for a while only, and then rejected the authority of the founders of the sect, notwithstanding that he seems to have put forward, to himself, the external authority of the spiritual gifts claimed by the Montanists, not the substance of their doctrine, as the ground of his secession", and so long regarded the revelations they claimed, as the inspiration of the Holy Ghost. Yet, we know not on what ground, retaining those points of discipline, which had probably originally recommended themselves to him, he separated from the Montanists, and formed a small local communion of his own. If also, as seems probable, the Adversus omnes hæreses be his, he had himself been alive to the blasphemies circulated among some sections of them; and we have external testimony, that he at the first wrote against them. His strong perception also of the validity of the "rule of faith," or, as is now said, " Catholic truth," as a definite substantial body of truth not to be departed from; his own well-recognised maxim that what was prior was Apostolic, that innovations branded themselves, as being such; his strong recognition of the Church, as the depository of Apostolic tradition;-would have seemed strong safeguards against his falling into error, and declaring against the Church'.

In the absence of fuller information, the source of that strange and lamentable fall can only be conjectured. Something there may have been in Montanism, at the outset, more attractive than it now seems, when laid bare. Heresy, like all other sin, is attractive in the present, revolting when past, and the mask turned. Something there must have

"He discharged from him all the idle pretence of Phrygia, and formed conventicles of Tertullianists. But in doctrine he changed nothing." Prædest. "Ourselves, after that time, the recognition and maintaining of the Paraclete separated from the Carnal." adv. Prax. c. 1.

i S. Aug. de Hæres.

S. Aug. de Hær. "passing over to the Cataphrygas whom he had before overthrown." This seems to be an al

lusion to the adv. omn. Hær.; possibly, however, (as Tillemont perhaps means to suggest, art. 9.) it only signifies that he "overthrew" them by teaching the truths opposed to their errors, the lawfulness of second marriage, (ad Ux. ii. 1. i. 3. de Pat. c. 13.) of flight in persecution, (ad Ux. i. 3. de Pat. 1. c.) of the Church's right to remit all mortal sin, (de Poen. c. 7.)

1 See the de Præscr. and notice below, p. 434, 5.

m

been, since even a Bishop of Rome was on the point of acknowledging the prophecies of Montanus, Prisca, and Maximilla, even when they had been condemned by his predecessors, and by the Asiatic Churches; and actually restored communion with them. They seem also in a very short time to have found adherents in the parts of the world the most distant", and some even among those ready to endure martyrdom. It may be that at first they did not declare against the Church, and seemed only reformers within her'. The very rule of Tertullian may also have been, in some degree, the means of ensnaring him, both by leading him to a false security, and, in its application, fixing his mind exclusively on greater deviations from the Faith. For, if one may so judge of one so highly endowed, Tertullian's mind seems remarkable rather for its great acuteness, power, condensed strength, energy, than for its comprehensiveness. His characteristic seems to be the vivid and strong perception and exhibition of single truths or principles. These he exhausts, bares them of every thing extrinsic to them, and then casts them forth the sharper and the more penetrating. They seem to flash on his mind like lightning, and to go forth with its rapidity and clearness. As in the well-known description, "he flashed, he thundered, he shook Greece." But single powers of mind, the more vividly they are possessed and developed, the more, generally, do they impair the even

m adv. Prax. c. 1. Episcopum Romanum, agnoscentem jam prophetias Montani, Priscæ, Maximillæ, et ex ea agnitione pacem Ecclesiis Asiæ et Phrygiæ inferentem, falsa de ipsis prophetis et Ecclesiis eorum adseverando, et præcessorum ejus auctoritates defendendo, coegit et literas pacis revocare jam emissas, et a proposito recipiendorum charismatum concessare.

n They seem even to have displaced the Church in Phrygia, (S. Hil. ad Const. ii. §. 9.) in Thyatira, (Epiph. Hær. 51. c. 53.) Their early extent may also be perhaps inferred from the notice of them in S. Clem. Alex. Strom. vii. c. xvii. p. 900. the frequent mention of them in Origen, (see Tillemont, art. 13.) from the letter written against

them by Serapion Bp. of Antioch, (Eus. H. E. v. 19.) and by the martyrs of Lyons, (ib. v. 3.) as also from Tertullian. Their subsequent extent is indicated by the frequent notice of them in the decisions on heretical Baptism, (see above, Note G. on the de Bapt. p.284,&c.) and the statement in Sozomen. (ii. 32.) that they suffered by Constantine's laws against heretics except in Phrygia and the neighbouring provinces, where from the time of Montanus they had existed in great numbers, (Tillem. 1. c.)

ad Mart. c. 1. p. 151. and note c. P They were excommunicated in Asia, did not separate themselves from the Church, and would gladly have been restored, see note m.

