“After me there will be no prophet more, but the consummation.”
Attributed to Maximilla; quoted by Epiphanius, Panarion 48.2.4 (trans. Frank Williams)
The Paraclete has come to speak through the New Prophecy, giving the church revelation it must obey beyond what the apostles delivered.
This is a serious error, not a heresy. It does not deny the Gospel or the God it reveals, but it departs from Scripture and needs correction (Acts 18:24–26).
Where It Began
Montanism began in Phrygia, a rural region of central Asia Minor in what is now Turkey, during the second half of the second century. Its followers called it simply the New Prophecy. Opponents called it the heresy of the Phrygians, and later writers named it after its founder.
Our earliest account comes from an anonymous critic quoted by Eusebius. He reports that a recent convert named Montanus, at a village called Ardabau, fell into a frenzy and began to speak strange words, claiming that the Spirit was speaking through him. Two women, Priscilla and Maximilla, left their husbands to join him and prophesied in the same ecstatic manner.
Montanus gave the name Jerusalem to Pepuza and Tymion, two small towns in Phrygia, and urged believers to gather there. According to his critic Apollonius, he also organized the collection of gifts and paid salaries to those who preached his message. The prophets' oracles were written down and read as the Spirit's latest word to the churches.
Ancient sources disagree. Epiphanius dates Montanus's first prophecies to about 157; Eusebius's Chronicle points to about 172. Many historians settle near 170, though some argue for the 160s. Either way, the movement arose within about a century of the apostles.
Nearly everything we know comes from the movement's opponents, preserved by Eusebius and Epiphanius, along with the sympathetic writings of Tertullian and a handful of surviving oracles. Historians read the hostile reports with care, but the central claims of the movement are clear.
Montanist congregations refused the bishops' growing authority and laxity and stood apart as separatist churches, and older Baptist histories count them among the free churches. Theologica places them on the free-churches side of the timeline. But they were not accurate in every doctrine. Their claim that the Paraclete spoke new, binding revelation through their prophets was a serious error, which is why this profile remains among the errors. Separatists were not perfect, and the line is sometimes muddy.
The People Involved
Loading the rest of this profile
Why This Is Dangerous
It claims new, binding revelation beyond what the apostles delivered, which in practice sets a prophet's voice above the apostles' word. Once that door is open, anyone can claim to speak for God, but the faith was once delivered unto the saints (Jude 1:3).