When I was studying for the ministry in the Assemblies of God, the course of Church History had a study question saying, "Although the text doesn't say it, this group was the result of an early Charismatic revival". The answer was Montanists, and the thought that they looked at an early heresy as a precursor was one factor in my leaving the Assemblies of God. Of late, I've had occasion to do some research into the Montanists, and I've decided to do a comparison between them, Catholic Charismatics, and the Assemblies of God. (2018 comment: This is certainly not an endorsement of Charismatics, merely a search for honesty in the matter)
I’m taking the information from the Wikipedia article, which itself contains copious footnotes. By “Charismatics”, I refer to Catholic Charismatics, faithful to the Magisterium. The Assemblies of God is a Trinitarian Pentecostal denomination. Other Trinitarian Pentecostal denominations would differ from it on the basis of issues which divide various Trinitarian Protestant denominations (church governance, free will vs. predestination, historic white vs. historic African-American, etc), and thus, the observations would equally apply. There are also "Oneness" Pentecostal denominations; rejecting the Trinity, they would be outside the context of Christianity. The so-called Toronto Blessing is, on the other hand, outside this classification, and seems to be out on the limb (to be charitable) It must be remembered that prophecy was not frowned upon in the early Church: Jerome 385, Letter 41.2: "we tell them [Montanists] that we do not so much reject prophecy—for this is attested by the passion of the Lord—as refuse to receive prophets whose utterances fail to accord with the Scriptures old and new".
Montanists: One source reports that Montanists claimed their revelation direct from the Holy Spirit could supersede the authority of Jesus or Paul or anyone else.
Charismatics: Faithful to the Magisterium
Assemblies: No. The Assemblies (and all Pentecostals I've ever met) hold the Bible above Charismata.
Montanists: The Montanist prophets did not speak as messengers of God but were described as possessed by God while being unable to resist.
Charismatics: One is able to resist.
Assemblies: One is able to resist.
Montanists: A prophetic utterance by Montanus described this possessed state: "Lo, the man is as a lyre, and I fly over him as a pick. The man sleepeth, while I watch." Thus, the Phrygians were seen as false prophets because they acted irrationally and were not in control of their senses
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: again, no.
Montanists: In On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Tertullian wrote that the Holy Spirit through the New Prophecy cleared up the ambiguities of scripture. The new prophecies did not contain new doctrinal content, but mandated strict ethical standards. To the mainstream church, Montanists appeared to believe that the new prophecies superseded and fulfilled the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: lacking tradition, the assemblies only look to scripture. And, again, the charismata take second place to scripture.
Montanists: The power of apostles and prophets to forgive sins. Adherents also believed, as did other Christians, that martyrs and confessors also possessed this power.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: Like all Protestants, the Assemblies look only to God for the forgiveness of sins.
Montanists: They recognized female bishops and presbyters.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: The understanding of the ministry is different than the Catholic - non sacramental - therefore most arguments against female clergy would not apply. The Assemblies do have some (few) female clergy. I know of no women as district superintendent (the administratively functional equivalent of a bishop)
(2018 note: As suggested in We are All Ministers, Protestant ministry is outside the paradigm of the Priesthood of Melchizedek, i.e., clergy. Rather, it falls under the ministries mentioned in Ephesians 4, which are ministries proper to the Royal Priesthood.)
Montanists: Women and girls were forbidden to wear ornaments, and virgins were required to wear veils.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: In the first half of the 20th century, Pentecostals tended to be quite puritanical in regards makeup and jewelry. This is no longer the case. Virgins have never been required to wear veils.
Montanists: Their prophets dyed their hair, stained their eyelids, and were allowed to play with tables and dice and lend on usury. At that time, dyed hair and eye make-up was used by harlots; the mainstream Church forbade it. The Church also forbade usury.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: Nope So, it would seem that comparing Charismatics to Montanists is, at best, mistaken. Any comparison between the Assemblies (and Pentecostals in general) and the Montanists is a bit of a stretch, and the similarities are not specific to Pentecostals, but to Protestants and/or Fundamentalists in general.
