Was Montanism A Heresy

Was Montanism A Heresy

Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars

Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected

| PentecostalTheology.com

67

WAS MONTANISM A HERESY?

by

Erich Nestler*

Introduction

Throughout

its

history major

conflict:

tended to become

would be branded

schismatic, According

Christianity schism and

heresy.

schismatic. But could

schismatic

without

Among many

historians,

has faced two forms of

In

general

heretical

groups

it be that a

group without

really being

heretical?

Evans

(Henry),

of a

group

that became

part

to Bonwetsch, Schaff, de Labriolle,

and Robeck, Montanism is an

example

being

heretical in doctrine.

Primary

sources on Montanism are

few;

to the

greater they

have been

preserved through

the

writings

of their enemies.

in the

past,

this has caused an

adoption of the views of the enemies of the movement.

a critical examination of the material down to

us,

can enable one to avoid the biased condemnation of

Nonetheless

older historians.

handed

°Erich Nestler

completed the Assemblies of God Graduate pursuing

further studies

the Master of Arts in Biblical Studies at

in

Europe.

School in 1978. He is currently

Scholars who in recent times have

adopted view,

of this

early

revival

movement,

two

points:

doctrine and

practice. istic doctrine

as

legalistic

and extreme.

The

present

Montanism

practice

should be considered

behavior.

Prophetic the movement

brought the area of ethics. Therefore,

a more favorable generally

evaluate it under They

conclude that montan- orthodox,

but the

practice

that in the case of of doctrine and therefore it

teaching

in had

Mainstream

Christianity this

teaching

order to defend person

of Tertullian, contrast

writer tends to think

is an

outgrowth

should be examined under the

aspect

of doctrine rather than of

utterances from

leading

men and women of

about most of the

specific

doctrines

much of montanistic

its origin in practice, namely the

practice

of the

gift

of prophecy.

of the late second

century

branded

new and

foreign

to the tradition

themselves the

Montanists,

tried to

prove

that

they

were not

standing

to the

Scriptures. They developed

which would show that

they

were in line with biblical

teaching.

of the church. In

namely

in the

in a new hermeneutic

1

68

of the “New

Prophecy”

1) The

manner

2)

Teachings resulting

3) The

adjusting

Charismatic

prophetic brought

Three areas

may be

looked

upon

as vital for an

understanding

as their enemies called the movement:

of

prophesying

of hermeneutics

from

prophetic

utterances

experiences

about the new

teachings.

new doctrines with the

Bible, a tremendous amount

ization” had to be invested. hermeneutic was construed.

Not

every prophecy discussed in this article.

were the

dynamo. They

In order to harmonize the

of”rational- Out of this a new biblical

or doctrine of Montanism will be

Those instances will be selected which seem to be rather vital for an evaluation of the movement.

The Manner of

Prophesying

manifestations,

The

greatest stumbling to have been the behavioral besides doctrinal

questions. the ” New

Prophecy”

have been elements

second

century Christianity. have

flatly rejected

Montanism.

block for the Catholic church seems

side of the

prophetic

That the church did not condemn from the

beginning

which were

the other miraculous Montanistic revelations

is a sign that there must

part

of the

experience

of Otherwise it

probably

would Schaff writes: “The Catholic

church did not

deny,

in theory, the continuance of

prophecy and

gifts,

but was

disposed

from Satanic

inspirations,

them all the more for their

preceeding

clergy,

but in great part from unauthorized

women.2

A certain Montanus,

Anonymous

to derive the

and mistrusted not from the

regular laymen

and fanatical

the

prophesying

of in the

following

words:

in a sort of

writer describes

the founder of the

movement,

“And he became beside

himself,

and

being suddenly

he

raved,

and

began

to babble and utter

in a manner

contrary

to the constant

down

by

tradition from the

frenzy

and

ecstasy,

strange things, prophesying custom of the church handed beginning.”3

two of the

leading prophetesses stirred

up

besides two

women,

The same author

says

about Priscilla and

Maximilla,

spirit,

so that

they

talked

wildly

and

unreasonably like the

person already

mentioned.

them blessed as

they rejoiced them

up by

the

magnitude

of his

promises.

beside Montanus: “And he and filled them with the false

and

strangely,

And the

spirit pronounced and

gloried

in

him,

and

puffed

But sometimes he

2

rebuked them

openly

in a might

seem to be a

reprover…” wise and

A certain Alcibiades

gave Montanus: “But the false

prophet

69

faithful

manner,

that he

the

following report

about falls into an

ecstacy,

in which

madness of soul.

he

passes on,

as has been

stated, They

cannot show that

was thus carried

away

in

spirit.”5

Several

things may

be observed

he is without shame or fear.

