Different Visions

Ἑγένετο δὲ ἐπ' αὐτον ἔκστασις , καὶ θεωρεῖ τὸν οὐρανὸν ἀνεωγμένον... Οἱ γυναικῶν παραπαιουσῶν ἑλόμενοι εἶναι μαθηταὶ, οὗτοι δὲ εἰσιν οἱ ἀπὸ τῆς Φρυγίας, φασὶ τοὺς προφήτας, κατεχομένους ὑπὸ τοῦ ἁγίου Πνεύματος, μὴ παρακολουθεῖν ἑαυτοῖς παραφερομένοις κατὰ τὸν τῆς προφητείας καιρόν. Δοκοῦσι δὲ ἀπόδειξιν ἔχειν ταύτης τῆς κακοδοξίας, καὶ ἐκ τῆς προκειμένης γραφῆς, λεγούσης ἐξεστακέναι τὸν Πέτρον. Ἀλλ᾽ ἴστωσαν οἱ ἡλίθιοι, οἱ ἀληθῶς παραπαίοντες, ὡς πολλὰ σημαίνει ἡ λέξις αὕτη. Δηλοῖ γὰρ καὶ τὴν ἐπὶ θαυμασμῷ ἔκπληξιν, καὶ τὸ ἔξω τῶν αἰσθητῶν γενέσθαι , ποδηγούμενον ἐπὶ τὰ πνευματικά, καὶ τὸ παρακόπτειν, ὅπερ οὐ λεκτέον οὔτε ἐπὶ Πέτρου, οὔτε ἐπὶ προφητῶν, ἀλλὰ τὰ ἄλλα ἐκ τῆς λέξεως σημαινόμενα. Ἀμέλει γοῦν ὁ ἐκστὰς Πέτρος παρηκολούθει, ὡς ἀπαγγέλλων, ἃ εἶδε καὶ ἤκουσε , καὶ τίνος σύμβολατὰ δειχθέντα ἦν. Ταῦτα καὶ περὶ τῶν προφητῶν πάντων ἐρεῖς παρακολουθούντων , οἷς ἔλεγον τὰ θεωρούμενα. Σοφοὶ γὰρ ἦσαν νοοῦντες ἀπὸ τοῦ ἰδίου στόματος, ἃ προέφερον, τοῦ Κυρίου μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν φανερῶς ἐντειλαμένου μαθητεῦσαι πάντα τὰ ἔθνη. Ἢ πῶς οἱ ἐν Ἱεροσολύμοις ἀπόστολοι ἀκούσαντες τὰ κατὰ τὸν Κορνήλιον, διεκρίνοντο πρὸς τὸν Πέτρον; Πάνυ μὲν οὖν ἐδεῖτο τῆς περὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν θείας ἀποκαλύψεως ὁ τῶν ἀποστόλων ἔξαρχος, Πέτρος, ὁ παν άγιος. Δίδυμος Αλεξανδρεύς, Ἐις Τάς Πράξεις Τῶν Ἀποστόλων, Ἐκλογή Source: Migne PG 39.1677a-c

And an ecstasy came on Peter, and he saw the heavens opened... 1 Those who delight to be disciples of maddened women, who are of the Phrygian sect, 2 say their prophetesses are carried off by the Holy Spirit when they are struck by the prophetic impulse and they do not understand what the say at the time, and in this passage in Scripture they think to find a demonstration of their error, for it says that Peter was struck by an ecstasy of the mind. But let it be known by these fools, who are truly despicable, that these words do not mean that, for what they do signify is an awe arising from wonder, and from being lifted up from sensible things to spiritual things. It is not fitting to say of Peter or the prophets that this is some sort of delirium, but rather this passage signifies something quite different. Certainly Peter, caught up in ecstasy, followed everything and took in all that he saw and heard, and knew what was taught there, which things were given to him to see. And you might say the same of all the things of the prophets, that is, because of which they were able to tell others what they saw. For they were wise, knowing what they said with their mouths, which the Lord after His resurrection was able to teach correctly, so that all the nations would be imbued with His teaching. Besides how would the other Apostles who were in Jerusalem, hearing what had happened with Cornelius, have been able to question Peter? This was the type of revelation concerning the Gentiles Peter had, the leader of the Apostles, a most holy man. Didymus the Blind, Commentary on The Acts of the Apostles, Fragment 1 Acts 10.10-11 2 Montanists