This article was originally a Facebook note, entered on June 17, 2013
I’m taking the information from the Wikipedia article, which itself contains copious footnotes. By “Charismatics”, I refer to Catholic Charismatics, faithful to the Magisterium. The Assemblies of God is a Trinitarian Pentecostal denomination. Other Trinitarian Pentecostal denominations would differ from it on the basis of issues which divide various Trinitarian Protestant denominations (church governance, free will vs. predestination, historic white vs. historic African-American, etc), and thus, the observations would equally apply. There are also "Oneness" Pentecostal denominations; rejecting the Trinity, they would be outside the context of Christianity. The so-called Toronto Blessing is, on the other hand, outside this classification, and seems to be out on the limb (to be charitable) It must be remembered that prophecy was not frowned upon in the early Church: Jerome 385, Letter 41.2: "we tell them [Montanists] that we do not so much reject prophecy—for this is attested by the passion of the Lord—as refuse to receive prophets whose utterances fail to accord with the Scriptures old and new".
Montanists: One source reports that Montanists claimed their revelation direct from the Holy Spirit could supersede the authority of Jesus or Paul or anyone else.
Charismatics: Faithful to the Magisterium
Assemblies: No. The Assemblies (and all Pentecostals I've ever met) hold the Bible above Charismata.
Montanists: The Montanist prophets did not speak as messengers of God but were described as possessed by God while being unable to resist.
Charismatics: One is able to resist.
Assemblies: One is able to resist.
Montanists: A prophetic utterance by Montanus described this possessed state: "Lo, the man is as a lyre, and I fly over him as a pick. The man sleepeth, while I watch." Thus, the Phrygians were seen as false prophets because they acted irrationally and were not in control of their senses
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: again, no.
Montanists: In On the Resurrection of the Flesh, Tertullian wrote that the Holy Spirit through the New Prophecy cleared up the ambiguities of scripture. The new prophecies did not contain new doctrinal content, but mandated strict ethical standards. To the mainstream church, Montanists appeared to believe that the new prophecies superseded and fulfilled the doctrines proclaimed by the Apostles.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: lacking tradition, the assemblies only look to scripture. And, again, the charismata take second place to scripture.
Montanists: The power of apostles and prophets to forgive sins. Adherents also believed, as did other Christians, that martyrs and confessors also possessed this power.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: Like all Protestants, the Assemblies look only to God for the forgiveness of sins.
Montanists: They recognized female bishops and presbyters.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: The understanding of the ministry is different than the Catholic - non sacramental - therefore most arguments against female clergy would not apply. The Assemblies do have some (few) female clergy. I know of no women as district superintendent (the administratively functional equivalent of a bishop)
(2018 note: As suggested in We are All Ministers, Protestant ministry is outside the paradigm of the Priesthood of Melchizedek, i.e., clergy. Rather, it falls under the ministries mentioned in Ephesians 4, which are ministries proper to the Royal Priesthood.)
Montanists: Women and girls were forbidden to wear ornaments, and virgins were required to wear veils.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: In the first half of the 20th century, Pentecostals tended to be quite puritanical in regards makeup and jewelry. This is no longer the case. Virgins have never been required to wear veils.
Montanists: Their prophets dyed their hair, stained their eyelids, and were allowed to play with tables and dice and lend on usury. At that time, dyed hair and eye make-up was used by harlots; the mainstream Church forbade it. The Church also forbade usury.
Charismatics: Nope
Assemblies: Nope So, it would seem that comparing Charismatics to Montanists is, at best, mistaken. Any comparison between the Assemblies (and Pentecostals in general) and the Montanists is a bit of a stretch, and the similarities are not specific to Pentecostals, but to Protestants and/or Fundamentalists in general.
This article was originally a Facebook note, entered on June 17, 2013
Comments
Post a Comment