Beginning

with

purposed ignorance,

to

involuntary

one of the old or one of the new

prophets

in these texts:

and

uttering

of

1) Dr. Palma thinks that the

babbling

.

strange things may very

well be a case of

glossolalia.

was a

part

of Tertullian’s

it might

very well

be

talking

with the Montanists.6

was

glossolalia,

and Maximilla’s wild and unreasonable

too. The next sentence in this

passage already

them blessed…” from which we can

in normal

language

be able to

compare

in modern

utterances

understandable for

this to day

Pentecostal and

in

English

are intro-

.

.

He shows that

glossolalia

experiences

If Montanus”‘babbling”

that Priscilla’s

was

glossolalia

says

“the

spirit pronounced

infer that it

happened

everyone present.

We

might phenomena

which are

occurring charismatic circles.

There, very often, prophetic duced

by

a

“babbling”

in

glossolalia.

2)

Interesting

. istic

prophesying:

ignorance,

he

passes on,…

soul.” It is of

importance

experience

of the

prophet

is Alcibiades’ statement about montan-

“Beginning

with

purposed to

involuntary

madness of to note that the ecstatic is made

possible by an

act

possessed.

of his own will (” Beginning with

purposed ignorance”)

and

only

then the “madness” or ecstasis follows.

The Montanists were accused of

being

demon

But one of the characteristics of demonic ecstasis seems to be that it comes

very

often without the consent of the one who is

possessed.7

The occurrence of an ecstatic hesying

does not

necessary

condition

during

the

prop-

Robeck

Testament.

as “astonishment

it is speaking of a “trance” In all three

instances,

have to be abnormal.

writes: “The noun ekstasis is used seven times in the New

In four of these cases it is

probably

or terror.” In the

remaining

experienced

the individual in

question

best translated

three references, by

either Peter or Paul.

received

3

70

direction and

guidance an

auditory

nature.”8

from God. It was both of a visionary

offense

intensity

Not

prophecy state of

ecstasy”

and

be an church. It

Both,

in the

not the word is used. The

preposition

intensification.9

prophetic

utter-

3) Ecstatic behavior needed not

necessarily

to the leaders of the Catholic

seems rather that montanistic ekstasis was of such an

that it became an offense.

accounts of Alcibiades and of Miltiades,

ekstasis and

parekstasis

combined with a verb

usually

denotes

as such, but the “extreme and unnatural

is

being disputed.’ 0

4)

The form in which montanistic

may

have been

culturally

conditioned. The movement had its

origin

in

Phrygia

whose

people were known for the wild enthusiasm in their

pagan

By

their enemies the Montanists times were called

Phrygians

ance

appeared

religions.

natural

background behavior

Christianity.

or

Cataphygians. may

even have colored

some- Their their

when Montanus and his 1 followers come into

This is not

necessarily

an excuse for their offensive behavior but it opens up the

possibility

of

finding

a natural prophesying demonic. If the

rather than

just simply condemning

prophesying

shown obvious demonic

would not have hesitated to label it as such from the

outset.

Teachings resulting

Some of the most serious

from

prophetic

reason for the extreme form of

it as

in Montanism had

features,

the church

surely

utterances

misunderstandings

Paraclete,

of the move- supposedly pro- or even the Father

ment

by past

historians were that Montanus

claimed himself to be the

promised

himself. The basis for this was three oracles which Montanus

had

given:

a) man. “I am

the Lord God

Omnipotent

dwelling

in

b) “I am neither an angel

nor an

envoy,

but I am the

Lord

God,

the

Father,

have come.” 13

c) “I am the Father and the Son and the Paraclete.’,14

in the

past

had been that in the first person

of these oracles, Montanus was

referring

to himself. But

The common

assumption

4

71

oracles without the so-called

probably

messenger

formula “thus Old Testament

prophecies.

we have here

prophetic

says

the

Lord”,

as we are used to it from

.

