which makes of the man and woman one flesh, be re- newed ? Is such an assimilation capable of repetition ? Besides, the bonds between husband and wife continue in death ; they have only become more sacred by be- coming more spiritual." Yet Tertullian's views, though extreme, do not in this instance clearly set forth the views of all Montanists. Indeed some of them insisted that their founder taught Xvffeig yajuwv— dissolution of marriage— and that Prisca and Maximilla, as soon as they recognised the spirit, abandoned their husbands. It is true Wernsdorf (see Routh's note. Eel. Sac. i, 473) ob- serves that Montanus's teaching was on this point not by precept, but by the example of his two prophetesses, and yet the extreme asceticism must have had a far- reaching influence even for Tertullian to advocate celi- bacy on the strength of i.% and in his Exhortation to Chastity he comes to recognise a moralitj' of perfection which rises above the ordinary standard. " Permanent virginity is its highest point ; abstinence from the sex- ual relations in marriage is akin to it in virtue." In an extreme ascetic tendency Montanism forbade women all ornamental clothing, and required virgins to be veiled. Thus Tertullian urges that it be done so as not to kindle the flame of passion. "I entreat thee, O woman, be thou mother, daughter, or virgin, veil thy head: as' mother, veil it for the sake of thy son ; as sister, for thy brother; as daughter, for thy father. For thou dost imperil men of every age. Put on the armor of mod- esty; encircle thee with a rampart of chastitj'. Set a guard over thine own eyes, and over those of others. Art thou not married to Christ ?" (Z'e Vi?-y. Veland. p. 16).
The perversion of the doctrine of redemption, which is the source of all such legalism, casuistrj', and extreme asceticism, as the Montanists taught, is more especially notable in the arbitrary disposition made by Jlonta- nisra of various kinds of sins. In the same manner as it recognises two orders of perfection, and thus does vi- olence to the true idea of good, so does it tamper with the idea of evil. In accordance with the words of John — "a sin not unto death," and "a sin unto death" — it made a difference between sins venial and mortal, and denied that the Church had power to pardon the latter, because, as it taught, there is no possibility of a second repentance for mortal sins, and therefore no power in the Church to restore the lapsed into fellowship. Ter- tullian's treatise on Modesty, called forth by the decree of the bishop of Rome, who had assumed the right to pardon the gravest sins, expresses the IMontanist the- ory with perfect clearness. He does not dwell for an instant on the real difficulty of obtaining proof of true repentance, but speaks only of the comparative gravity of sins. "Some," he says, "are pardonable; others, on the contrary, are beyond remission; some merit punishment, others damnation. From this dif- ference in the offences comes the difference in the pen- itence, which varies according as it is exercised on ac- count of a pardonable or unpardonable sin." He held all mortal sins (of which he numbers seven) committed after baptism to be unpardonable {De Pudicit. c. 2 and 19), at least in this world ; and a Church which shoVved such lenity towards gross offenders, as the Roman Church at that time did, according to the corroborating testimony of Hippolytus, he called worse than a " den of thieves," even a " spelunca moechorum et fornicatorura." At the head of the black catalogue of unpardonable or mortal sins the IMontanists placed adulterj- and apostasy. They did not deny that liod could pardon them directly, or through the medium of an exceptional revelation ; but on this side the grave no restoration was possible for those who had been guilty of such sins, even though they gave the strongest pledges of their repentance. Here we have a clear departure from the grand Chris- tian doctrine of the fulness of God's mercy, irrespective of the proportion of sin, and that the Church must suf- fer all to enter its fellowship who manifest "a desire to flee from the wrath to come." If Montanism taught
MOXTANISTS
530
MOXTANUS
truly, it follows that the work of redemption is insuffi- cient, and that, in addition to repentance, a certain sat- isfaction is demanded of the sinner. We have here un- questionably reached the rfxjt of the error of Montanism, from which grows its legalism and its asceticism.
The religious earnestness which animated Monta- nism, and tlic fanatical extremes into which it ran, have frequently reappeared in the Church after the deatli of Montanism, under various names and forms, as in Novatianism, Donatism, Anabaptism, the Carai- sard enthusiasm, Puritanism, Pietism, Ir\-ingism, and so on, by way of protest and wholesome reaction against various evils in the Church. And what may ajipear perhaps more strange, several of those very doctrines of the Jlontanists which in their earliest rise were pro- nounced heretical gradually made their way into tlie Church of Rome, and, with slight modifications, remain to this day a part of her creed. Thus it is to Monta- nism that it owes the idea of the infallibility of its coun- cils, which attempt in the same way to add to revela- tion. From the same source, too, it has derived its "counsels of perfection," and the distinction between venial and mortal sins. Says Dr. Newman, in his JJsgai/ on Development, a work which he would liardly care to own now, " the prophets of the Montanists prefigure the Church's doctors, and their inspiration lier infallibility ; their revelations her developments" (p. 349-352). Since this was written a new significance has been given it by the proceedings of the last Vatican Council (1869), ; which has lodged in the individual head of the Church the infallibility formerly attributed to the Church as a whole. See, however, Infallibilitv; Pai'acv.