David Johnson

Dr. Clauson

Church History

March 24, 2010

Montanism: A Brief Overview

“It has been said with truth that a perfect historian of secular events will never be

found, how much less hope can we entertain that the vast field of ecclesiastical history will

ever find a really successful explorer?” (Bradley). This statement by John De Soyre is quite

indicative of the Montanist movement. Tertullian is one of the only writers to have

supported the movement and his work Seven Books Against The Church In Defence Of

Montanism has been lost, leaving only vague references from other works. About twenty

Montanist prophecies have been preserved by Epiphanius writing in the fourth century,

but his objectivity in their selection is open to question. Probably the two most valuable

sources are Tertullian and the Anonymous contemporary of Montanus, quoted in

Eusebius’s Church History. The main problem that scholars find when discussing this

subject is the shortage of information, and the biased nature of the existing sources.

Therefore, the little known about Montanism must be looked at as objectively as possible

(Bradley).

Montanism arose through a difference of worship styles and church discipline within

Orthodox Christianity. In the late 150’s or early 170’s, Montanus along with two women,

Priscilla and Maximilla, began a prophetic movement throughout Phrygia (Ferguson 101).

Jerome (342-420A.D.) writes about Montanus, stating that he was a priest of Cybele before

his conversion to Christianity. This means that he had been castrated, for it was customary
due to the belief that worship of Cybele had to be performed by “half-men” (Bradley).

Montanus’s movement was started around the middle of the second century during the

reign of Antoninus Pius or Marcus Aurelius (scholars are still unclear on the origins). The

followers of Montanus were referred to as Montanists, Phrygians, or Cataphrygians (from

the province of their origin), Pepuziani, Priscillianists (from Priscilla). Proponents of this

movement called it the “New Prophecy”, while opponents referred to it as “Kataphrygian”

translated as “The Phyrgian Heresy” (Ferguson 101). Montanists called themselves

spiritual Christians (peumatikoiv). They referred to traditional Christians as (yucikoiv) or

carnal Christians. Montanism differed from traditional orthodox belief in the areas of

church discipline, the office of priesthood, worship style and eschatological interpretation

(Schaff).

Montanism was not a departure from the faith, but rather an attempt to reform

Orthodox Christianity. Unfortunately, it was a morbid overstraining of the practical

morality and discipline of the early church. It focused primarily on supernaturalism and

puritanism, emphasizing spiritual gifts and holiness almost to the exclusion of other

essential Christian doctrine. This was primarily a reaction from the Gnostic rationalism and

Catholic laxity that was pervasive throughout Christendom during this period. It is the first

example of an earnest and well-meaning, but fanatical hyper-Christianity. Regardless, it is

still important to note that no fundamental doctrinal differences were involved between

Orthodox Christianity and Montanism (Schaff).

Montanism is perceived as a protest against increasing worldliness and formality in the

church. Much like Pentecostals of today, Montanists saw prophecy and other spiritual gifts

as the hallmark of Christianity. Montanus argued that the promised “paraclete”

(παρά κλητος) meaning “Holy Spirit” that Jesus spoke of in John 16:7 was speaking in and

through him. Montanus was widely misunderstood by his critics due to this belief and the

nature of his prophecies. He often spoke in first person when referencing God and

projected ecstatic utterances. His adversaries wrongly inferred from the use of the first

person for the Holy Spirit in his oracles, that he made himself directly the Paraclete, or,

according to Epiphanius, even God the Father (Schaff).

Montanism encouraged a radical ascetic lifestyle among its adherents and strongly

emphasized eschatological fulfillment. Priscilla and Maximilla, two Montanist converts, left

their husbands to follow Montanus and proclaim the necessity of purity and gifts. During

the bloody persecutions under the Antonines, which raged in Asia Minor, all three went

forth as prophets and reformers of the Christian life, and proclaimed the near approach of

the age of the Holy Spirit and of the millennial reign in Pepuza, a small village of Phrygia,

upon which the New Jerusalem was to come down. Scenes took place similar to those under

the preaching of the first Quakers, and the glossolalia and prophesying in the Irvingite

congregations. The frantic movement soon far exceeded the intention of its authors,

spreading to Rome and North Africa. This threw the whole church into commotion.