Philip Schaff,

in his

History

of the Christian

concerning adversaries

the

prophetic

Paraclete, or, according

Church, utterances of Montanus:

writes “His

wrongly

inferred from the use of the first

person

for the

Holy Spirit

in his

oracles, that

he made himself

directly

the

to

Epiphanius,

Only

sixteen Montanist oracles have been

Two of them deal with the

subject

writing.1 6

and are an

encouragement,

From Tertullian’s

writings interpreted

even God the Father.” 15

preserved

in

of

not to be afraid of them. persecutions

we know that the Montanists

manner. To them

they

the church saw the

greatest the “New

Prophecy” rejected inspired

its members

these oracles in a

legalistic

were not

only

an

encouragement, they

became a binding law. If

perfection

of a Christian

martyrdom, flight during persecution

and

martyrdom. ‘

a trend to

press

towards letters and the

martyrdom dangerous

law for all Christians teaching.20

Apollonius

accused dissolution of

marriage.”21 two

leading prophetesses

to

press

towards

Although

in the church of the second

century

there

developed

martyrdom, especially through

of the

bishop Polycarp,

trend

finally

condemned

When Montanism made its

practice

it

certainly

came into conflict with biblical

Montanus,

the

this was a by

the church.? 9

a

binding obligation

or

of the movement direction. She

said,

“For continence see visions, and,

bowing

their

heads, voices, saving

and

mysterious.”22

We know from Tertullian’s time

“prohibited

definite manichaeistic

compare

the

conjugal of sexes as caused

as

he,

“who

taught

the An oracle from

Priscilla,

one of the

may point

in this

brings harmony,

and

they

they

also hear distinct

writings

that the Montanists of his

for

laity

as well as

A

to

and brands the union of lust. “Thus

then,”

he

marriages,”

same act as

adultery… woman; virginity removed from

adultery

second

marriage

as adultery,

clergy, urging

its faithful ones to absolute continence.”23

touch marks his

writings, probably

caused by

a

platonic

view of the

body.

“Tertullian does not hesitate

union to

adultery…

by

an

impulse

suggests,

as an

objection urged, “you

set a brand even on first

“and

rightly,”

he

replies,

“since

they

consist

Thus it is good for a man not to touch a

is the

highest

(On

Veiling

of

Virgins, p.

16).”24

in the

holiness,

since it is furthest

5

72

husbands set an

example,

by leaving

their own

as a duty. of the Lord

they

forbade

Baus thinks that Priscilla and Maximilla,

which

they began

to

present

In the short

span

before the

parousia

“Tertullian later amended this rule to

marriages.”25

second

marriage

as

adultery,

as

clergy

and inclined even to

regard

a single marriage as a mere

of the

part

of God to the sensuous

marriages

to take

place. prohibition

of second tanism

“prohibited

concession man.

considered the

teaching down in

Pepuza,

Schaff thinks that Mon-

for

laity

as well l

infirmity

of

would come

of

In the

past,

one of the most obvious errors of Montanism was

that the New

Jersualem

a small town in

Phrygia.27 Appollonius Ephesus says

this

teaching goes

back to Montanus himself “who

Pepuza

and

Tymion Jerusalem

in his desire to draw to Accordingto Epiphanius

this

“Appearing

as a

named

them

people

from

everywhere.”28 teaching

woman clothed in a

shining wisdom into me and revealed that here

Jerusalem

Robeck observes

though, mentions

by

name the

“place”

comes from one of Priscilla’s oracles:

robe,

Christ came to

me;

he

put

to me that this

place

is sacred and

will come down from heaven.”29

“that Priscilla herself never to which the oracle refers. Nor

literally

or figuratively.

are we told whether it is to be

interpreted

.. That it refers to

Pepuza

in a literal sense of the word is the

This is further

produced by Apollonius. 30

contention of

Epiphanius. circumstantial evidence statement made

by Apollonius, Jerusalem will descend

however,

supported by

the

Even in the we are told that

to what Alexander

upon Pepuza

and

Tymion,

but ratherthat Montanus called the towns

Jerusalem.”31

at the turn of the

happened Dowie.

