7 admits of an easy interpretation. The Apostle there says: " Now ye know what withholdeth, that he might be revealed in his time. For the mystery of iniquity doth already work : only he who now letteth will let, until he be taken out of the way." There was, therefore, at that time an obstacle which prevented the development of the Man of Sin, and would continue to pre- vent it, as long as it remained as it then was. It is to be noticed that Paul says, " Now ye know what withholdeth." How could the Thessalonians know to what he referred? only from the Apostle's instructions, or from the nature of the case. The fact however is that they did know, and, therefore, it is probable that knowledge was communicated to others, and was not likely to be soon forgotten. This consideration gives the more weight to the almost unanimous judgment of the early fathers that the obstacle to the development of Antichrist was the Roman empire. While that continued in its vigour it was impossible that an ecclesiastic should become the virtual sovereign of the world. It is a historical fact that the conflict between the Emperors and the Popes for the ascendancy, was continued for ages, and that as the power of the former decreased that of the latter increased.
On the assumption that the Antichrist of which Paul speaks in his Epistle to the Thessalonians, is a powerful worldly monarch hereafter to appear, these verses, the 6th and 7th, present the greatest difficulty. The causes which are to bring such a mon- arch into the possession of his power were not then in operation ; there was then no obstacle to his manifestation so obvious as to be generally known to Christians, and the removal of which was to be followed at once by his revelation. Even on the assumption that the obstacle of which the Apostle speaks, was not the Ro- man empire, but rather the regard to law and order deeply fixed in the public mind, which stood in the way of the revelation of the Man of Sin, this difficulty is scarcely lessened. How could the Thessalonians have known that ? How foreign to their minds must have been the thought that a regard for law must be taken out the way before the lawless one could appear. It seems plain that the early fathers were right in their interpretation of the Apostle's language ; and that he meant to say that the appearance of eccle- siastical claimants to universal dominion, was not possible until the Roman empire was effectually broken.
According to Paul's account, Antichrist was to arise in the Church. He was to put forth the most exorbitant claims ; exalt himself above all human authority ; assume to himself the pre-
822 PART IV. Ch. HI. — THE SECOND ADVENT.
rogatives of God, demanding a submission due only to God, and virtually setting aside the authority of God, and substituting his own in its place. These assumptions were to be sustained by all manner of unrighteous deceits, by signs, and by lying wonders. This portrait suits the papacy so exactly, that Protestants at least have rarely doubted that it is the Antichrist which the Apostle intended to describe.
Dr. John Henry Newman says, that if Protestants insist on making the Church of Rome Antichrist, they thereby make over all Roman Catholics, past and present, "to utter and hopeless perdition. " 1 This does not follow. The Church of Rome is to be viewed under different aspects ; as the papacy, an external organized hierarchy, with the pope, with all his arrogant claims, at its head ; and also as a body of men professing certain re- ligious doctrines. Much may be said of it in the one aspect, which is not true of it in the other. Much may be said of Russia as an empire that cannot be said of all Russians. At one time the first Napoleon was regarded by many as Antichrist ; that did not involve the belief that all Frenchmen who acknowledged him as emperor, or all soldiers who followed him as their leader, were the sons of perdition. That many Roman Catholics, past and present, are true Christians, is a palpable fact. It is a fact which no man can deny without committing a great sin. It is a sin against Christ not to acknowledge as true Christians those who bear his image, and whom He recognizes as his brethren. It is a sin also against ourselves. We are not born of God unless we love the children of God. If we hate and denounce those whom Christ loves as members of his own body, what are we ? It is best to be found on the side of Christ, let what will happen. It is perfectly consistent, then, for a man to denounce the papacy as the man of sin, and yet rejoice in believing, and in openly acknowledging, that there are, and ever have been, many Roman- ists who are the true children of God.
Admitting that the Apostle's predictions refer to the Roman pontiffs, it does not follow that the papacy is the only anti- christ. St. John says there are many antichrists. Our Lord says many shall come in his name, claiming in one form or another his authority, and endeavouring to take his place by de- throning him. The Apostle John tells us this " is the last time " (1 John ii. 18) in which many antichrists are to appear. This
1 The Protestant Idea of Antichrist, in vol. ii. of his Essays Critical and Historical, p. 148.