was, despite the early beginnings of the church of Rome at that time. The 3 nations had yet to be vanquished: It was this event that would definitively prove the Antichrist's identity.
I think it would be a good time to quote a Catholic source, the eminent historian Cardinal Manning.
“Now the abandonment of Rome was the liberation of the pontiffs. Whatsoever claims to obedience the emperors may have made, and whatsoever compliance the Pontiff may have yielded, the whole previous relation, anomalous, and annulled again and again by the vices and outrages of the emperors, was finally dissolved by a higher power. The providence of God permitted a succession of irruptions, Gothic, Lombard, and Hungarian, to desolate Italy, and to efface from it every remnant of the empire.
The pontiffs found themselves alone, the sole fountains of order, peace, law, and safety. And from the hour of this providential liberation, when, by a divine intervention, the chains fell off from the hands of the successor of St. Peter, as once before from his own, no sovereign has ever reigned in Rome except the Vicar of Jesus Christ.”
(Henry Edward Manning, The Temporal Power of The Vicar of Jesus Christ, Preface, pp. xxviii, xxix. London: Burns and Lambert, 1862).
Manning has clearly given an excellent summary of history which directly correlates with the prophecies of Daniel and Paul. While attributing the fall of Rome to God and the rise of the papacy to Him also, Manning seems oblivious to the fact that he is revealing the perfect fulfilment of the prophecy of Paul and Daniel. That when Rome fell, the ten nations arose, three were subdued, and the ultimate victor was the papacy! It was the papacy itself that the empire of Rome was restraining. It was the papacy that arose after the establishment of the ten horns. It was the papacy that had a major role in the subjugation of the 3 horns because being Arian in belief they were directly opposed to the rule of the pontiffs. It will be the papacy that will still be here at the second coming, when Paul says she will be destroyed by the “brightness of His coming”. Therefore it is the papacy which perfectly fulfils the criteria demanded of it in order to be identified as the Antichrist. And that my friends are precisely the reasons all non-Roman Bible commentators from the time of the 6th century on were almost unanimous in identifying the papacy as the man of sin. The power who entered the church (the temple of God) and by claiming the power to forgive sin, and shut out of heaven whom he will, and claiming universal spiritual and temporal authority over all the earth, thus claiming the prerogatives of God, “opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God.”