He founded

Zion. His

plan

was to

buy property the world and to found further “Zions”

goals

would be realized.32 Adjusting

the hermeneutics

Montanism

of newteachings.

of

flight during persecutions

This

may be compared

century

under

John a

city

in Illinois and called it

in different

places

all over

in which his

religious

and the introduction consisted of the

prohibition

least not in this world).33 movement has

generally

The two main areas of conflict between the main church and

were the manner of

prophesying

The

newteachings

and an extreme view of

penance (any

mortal sin committed after

baptism

It is

important

been

regarded

cannot be

forgiven;

at

to note that the as orthodox so far as

6

73

Christology

“In doctrine

and the doctrine of the

Trinity

are concerned.

Montanism

agreed

the Catholic church and held

very firmly to

faith. Tertullian was

thoroughly standard of this

age.”34 demands

The

purpose

of the “New

in all essential

points

with

the traditional rule of orthodox

according

to the

theology. was to

prepare

the

.

The area of conflict was in ethics and

for

practical living,

rather than in systematic

Prophecy”

believers for the

coming

of the Lord. Seldom did it introduce new

forms,

which had been uncommon

church. But what had been

voluntary

was made a

duty:

“… whenever

invariably

“…

allowed

to the tradition of the in the church

up

to

then, the Church

permitted

a

rule, the Montanists

distinction between a laxer and a stricter

only

the (atter…”35

The Montanistic sect was characterized severity

in Asceticism and church

discipline… the restoration of a rigorous

discipline

by

fanatical

Tertullian makes the chief office of the new

the movement claimed to have

which was

by

Christ and His

apostles.37

this to be the first instance of a

theory

prophecy.”36

According

to de

Soyres, received a revelation, communicated

supplementary

to that

Schaff considers

“which assumes an and the

Christianity

of the

but it “suffers

of

…”38 The Bible is not set aside

as it is no

longer

the final utterance

It has not

brought

revelation to

perfection;

weakness…”39 “Tertullian

of the

apostles,

in

unqualified

more than

never terms the

advance

beyond

the New Testament apostles

depreciation,

inasmuch

the divine

teaching.

it has made

especially

in the

teaching one concession to human

loses an

opportunity

of

asserting superior insight enjoyed

through

order to

provide

develops

dispensationalism.

which revelation takes

place:

1. Natural

by those

who harkened to the Paraclete the mouth of the

prophets

a biblical basis for the new doctrine a new hermeneutic. We

There are four

stages

or

prophetesses.’,40

In

he could call it a

simple

in human

history

in

religion,

or the innate idea of God.

2. The

legal religion

of the Old Testament.

3. The

gospel during

the

earthly

life

of

Christ;

and

the Paraclete…

z

for a new revelation which at first sight

seems to contradict the

teaching

When the Pharisees

4. the revelation of The entire

argumentation

on the case of Moses.

of the

Scriptures

is built

asked

Jesus

if he

7

74

this in the

would

permit divorce, have allowed

beginning. Only

because Moses allow divorce.42

he answered with a “No.” Moses

may

divorce but God did not intent

of the hardness of human hearts did

In the same

way

the Paraclete was sent to restore the initial intention of God. Paul had left the

option

for widowed Christians to

remarry weakness: “To the unmarried

on the

grounds

of human

and the widows

I say

that it is well for them to remain

single

as I do. But if they cannot exercise self-

For it is better to

marry

than to be

control, they

should

marry. aflame with

passion.”43

Tertullian

argues:

human weakness was not

capable once; it was necessary

and

progressively ordered, the

Holy Spirit.”44

because from the

beginning

“The Lord has sent the

Paraclete,

because of

receiving

the truth all at

should be

regulated

what Moses commanded

that the

discipline

until it was carried to

perfection by

“If Christ

abrogated

it was not so…

why

should not the Paraclete alter what Paul

permitted?”45

Tertullian held a

very high

view of the

Scriptures.

revelations he demanded “the closest

traditional faith of the church, genuine

Montanistic

abilis.”46 “In

fine,

the

Spirit

work,

he

terms,

foreseen and declared

ation. His

thinking level of

argument to

prove.

