The one thing by which Montanism came to be espe- cially distinguished from the Church catholic was its assertion of the continuance of prophecy, and hence it ■went generallj' under the name of iwva propheiia. Now there was nothing heretical in the simple doctrine that charismata had not ceased in the Church ; but there was heresy in the doctrine, which the Montanists es- poused, that these charismata introduced a new dispen- sation superior to that of Christ and his apostles. That Christ, who came to fulfil the law and the prophets, and promised his Holy Spirit to his apostles to guide them into all truth, bequeathed to his Church only an insuffi- cient morality, and a dispensation which needed to be supplemented by the Paraclete of Montanus, is utterly inconsistent with a true reception of the doctrines of the Church catholic and of the Holy Ghost, who spake by the prophets. This distinction in Montanism between the Paraclete and the Holy Ghost is not a distinction (or difference, rather) of person or nature, but the dis- tinction of a plenary bestowal for a complete revelation following a partial bestowal for an imperfect and tem- porary revelation. It may be compared, and is virtu- ally compared by Tertullian in the passages cited above from the treatises De Monorj. and De Virg. VeL, to the distinction drawn by St. John when he says, " The Holy
Ghost was not yet given." It was the same Spirit in the Mosaic and the Christian dispensations, yet might be called another on account of the different and larger grace of the Christian dispensation. So the Paraclete is in person and being identified with the Holy Ghost, but the larger measure of the Spirit given for the com- pletion of Christianity introduces a distinction by which the Hoi}'- Ghost bestowed on the apostles is inferior to the Paraclete. The Paraclete is undeniably identified with the promised Spirit of Truth— i. e. the promise of Christ, which the Church believes to have been fulfilled on the first Pentecostal day, was not fulfilled until the Spirit came on Montanus. Mosheim (cent, ii, pt. ii, ch. V, sect. 23, note), we must take the liberty of saying, entirely mistakes the nature of the distinction if his words imply, as we understand them to imply, a teacher other than the third person of the Christian Trinity. This heresy gave a character to the new disciplinary rules. It introduced also schism in its most aggravated form, asserting that the party of Montanus alone was the true Church, the pneumatici, all other nominal Chris- tians being psychici.
Montanism manifestly claimed for itself a position above the organization and regular powers of the Church, asserting as its own monopoly the continu- ity of revelation. Anterior revelations, to be sure, are not set aside ; they are, however, regarded simply as in- itiatory steps. The Old Testament retains itsclaims, but the New Testament suffiers depreciation, inasmuch as it is no longer the final utterance of the divine teach- ing. It has not brought revelation to perfection ; it has made, especially in the teaching of the apostles, more than one concession to human weakness, and, like Mo- ses, it has allowed certain practices because of the hard- ness of men's hearts. "The Lord," says Tertullian, " has sent the Paraclete, because human weakness was not capable of receiving the truth all at once ; it was necessary that the discipline should be regulated and progressively ordered, until it was carried to perfection by the Holy Spirit" (De Virr/. VelancJ. pt. i). Paul gave certain instructions rather by permission than in the name of God; he tolerated marriage because of the weakness of the flesh, in the same manner as Moses permitted divorce. " If Christ has abolished that which Closes had commanded, why should not the Paraclete forbid that which Paul allows ?" (Be Monog. i, 4). " In fine, the Holy Spirit is rather a restorer than an inno- vator (ibid.). Was not the new development of the rev- elations given foreseen and declared by Jesus Christ? The final and glorious economy of the Paraclete may, indeed, have commenced at Pentecost, but it only reach- ed its culminating point with the appearance of Mon- tanus and the prophetesses of Phrygia ; none can tell where its developments may end." Such were the prin- ciples of Montanism. Surely it were impossible to make a more serious assault than this upon apostolic Christi- anity. It clearly enough regarded revelation not as a fact, but rather as a doctrine or a law, and in conse- quence religion lost the definitive character which be- longs to that which is absolute. "Inspiration," says Pressense, "which thus had power to change everj'- thing, was exempted from the restraint of all the rules of reason, as well as from the authority of the Holy Scriptures. It was admitted to be a sort of ecstasy, and its great merit, according to the sect, consisted in its bringing man into a state of complete passivity. 'Ec- stasy seized the inspired man ; this is the power of the Holy Spirit which produces prophecy' (Tertullian, De Anima, pt. ii). It is a sort of God-sent madness, which constitutes the spiritual faculty called by us prophecy. The soul is no longer self-possessed when it prophesies ; it is in a state of delirium ; a power not its own masters it. Dreams and visions occupy the principal jilace in the inspiration of the Montanists. Inspiration is only the harp which vibrates as it is touched by the player's fin- ger (Epiphanius, Hwr. xlviii, 4). 'Man sleeps : I alone am Avalking,' says the Paraclete (ibid.). In such a con-