true on that account. For some of the other heresies also have a vast number of martyrs, but neither do we the more on that account agree with them, nor acknowledge that they have truth on their side. Indeed, they who are called Marcionites, say that they had vast numbers that were martyrs for Christ. But they do not confess Christ in truth." And a little after, he adds: "Hence, whenever those that are called martyrs by the church, on account of enduring martyrdom for the true faith, happen to fall in with those called martyrs of the Phrygian heresy, they always separate from them and undergo death, having no communion with them, because they do not assent to the spirit of Montanus and the women; and that all this is true, and happened in our own times at Apamea on the Menander, is manifest from those who suffered martyrdom with Caius and Alexander of Eumenia."

CHAPTER XVII.

OF MILTIADES AND HIS WORKS.

IN the same work he also makes mention of the historian Miltiades, who also wrote a book against the same heresy. After quoting some passages from them, he adds: "As I found these statements in one of their works against another work written by our brother Alcibiades, in which he demonstrates the impropriety of a prophet's speaking in ecstasy; this work I have abridged." After stating other matters, he enumerates those who had prophesied under the New Testament. Among these he mentions one Ammias and Quadratus. But the false prophet," says he, "is carried away by a vehement ecstasy, accompanied by want of all shame and fear; beginning, indeed, with a designed ignorance, and terminating, as beforesaid, in involuntary madness. They will never be able to show that any in the Old or New Testament, were thus violently agitated and carried away in spirit. Neither will they be able to boast that Agabus,

or Judas, or Silas, or the daughters of Philip, or Ammias in Philadelphia, or Quadratus, or others that do not belong to them, ever acted in this way." Again, after a little, he says: "If after Quadratus and Ammias in Philadelphia, the women that followed Montanus, succeeded in the gift of prophecy, let them show us what women among them succeeded Montanus and his women. For the apostle shows that the gift of prophecy should be in all the church until the coming of the Lord, but they can by no means show any one at this time, the fourteenth year from the death of Maximilla." Thus far this author. But the Miltiades mentioned by him has left other monuments of his study in the holy Scriptures, both in the works that he wrote against the Greeks and those against the Jews. Both treatises are written in two separate volumes. He has, moreover, written a work against the philosophers of the age, in favour of the philosophy which he embraced.

CHAPTER XVIII.

APOLLONIUS ALSO REFUTES THE PHRYGIAN HERESY, AND THOSE WHOM HE HAS MENTIONED.

THE heresy of the Phrygians, as it was called, still continuing to prevail in Phrygia, Apollonius undertook to refute it in a particular work which he wrote; on the one hand correcting their false predictions in reference to what they said, and on the other describing the life of those who were its founders. Hear him in his own words respecting Montanus: "But who," says he, "is this new teacher? His works and his doctrines sufficiently show it. This is he that taught the dissolutions of marriage, he that imposed laws of fasting, that called Pepuza and Tymium, little places in Phrygia, a Jerusalem, in order to collect men from every quarter thither; who established exactors of money, and under the name of offerings, devised the artifice to procure presents; who provided salaries for those that preached his doctrine, that

it might grow strong by gormandizing and gluttony." Thus far concerning Montanus; and further on he writes concerning his prophetesses: "We show, therefore," says he, "that these same leading prophetesses, as soon as they were filled with the spirit, abandoned their husbands. How then can they utter this falsehood, who call Prisca a virgin?" He afterwards proceeds again: "Does it not appear to you that the Scripture forbids any prophet to receive gifts and money? When, therefore, I see a prophetess receiving both gold and silver, and precious garments, how can I fail to reject her?" Again, further on, respecting a certain one of their confessors, he says: "Moreover, Themison, who was completely clad in a most plausible covetousness, could not bear the great characteristic of confession, but threw aside bonds and imprisonment for the abundance of wealth, and though it became him to walk humbly, boasted as a martyr, and dared to imitate the apostles by drawing up a certain catholic epistle, to instruct those who had a better faith than himself, to contend for doctrines of empty sound, and to utter impieties against the Lord and his apostles and the holy church." Again, speaking of others that are honoured among them as martyrs, he writes thus: "But not to speak of many, let the prophetess tell us the circumstances of Alexander, who called himself a martyr, with whom she feasted, the same too that is adored by numbers; whose robberies and other crimes, for which he was punished, it is not for us to tell, but which are preserved in the public records. Which of them forgives another his sins? Does the prophetess forgive the martyr his robberies? or the martyr forgive the prophetess her avarice? Although the Lord has said, ‘ Lay not up for yourselves gold or silver, nor two coats,' these, in direct opposition, have committed great crimes in regard to the possession of things thus prohibited. For we shall show, that those that are called martyrs and prophets among them, have derived pecuniary gain, not only from the wealthy, but from the poor, and from