For all new

argument

with the the

regula

fidei

which,

in a

“immobilis et irreform- is rather a restorer than an

of revelations

given

argument-

It I ndeed many seem to be

of Tertullian’s reasons culturally conditioned,

innovator. Was not the new

development

by Jesus

Christ

One cannot

help

but be

impressed by Tertullian’s

is sharp and clear. On a

purely

rationalistic

one

might

be

willing

to

accept

what he is trying

But the

spirit

behind

it,

is that of a Roman

lawyer. seems “to violate the

spirit

of the Pauline

epistles.

for

holding

these

teachings

or result from

presuppositions.”4$

Robeck thinks the mistake of the Montanists

they

tried

a law for the whole church.49

God was

speaking

to

them, individual

guidance

The

problem

with Tertullian’s

was,

that when to make out of that

.

is that is opens the door to all kinds of

teachings The “revelations of the

Paraclete”, became

rather than

which are

externally applied, through

their internal (written) brought

formulated the inherent

from outside to them. Without

danger

of such an

approach:

dispensational

hermeneutics

and doctrines.

a

“measuring

rod”

allowing the Scriptures content to

judge

whatever is

intention,

he himself

“The final

8

75

and

glorious economy commenced at Pentecost, point

with the

appearance

of the Paraclete

but it

only

reached

of Montanus Phrygia;

none can tell where its

developments

CONCLUSION

may, indeed,

have

its

culminating and the

prophetesses

of

may

end.”SO

We have

attempted angles:

First from the manner behavioral

their

teaching

enemies accused

to examine Montanism from three

in which

they prophesied

(the

c.

Tertullian’s

biblical and montanistic

teaching. Montanism a

heresy?

between

theology

and

practice, exaggeration

danger

of going

back again would have considered

aspect

of it).

Second,

we examined four vital areas of

(a. Did Montanus claim to be the Paraclete as his

him of

doing?,

b. flight

during persecutions, second

marriage,

and d. Did

they

teach that the New

Jerusalem was

going

to come down at

Pepuza?).

method of

rationalizing

If someone

Third,

we looked at the contradiction between Our initial

question

is: Was

establishes a distinction it was not a

heresy,

but an

theology

and ethical

matters, has to be called a heresy. heretical movements

of Christian ideas. Such a distinction involves the

under the

law,

which the

apostle

Paul

as false doctrine

On the other hand if one does not make a distinction

as I have

suggested

But if one

compares

of the second and third

century, cannot

help

but feel that

calling

it a heresy would be too harsh a

(“another

gospel”).5

between

it, Montanism

Montanism with

one

in

Judaism, nor,

like

Gnosticism,

said: “Montanism was rooted

in and its errors consist in a morbid

judgement.

As

Philip

Schaff neither,

like

Ebionism, heathenism,

but in Christianity; exaggeration

of Christian ideas and demands.”52.

END NOTES

It is commonly noted that the church of the second century was losing the vitality which it possessed in the first century. The more an ecclesiastical was

developed in defense against heretical groups, the less

was hierarchy on charismatic manifestations. That the church of the late second emphasis

placed

century was still all acquainted

with charismatic manifestations shows a

passage

from Irenaeus Against Heresies, 5.6 “These brethren … possess languages, and bring to the light for

general benefit the hidden things of men, and declare the mysteries of whom God,

also the apostle terms “spiritual,” they being spiritual because

of the Spirit, and not because their flesh has been

they partake

stripped off and taken away, and because

they

have become

purely spiritual.”

Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson, eds., The Ante-Nicene Fathers (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. ERdmans Publishing Company, rpt. 1953), 1:531. Hereafter denoted ANF 1:531.

9

76

2Philip Schaff Church History, (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Erdmans Publishing Company, rpt. 1970), 2:423-424.

3Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.16.7.

4Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.16.9.

SEusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.17.2-3.

61 n his Bachelor of Divinity thesis Dr. Palma from Tertullian’s with Marcion: “Let Marcion … as

quotes of his

some

controversy such as have not spoken by human

exhibit, gifts god, prophets,

sense, but with the Spirit of God, such as have both predicted things to come, and have made manifest the

secrets of the heart; let them

that

produce a psalm, a vision, a prayer-only let it be by the

in an

is, in a rapture (amentia) whenever an interpretation

of

Spirit, ecstacy,

tongues has occurred to him … Now all these

signs (of spiritual gifts) are forthcoming from my side without

any difficulty.” Against Marcion 5.8 ; ANF 3:446-447.

7″Das

Sprachenreden

eines Besessenen unterscheidet sich in der

Regel wesentlich vom geistlichen Sprachenreden. Es ist ein Zwangsreden im Zustand der Trance.” “The

tongue-speaking of a possessed person usually differs from a essentially trance.” spiritual (Translation speaking

in tongues. It is a forced speaking in the condition of a

mine.) Arnold Bittlinger. Glossolalia, Schloss Craheim: Rolf Kuehne Veriag, 1969, p. 14.

BCecil M. Robeck, Jr., “The Charismata in Montanism,”

(unpublished

PhD paper, Fuller visions and auditions Theological 62, 63.

I am aware of the fact that the

in

Seminar, 1977),

the cases of Peter and Paul were not verbalized at the when

time,

they received them (Acts 10:10; 11:5; 22:17).

This does not rule out the possibility though

that

they

could have been verbalized at the time of the reception.

916id., 222.

10 Ibid.

11 Bonwetsch writes: “.. , the “new prophesy” was doubtless influenced by the the wild enthusiasm of the Phygian religious nature. The

very

names

applied

to the Montanists-Phrygians and Cataphrygians imply that the movement had a natioanl character.” Bonwetsch, “Montanism,” in Samuel

quasi-

McCauley Jackson, ed. The New

Schaff-Herzog Encyclopedia of 7:485. Religious Knowledge (New York: Funk and Wagnalls Company, 1910),

12 Epiphanius, Panarion 48.11.

13 /bid

On the Trinity, 3.41.1. All three quotations are taken from Robert M. 14 Didymus,

Grant, Second-Century Christianity. A Collection of Fragments (London: S.P.C.K., 1975), 95.

15 philip Schaff, History of the Christian Church, 2:418.

16 Grant, 95-96.

17″Montanus: You are exposed to public reproach? It is for your good. He who is not reproached by men is reproached by God. Do not be disconcerted; your righteousness has brought you into the midst (of all). Why are since

are Your arises when are seen you disconcerted, you

gaining praise? power you by men.” (Tertullian, On Flight in Persecution 9). “Montanus: Do not hope to die in bed nor

10

77

in abortion nor in languishing fevers, but in martyrdom, that he who suffered for you may be glorified.” (Ibid.); Grant, 95.

18 Bonwetsch: “Sah auch die Kirche die vollkommenste Sewiihrungdes Christen im Martyrium, so verwarf der Paraklet die Flucht in der und

dazu zum Martyrium sich herzuzudringen.” in

Verfoigung begeisterte

“Montanismus,” Albert Hauck, ed. Reaiencyc/op5die far protestantische Theologie und Kirche (Liepzig: ).C. Hinrichs’ sche

Buchhandlung, 1903), 13:422.

19Wimmer, Kirchengeschichte. Fachhochschule fur Religions-paedagogik und Kirchliche Bildungsarbeit.

When

they persecute you in one town, flee to the next.” Mt. 10:23, RSV.

21 Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.18.2-3.

22Tertullian, Exhortation to Chastity, 10.

23″Montanism,” John McClintock and James Strong, eds., Cyclopedia of Biblical, Theological and Ecclesiastical Literature (Grand Rapids: Baker, rpt. 1969), 6:523.