Against The Montanists

Τῆς δὲ κατὰ Φρύγας καλουμένης αἱρέσεως καὶ Ἀπολλώνιος, ἐκκλησιαστικὸς συγγραφεύς, ἀκμαζούσης εἰς ἔτι τότε κατὰ τὴν Φρυγίαν ἔλεγχον ἐνστησάμενος, ἴδιον κατ’ αὐτῶν πεποίηται σύγγραμμα, τὰς μὲν φερομένας αὐτῶν προφητείας ψευδεῖς οὔσας κατὰ λέξιν εὐθύνων, τὸν δὲ βίον τῶν τῆς αἱρέσεως ἀρχηγῶν ὁποῖός τις γέγονεν, διελέγχων· αὐτοῖς δὲ ῥήμασιν περὶ τοῦ Μοντανοῦ ταῦτα λέγοντος ἄκουε· ἀλλὰ τίς ἐστιν οὗτος ὁ πρόα· φατὸς διδάσκαλος , τὰ ἔργα αὐτοῦ καὶ ἡ διδασκαλία δείκνυσιν. οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ διδάξας λύαεις γάμων, ὁ νηστείας νομοθετήσας, ὁ Πέπουζαν καὶ Τύμιον Ἱερουσαλὴμ ὀνομάσας πόλεις δ’ εἰσὶν αὗται μικραὶ τῆς Φρυγίας, τοὺς πανταχόθεν ἐκεῖ συναγαγεῖν ἐθέλων ὁπρακτῆρας χρημάτων καταστήσας, ὁ ἐπ’ ὀνόματι προσφορῶν τὴν δωροληψίαν ἐπιτεχνώμενος, ὁ σαλάρια χορηγῶν τοῖς κηρύσσουσιν αὐτοῦ τὸν λόγον, ἵνα διὰ τῆς γαατριμαργίας ἡ διδασκαλία τοῦ λόγου κρατύνηται.” Καὶ ταῦτα μὲν περὶ τοῦ Μοντανοῦ· καὶ περὶ τῶν προφητίδων δὲ αὐτοῦ ὑποκαταβὰς οὕτω γράφει· δείκνυμεν οὖν αὐτὰς πρώτας τὰς προφήτιδας ταύτας, ἀφ’ οὗ τοῦ πνεύματος ἐπληρώθησαν, τοὺς ἄνδρας καταλιπούσας . πῶς οὖν ἐψεύδοντο Πρίσκιλλαν παρθένον ἀποκαλοῦντες;  Εἶτ’ ἐπιφέρει λέγων·  δοκεῖ σοῖ πᾶσα γραφὴ κωλύειν προφήτην λαμβάνειν δῶρα καὶ χρήματα; ὅταν οὖν ἴδω τὴν προφῆτιν εἰληφυῖαν καὶ χρυσὸν καὶ ἄργυρον καὶ πολυτελεῖς ἐσθῆτας, πῶς αὐτὴν μὴ παραιτήαωμαι. Αὖθις δ᾿ ὑποκαταβὰς περί τινος τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτοὺς ὁμολογητῶν ταῦτά φησιν·  ἔτι δὲ καὶ Θεμίσων, ὁ τὴν ἀξιόπιστον πλεονεξίαν ἠμφιεσμένος, ὁ μὴ βαστάσας τῆς ὁμολογίας τὸ σημεῖον, ἀλλὰ πλήθει χρημάτων ἀποθέμενος τὰ δεσμά, δέον ἐπὶ τούτῳ ταπεινοφρονεῖν, ὡς μάρτυς καυχώμενος, ἐτόλμησεν, μιμούμενος τὸν ἀπόστολον, καθολικήν τινα συνταξάμενος ἐπιστολῄν, κατηχεῖν μὲν τοὺς ἄμεινον αὐτοῦ πεπιστευκότας , συναγωνίζεσθαι δὲ τοῖς τῆς κενοφωνίας λόγοις, βλασφημῆσαι δὲ εἰς τὸν Κύριον καὶ τοὺς ἀποστόλους καὶ τὴν ἁγίαν ἐκκληαίαν. Καὶ περὶ ἑτέρου δὲ αὖθις τῶν κατ᾿ αὐτοὺς τετιμημένων ὡς δὴ μαρτύρων οὕτω γράφει· ἵνα δὲ μὴ περὶ πλειόνων λέγωμεν, ἡ προφῆτις ἡμῖν εἰπάτω τὰ κατὰ Ἀλέξανδρον, τὸν λέγοντα ἑαυτὸν μάρτυρα, ᾧ συνεστιᾶται, ᾧ προσκυνοῦσιν καὶ αὐτῷ πολλοί· οὗ τὰς λῃστείας καὶ τὰ ἄλλα τολμήματα ἐφ᾿ οἷς κεκόλασται, οὐχ ἡμᾶς δεῖ λέγειν, ἀλλὰ ὁ ὀπισθόδομος ἔχει. τίς οὖν τίνι χαρίζεται τὰ ἁμαρτήματα; πότερον ὁ προφήτης τὰς λῃστείας τῷ μάρτυρι ἢ ὁ μάρτυς τῷ προφήτη τὰς πλεονεξίας; εἰρηκότος γὰρ τοῦ Κυρίου μὴ κτήσησθε χρυσὸν μήτε ἄργυρον μηδὲ δύο χιτῶνας, οὗτοι πᾶν τοὐναντίον πεπλημμελήκασιν περὶ τὰς τούτων τῶν ἀπηγορευμένων κτήσεις. δείξομεν γὰρ τοὺς λεγομένους παρ᾿ αὐτοῖς προφήτας καὶ μάρτυρας μὴ μόνον παρὰ πλουσίων, ἀλλὰ καὶ παρὰ πτωχῶν καὶ ὀρφανῶν καὶ χηρῶν κερματιζομένους. Καὶ εἰ πεποίθησιν ἔχουσιν, στήτωσαν ἐν τούτῳ καὶ διορισάσθωσαν ἐπὶ τούτοις, ἵνα ἐὰν ἐλεγχθῶσιν, κἂν τοῦ λοιποῦ παύσωνται πλημμελοῦντες. δεῖ γὰρ τοὺς καρποὺς δοκιμάζεσθαι τοῦ προφήτου· ἀπὸ γὰρ τοῦ καρποῦ τὸ ξύλον γινώσκεται. Ἵνα δὲ τοῖς βουλομένοις τὰ κατὰ Ἀλέξανδρον ἦ γνώριμα, κέκριται ὑπὸ Αἰμιλίου Φροντίνου ἀνθυπάτου ἐν Ἐφέσῳ, οὐ διὰ τὸ ὄνομα, ἀλλὰ δι’ ἃς ἐτόλμησεν λῃστείας, ὢν ἤδη παραβάτης· εἶτ’ ἐπιψευσάμενος τῷ ὀνόματι τοῦ Κυρίου, ἀπολέλυται, πλανήσας τοὺς ἐκεῖ πιστούς, καὶ ἡ ἰδία παροικία αὐτόν, ὅθεν ἢν, οὐκ ἐδέξατο διὰ τὸ εἶναι αὐτὸν λῃστήν, καὶ οἱ θέλοντες μαθεῖν τὰ κατ’ αὐτὸν ἔχουσιν τὸ τῆς Ἀσίας δημόσιον ἀρχεῖον· ὅν ὁ προφήτης συνόντα πολλοῖς ἔτεσιν ἀγνοεῖ. Τοῦτον ἐλέγχοντες ἡμεῖς, δι’ αὐτοῦ καὶ τὴν ὑπόστασιν ἐξελέγχομεν τοῦ προφήτου. Τὸ ὅμοιον ἐπὶ πολλῶν δυνάμεθα ἀποδεῖξαι, καὶ εἰ θαρροῦσιν, ὑπομεινάτωσαν τὸν ἔλεγχον. Πάλιν τε αὗ ἐν ἑτέρῳ τόπῳ τοῦ συγγράμματος περὶ ὧν αὐχοῦσι προφητῶν ἐπιλέγει ταῦτα·  ἐὰν ἀρνῶνται δῶρα τοὺς προφήτας αὐτῶν εἰληφέναι, τοῦθ’ ὁμολογησάτωσαν ὅτι ἐὰν ἐλεγχθῶσιν εἰλγφότες, οὐκ εἰσὶ προφῆται, καὶ μυρίας ἀποδείξεις τούτων παραστήσομεν. ἀναγκαῖον δέ ἐστιν πάντας καρποὺς δοκιμάζεσθαι προφήτου. προφήτης, εἰπέ μοι, βάπτεται; προφήτης στιβίζεται; προφήτης Φιλοκοσμεῖ; προφήτης τάβλαις καὶ κύβοις παίζει; προφήτης δανείζει; ταῦτα ὁμολογησάτωσαν πότερον ἔξεστιν ἢ μή, ἐγὼ δ’ ὅτι γέγονεν παρ’ αὐτοῖς, δείξω. Εὐσέβιος ὁ Καισάρειος, Ὑπομνηματα Ἐις Τους ψαλμους, ψαλμος ϟΗ' Source:  Migne PG 20.476a-480b

Against the heresy named the Phrygian which was thriving in Phrygia at that time, Apollonius also, an ecclesiastical writer, undertook to refute it, and wrote a special work against them, correcting in detail the false prophecies among them and reproving the life of the founders of the heresy. But hear his words about Montanus: But who this fellow is who is first among them let the word of his doctrine and his actions and his teaching show. He is the one who taught the dissolution of marriage, who made laws for fasting, who named Pepuza and Tymion, little towns in Phrygia, Jerusalem, wishing to gather people there from all directions, who established collectors of money; who under the name of offerings contrived the receiving of gifts, who provided salaries for those who preached his way, that through gluttony the teaching might prevail. So the things he says about Montanus. A little after he writes as follows concerning his prophetesses:  We show that these first prophetesses themselves, from the moment they were filled with the spirit, abandoned their husbands. Why, then, do they lie calling Priscilla a virgin? Afterwards he says:  Does it not appear to you that all Scripture forbids a prophet from receiving gifts and money? When, then, I see the prophetess receiving gold and silver and expensive garments, how should I not admonish her? And again a little after he says these things about one of their confessors: So also Themiso, who was clothed with plausible covetousness, could