balance of the whole. Men's very excellences, lest they forget their humility and "be as gods," are often purchased at the expense of other endowments. It is with God Alone to possess all things perfectly. Thus we see how strength of memory and learning are mostly bought by forfeiture of originality or even judgment; inventiveness by want of precision; imaginativeness by absence of accuracy in reasoning; clearness by want of depth; what lies deep struggles to the surface, yet cannot reach it; contemplativeness and practical wisdom are severed; and so on. In this way the very intensity with which Tertullian's mind grasped single truths may have the rather hindered him from seeing their bearings upon other truth. While gazing intently upon one object, a person cannot for the time see others which surround it, or, at most, is only indistinctly conscious of their presence. On each occasion Tertullian seems to be wholly taken up with, and immersed in, the one truth which he is contemplating; and to see other things as they bear upon it, rather than its bearings upon others. It seems for the time the centre, around which his thoughts are revolving. This habit was perhaps augmented by his previous profession. To this habit of mind perhaps belong his frequent argumenta ad hominem; they stop the mouth of an adversary, and with this he seems for the time content; whether he have maintained his position or silenced an adversary seems to him indifferent. One seems to see the habits of a mind, accustomed to bend all its energies to make out its case,-not, of course now, as in Heathenism and on secular subjects, irrespectively of truth or falsehood,-yet, even the more, because fully persuaded of the truth of what it advocates, seizing whatever will fortify its position, without fully considering whether it may not thereby be dismantling some other post, and pressing into its service what really does not belong thither. On different occasions, he seems to look on the same truth upon opposite sides, and each time

It is perhaps out of reverence that he thus contents himself with retorting the charge of worshipping the Cross,

(Apol. c. 16.) or the Sun because they prayed towards the East, (ib.)

exclusively, so that from the different point of view, its form seems not only different, but inconsistent and contradictory. He seems at no pains to guard or qualify his statements either to his own mind or that of others; rather he exhibits them unqualified, as being more effective. As an instance of this sort, it has been noticed in the body of the work, how he represents the end of the world, on different occasions, as the object exclusively of hope or fear, so that persons must needs pray for it or against it, long for its coming or its delay'.

One form in which this habit of mind shewed itself was his very mode of employing his wonted test of heresy-the "rule of faith." The "rule of faith" or body of Apostolic teaching committed to the Church, and concentrated in the Creeds, is as a whole inviolable, either by the Church or by individuals. What has been "delivered once for all" must in its minutest details remain to the end. What is really Apostolical, admits neither of increase nor diminution, without blame. Other things may be true so that they contradict it not, but they cannot form part of it, nor may be ranked with it, because they did not originally belong to it; and what did once belong to it, must, of course, to the end remain a part of it. The doctrine of the Millennium may be true, but cannot be part of that body of truth, because it was not so at the first; the Roman doctrine of Purgatory cannot be true, because it is at variance with the Apostolical tradition of Paradise and a state of rest for those departed in the faith and fear of Christ; the value of almsdeeds or fasting, however of late disparaged, must continue a part of Catholic truth, because it was such. But Tertullian's view of the "rule of faith" seems to have been narrowed by his exclusive consideration of those, to refute whose errors he applied it. These were such as violated it in very gross cases, denying the Creator of the world or the resurrection of the flesh. Against these he urged vividly the extent of their departure from the Apostolic rule, as using the Scriptures Apol. c. 31. p. 27. note u.

of God, but denying the God Whose they were; presupposing that, until themselves taught, Christians had not known, Who that Christ was, Whose Name they bore'. But in this way, he seems to have habituated himself to regard Apostolic tradition as identical with the "rule of faith" or the Creed, so that what did not contradict this, might, although held by the whole Church, be contradicted or corrected. This he lays down after the summary of the Apostles' Creed, which he gives as a Montanist'. "This law of faith remaining, all other matters of faith and conversation admit of the novelty of correction, the grace of God namely working and advancing, unto the end. For what a thing were it, that whereas the devil ever worketh and daily addeth to the inventions of iniquity, the work of God should either have ceased, or failed to advance!" and, again", he represents the Montanists as aggrieved, because blamed for new doctrines which did not touch on these points. "These raise disputes against the Paraclete; for this are the new prophecies rejected, not because Montanus and Priscilla and Maximilla preach another God, or annul Christ Jesus, or overthrow any rule of faith or hope, but because they teach to fast oftener than to marry ;" and, elsewhere, he distinctly lays down that no change in discipline can be heretical, except it flow from heresy in doctrine. "They reproach the discipline of single-marriage as a heresy. Nor are they reduced to deny the Paraclete so much on any ground, as that they think He is the Framer of a new discipline, and that most burdensome to them"-and then

de Præscr. c. 29.

de Virg. vel. c. 1. see more below in Notice on Prescription against Heretics," p. 434.

u de Jej. c. 1. add c. 11. "Undoubtedly heresy and false-prophecy will among us, who are all ministers [antistites] of One God, the Creator, and of His Christ, be judged such by differing as to the Godhead, and therefore I maintain this position unconcerned, leaving them to choose their own point of attack. Thou sayest, carnal one, it is the spirit of the devil.' How

then does it command duties to our God, to be offered to none but our God? Either maintain that the devil takes part with our God, or be Satan accounted the Paraclete."

de Monog. c. 2. see further p. 434. and init. where he distinguishes the 1) Catholics, 2) Montanists, 3) heretics. "The heretics take away, the Carnal heap up marriages.-But among us, whom the recognising of spiritual gifts rightly causes to be termed spiritual.-'