24 Ibid.

25Karl Baus. from the Apostolic Communityto Constantine (Freiburg: Herder, 1965) 1:201.

before Tertullian 26Schaff,

2:426. It seems to me to be impossible to deci ‘,e what Montanism

taught

and which points underwent a doctrinal change or reinterpretation

in Tertullian’s writings. All we can do is to look at Montanism through Tertullian’s glasses. What he amended and what he left be decided if montanistic

from before Tertullian’s unchanged

could only writings

time were to be found. How far Eusebius’ sources are prejudiced or correct in the same way can only be decided

if more primary sources can be found.

27″Hier nämlich sollte nach einer der Priska gewordenen Offenbarung das obere Jerusalem herabkommen (Epiph. 49, 1; vgl. 48, 14, Philastr. 49).

Montan hat es offenbar als jene Wueste in welche nach die Gemeinde der Endzeit gefluechtet werden angesehen,

Apk. 12,14 solle; denn so wird die

wusten Ortes”

Bezeichnung Pepuzas als eines nun mehr

(Epiph. 48, 14) zu erkliren

sein …” Bonwetsch, Montanismus,” RPTK 13:432.

28Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.18.

29Epiphanius, Panarion 49.1.

29Epiphanius, Panarion 49.1.

30″This is he (Montanus) who… named Pepuza and Tymion … Jerusalem…” Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History 5.18.2.

31 Robeck, 175.

32CIass notes from William W. Menzies,”History of Charismatic Movements,” (Springfield,

Mo.: Assemblies of God Graduate School, 1978).

33According to de Labriolle’s History and Literature from Tertullian to Boethius, (New York: A.A. Knopf, 1924), 91. Tertullian’s points of conflict with the Catholic Church were: (a) ecstasy, (b) flight during persecution, (c)

and

re-marriage, (d) fasts,

(e) penance. We have already dealt with the subjects of ecstasy, flight during Persecution and

Re-marriage. Because of the

limited size of this paper the

11

78

teachings on fasts and penance

will not be treated. In this section we will be dealing with hermeneutical problems rather than with the

individual doctrines themselves. Tertullian’s main line of argumentation is construed from the case of re-marriage.

What we will be

dealing with,

of course, is Tertullian’s

How far this was

way of argument. already common among Montanists before him, we do not know. But his

writings are the only primary sources which we have, as far as a developed

line of thought is concerned.

421. It is worthy to note that the of Hermas a

Christian 34Schaff,

Shepherd

book of the second

very popular

century, which was considered as being canonical by lrenaeus, the pre-montanistic Tertullian, Clemens Al., and

as orthodox as the “heretical” Montanism: it never

Origines, was by far not

speaks of Jesus Christ or the of the Son of God. This one is identical with the

Logos, only

above six others.

Holy Spirit. The son of God

appears as the the

a very “orthodox”

(Altaner, Patrologie, 55, 57). In

same

way

Lactantius highest angel

theologian of the fourth identified the century brother of Jesus, who only sinned later on. (Altaner, 186). “Montanistic

Holy Spirit with the Son of God, and even considered the devil to be a made no claim to reveal further the truths of salvation. Whenever it touched on prophecy dogmatic problems,

its utterances were designed only to

support

the Church’s tradition.” Bonwetsch, “Montanism,” 7:486.

35Bonwetsch, “Montanism,” 7:486.

36Schaff, 425.

37 John de Soyres, Montanism and the Primitive Church (Cambridge: Deighton Bell, 1878; rpt. Lexington: ATLA, 1965), 58.

38Schaff, 2:422.

39/bid.

40de

Soyres, 60.

41 Schaff, 2:422.

42Matthew 19:1-9.

431 Corinthians 7:8-9.

44Tertullian, On the Veiling of Virgins 1.

45Tertullian, On Monogamy, 14; Exhortation to Chastity, 10.

46Schaff, 2:422.

47Tertullian, On Monogamy 1.4.

48Robeck, 243.

49″From standards of theology, they were essentially orthodox, except, that they

were a fanatical fringe who heard God speak to them

through a gift of prophecy, and presumed that He was speaking to all the Church in an identical fashion.”

Robeck, 244.

50Tertullian, On Monogamy 1.4.

51 Galatians 1:6-7.

52Schaff, 2:421.

12

Be first to comment

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.