not endure the sign of confession, but for an abundance of possessions laid off his bonds, and not being humbled by it, dared to boast himself a martyr, and imitating the Apostle, he composed a certain 'catholic epistle', to catechise those whose faith was better than his own, contending with words of empty noise and blaspheming against the Lord and the Apostles and the holy Church. And again about others who receive honour among them as martyrs, he writes this: That we do not speak excessively, let the prophetess tell us of Alexander, who called himself a martyr, with whom she feasts, and who is revered by many. We need not speak about his robberies and other daring deeds for which he was punished, for the public archives contain them. Which of these overlooks the sins of the other? The prophet the robberies of the martyr, or the martyr the covetousness of the prophet? For although the Lord said, 'Provide neither gold, nor silver, neither two coats,' 1 these men are in utter opposition to the possession of the things forbidden. For we will show that those who are called prophets and martyrs among them, not only from the rich, but also from the poor and orphans and widows gather their wealth. And if they have the confidence let them stand up and debate these things, that if convicted they may then cease their errors. One must test the fruits of the prophet, 'for the tree is known by its fruit.' 2 But that those who wish may have knowledge of Alexander, he was judged by Aemilius Frontinus, proconsul at Ephesus, not because of the Name, but because of the robberies which he had committed, being then an apostate, but later, having falsely declared for the name of the Lord, he was released, having deceived the faithful there, and his own parish, from which he was, did not receive him because he was a robber, and those who wish to learn about him may consult the public records of Asia, and yet the prophet with whom he has spent many years knows nothing about him! Convicting him, through him we convict also the nature of the prophet. We could expose similar things in many others. But if they are confident, let them endure the test. Again, in another part of the work he speaks these things of the prophets of whom they boast: If they deny that their prophets have received gifts, let them confess this: that if they are convicted of receiving them, they are not prophets. And we will set forth a multitude of proofs of this. But it is necessary that all the fruits of a prophet should be tested. Tell me, does a prophet dye his hair? Does a prophet paint his eyelids? Does a prophet delight in adornment? Does a prophet play at tables and dice? Does a prophet lend on usury? Let them confess whether these things are lawful or not; I will show that they have been done by them. Eusebius of Caesarea, Ecclesiastial History, from Book 5, Chap 18 1 Mt 10.9-10 2 Mt 12.33