Prejudice and malice were quickly invented against Montanus and the two female

prophets. These charges entailed immorality, madness and suicide, all of which were

readily believed. Epiphanius and John of Damascus tell the absurd story that the sacrifice of

an infant was a part of the mystic worship of the Montanists, and that they made bread

with the blood of murdered infants. Priscilla succeeded Montanus as the main prophet, and

later Maximilla followed her, until her death in 179. The fact the leaders were women

seems to have been an additional upsetting factor to the Catholic bishops, who said that
they were demon-possessed and attempted to exorcise them. These disturbances gave rise

to the first synods which are mentioned after the apostolic age (Schaff).

  In Doctrine, Montanism agreed in all essential points with the Catholic Church, and

held very firmly to the traditional rule of faith. The Catholic Church did not deny, in theory,

the continuance of prophecy and the other miraculous gifts, but was disposed to derive the

Montanistic revelations from satanic inspirations (due to their eccentric nature), and

mistrusted them all the more for their proceeding not from the regular clergy, but in great

part from unauthorized laymen and fanatical women who engaged in ecstatic utterances

(Schaff).

The Montanistic movement, asserted the notion of a Universal Priesthood. This

meant that any Christian, no matter what their standing in the church, male or female could

utilize the office of prophet for the benefit of the church. Under this view, it may be called a

democratic reaction against the clerical aristocracy, which from the time of Ignatius had

more and more monopolized all ministerial privileges and functions. Montanism opposed

fixed ecclesiastical order and proposed more freedom in worship, inhibiting control from

the Catholic Church. The inability to harness this movement, and the threat to traditional

Catholic worship practices, prompted a backlash by the Church during this period. They

argued that Montanism required possession and speech in a frenzied ecstasy, unlike the

biblical prophets of old that kept full possession of their understanding (Schaff).

Differences in practice and emphasis became more prevalent in the church as time

progressed. When Montanism spread to North Africa, Tertullian (who lived in Carthage), a

man who spent most of his life fighting heresies, converted. He was initially attracted to
Montanism due to its greater rigorism in observing fasts, prohibiting second marriages

(even after the spouse has died), and not fleeing amidst persecution or even martyrdom.

Although there is no proof that Montanists’ had a greater eagerness than other Christians

to volunteer for martyrdom it is almost certain that Perpetua and Felicita were Montanists

when they died in 207A.D. in Carthage (Bradley). Most scholars agree that if the great

champion of orthodoxy, Tertullian, gave credence to this movement, there must have been

something genuine about it (Bradley).

Eventually synods were held to decide the fate of the “heresy” of Montanism. The

first recorded synods of bishops were hosted in Asia Minor to consider the proper course

of action. These civil meetings discussed a plethora of issues regarding the movement, such

as the Holy Spirit, authority of Scripture and the office of prophet. It is important to note

that initially the Catholic Church was not opposed to the idea of the Holy Spirit speaking

prophetic words outside of the text of Scripture. Regardless, The Catholic Church decided

that the Holy Spirit works best through a council and ecstatic utterances of prophecies

were considered heretical. The focus on Church unity and the sanctity of the office of

prophet were ideas that the Apostle Paul conveyed in 1 Corinthians 12 & 14. Prophecies

void of strange utterances seemed to be more of a church preference. Nowhere in scripture

does it give detail on what the nature of the prophetic message should sound like when

conveyed

Lastly, the bishops of the church claimed to be the “true spiritual leaders” of the

church, possessing the Holy Spirit solely on the basis of their office. The church argued that

in the same way the bishops guided the church away from the heresy of Gnosticism, the
bishops could lead the church through the guidance of the Holy Spirit due to the nature of

their office. Montanism continued in the East until severe legislation against Montanism by

Emperor Justinian I (527-565) essentially destroyed it, but some remnants evidently

survived into the 9th century (Schaff).

 Works Cited

Bradshaw, Robert I. "Montanism: Heresy Or Healthy Revival?" (1992). Print.

Ferguson, Everett. Church History. Grand Rapids, Mich.: Zondervan, 2005. Print.

Schaff, Philip. History of the Christian Church. Peabody, Mass.: Hendrickson, 1996. Print.