widows and orphans, and if they have any confidence (of innocence) in this, let them stand and settle these matters with us; so that if they are convicted, they may abandon their misdemeanours hereafter.

"The fruits of a prophet must be examined; for by its fruits the tree is known. But that those who wish may understand the circumstances respecting this Alexander, he was tried by Æmilius Frontinus, the proconsul (of Asia) at Ephesus, not for the name (of Christian) but for the robberies which he dared to commit, as he had already been a transgressor. Then, however, pretending to the name of the Lord, he was liberated, after he had spread his errors among the faithful there. But the church of the place whence he sprung would not receive him, because he was a robber. Those, however, that wish to learn his history, can consult the public archives of Asia. And yet the prophet pretends to be ignorant of this man, with whom he lived many years. By refuting him, we also overturn the pretensions of the prophet. The same thing could be shown in many others, and if they have the courage let them undergo the test of argument." In another part of the same work, he adds the following, respecting their boasted prophets: "If," says he, "they deny that their prophets took presents, let them at least acknowledge, that, if they should be proved to have received them, they are no prophets. And of these matters we will furnish a thousand proofs. But it is necessary that all the fruits of a prophet should be examined. Tell me, does a prophet dye (his hair)? Does a prophet stain (his eyelids)? Does a prophet delight in ornament? Does a prophet play with tablets and dice? Does he take usury? Let them first acknowledge these things, whether they are right or not; and I will show that they have been done by them."

This same Apollonius relates, in the same work, that it was forty years from the time that Montanus undertook his pretended prophecy down to the period when he wrote his work. And again he says, that Zoticus, who

was also mentioned by the former historian, when Maximilla was pretending to utter prophecies at Pepuza, attempted to interfere and reason with the spirit by which she was stimulated, but was hindered by those that followed her opinions. He mentions, also, a certain Thraseas among the martyrs of the times, and also that it was handed down by tradition, that our Saviour commanded his disciples not to depart from Jerusalem for twelve years. He quotes, also, the Revelations of John as testimony; and relates, also, that a dead man was raised by the divine power, through the same John, at Ephesus. Many other matters he also states; by which he abundantly refutes the error of the above-mentioned heresy. These are the matters stated by Apollonius.

CHAPTER XIX.

THE OPINION OF SERAPION RESPECTING THE HERESY OF THE

PHRYGIANS.

SERAPION, who is said about this time to have been the bishop of the church of Antioch, after Maximinus, has also made mention of the writings of Apollinaris against the same heresy. In a private letter, which he wrote to Caricus and Ponticus, he mentions him, and also refutes his heresy in the following words: "But that you may also see, that the influence of this lying party of a new prophecy, as it is called, is abominated by all the brethren in the world, I have also sent you the epistle of Claudius Apollinaris, that most blessed bishop of Hierapolis in Asia.' In this same epistle of Serapion are also given the subscriptions of several bishops, of whom one wrote as follows: "I, Aurelius Cyrenius, a witness, wish you health." Another, as follows: " Ælius Publius Julius, bishop of Debeltum, a colony of Thrace, as sure as God lives in the heavens, the blessed Sotas, in Anchialus, wished to cast out the dæmon from Priscilla, and the hypocrites would not suffer him." The signatures of many other bishops who bear witness to