III. Reform Movements in the Church
did the Gnostics distinguish between pistis and gnostis? Are the Gnostic distinctions between the world and the kingdom of God, between good and evil, of an ethical nature? Is there anything in other systems corresponding to their doctrine of an unapproachable
God and intermediate beings? What lent Gnosticism its temporary popularity, its speculations or its esoteric religion? Why is Harnack hardly justified in speaking of the Gnostics as "the first Christian theologians"?
Literature: Burton, Heresies of the Apostolic Age; Mansel, The Gnostic Heresies of the First and Second Centuries; King, The Gnostics and their Remains; Lightfoot, Commentary on Colossians, pp. 73–113; Moody, The Mind of the Early Christians, pp. 148–203;
Scott, The Nicene Theology, pp. 87–133; Faulkner, Crises in the Early Church, pp. 9–51; Cunningham, Historical Theology I, pp. 121–
133; Neander, History of Christian Dogmas I, pp. 33–45; Harnack, History of Dogma I, pp. 222–265; Seeberg, History of Doctrine I, pp.
87–102; Otten, Manual of the History of Dogmas I, pp. 99–105; Shedd, History of Christian Doctrine I, pp. 105–117; Fisher, History of Christian Doctrine, pp. 48–58; Orr, Progress of Dogma, pp. 54–
70.
III. Reform Movements in the Church
1. MARCION AND HIS MOVEMENT OF REFORM
a. His character and purpose. Marcion was a native of Pontus (Sinope), who was driven from his home, so it seems, on account of adultery, and made his way to Rome about the year 139 A. D. He is represented as a man of deep earnestness and marked ability, who labored in the spirit of a reformer. He first made the attempt to bring the Church to his way of thinking, and when he did not succeed in his work of reform, felt constrained to organize his followers into a separate church and to seek universal acceptance of his views by
active propaganda. He has often been classed as a Gnostic, but the correctness of this classification is now doubted. Loofs says that the statement of Hahn, "Marcion perperam gnosticus vocatur, is to the point, since Marcion had a soteriological rather than a cosmological purpose, faith rather than knowledge occupied the most important place in his system, he did not work out oriental myths nor Greek philosophical problems, and excluded allegorical interpretations.
This is in general agreement with the statement of Harnack, who says that he should not be classed with Gnostics like Basilides and Vanlentinus and gives the following reasons for his opinion: " (1) He was guided by no metaphysical, also by no apologetical, but only by a purely soteriological interest, (2) he therefore placed the whole emphasis upon the pure Gospel and upon faith (not upon knowledge), (3) he did not employ philosophy—at least not as a main principle—in his conception of Christianity, (4) he did not endeavor to found schools of philosophers, but to reform, in accordance with the true Pauline Gospel, the churches whose Christianity he believed to be legalistic (Judaistic) and who, as he thought, denied free grace.
When he failed in this, he formed a church of his own." Seeberg also singles him out for separate treatment. b. His main teachings. The great question for Marcion was how to relate the Old Testament to the New. He found the key to this problem in the Epistle to the Galatians, which speaks of a Judaistic opposition to Paul, and proceeded on the assumption that the other apostles shared in this. He became convinced that the Gospel was corrupted by commingling it with the law. So he set himself the task of separating the Jaw and the Gospel, and worked out his theory of opposites or antitheses. He accepted the Old Testament as the genuine revelation of the God of the Jews, but declared that He could not be the same as the God of the New Testament. He is the Creator of the world, but a God by no means perfect. He rules with rigour and justice, is full of wrath, and knows nothing of grace. However,
He is not opposed to the God of the New Testament as the principle of evil, but only as a lesser God.
The God of the New Testament, on the other hand, is good and merciful. He was unknown until the fifteenth year of Tiberias, when
He revealed Himself in Christ, who is often spoken of as the good God himself. Christ is not to be identified with the Old Testament
Messiah, since He does not answer to the prophetic delineations of the coming Redeemer. He came as the manifestation of the good
God, and did not defile Himself by taking on a real body, since He would take nothing from the kingdom of the Demiurge, but merely assumed an apparent body, in order to make Himself intelligible. He abrogated the law and all the works of the Demiurge, who for that reason secured His execution on the cross by the princes of the world. But because of the unreality of His body, the crucifixion did not harm Christ. He proclaimed the Gospel of love and of freedom from the law of the Old Testament God, thus opening a way of salvation for all who believe and even for the wicked in the nether world. It was understood, however, that the majority of mankind would perish by being consigned to the fire of the Demiurge. The good God does not punish them; He simply will not have them. That is His judgment on the wicked. Since Marcion believed that Paul was the only apostle who really understood the Gospel of Jesus Christ, he limited the canon of the New Testament to the Gospel of Luke and ten Epistles of the great Apostle of the Gentiles.
2. THE MONTANIST REFORMATION:
a. Its origin. While Montanism may be regarded as a reaction against the innovations of the Gnostics, it was itself also characterized by innovating tendencies. Montanus appeared in Phrygia about the year
150 A. D., and therefore his teaching is often called the Phrygian heresy. He and two women, Prisca and Maximilla, announced themselves as prophets. On the basis of the Gospel of John they held that the last and highest stage of revelation had been reached. The age of the Paraclete had come, and the Paraclete spoke through Montanus now that the end of the world was at hand. The revelations given through Montanus were mainly concerned with those things in which it seemed that the Scriptures were not sufficiently ascetic.
From this it would seem that the most essential element in Montanism was its legalistic asceticism. b. Its main teachings. According to Montanism the last period of revelation has opened with the coming of the Paraclete. Hence the present age is one of spiritual gifts and especially of prophecy.
Montanus and his co-laborers are regarded as the last of the prophets, bringing new revelations. On the whole the Montanists were orthodox and accepted the rule of faith. They strongly emphasized the nearness of the end of the world, and in view of this insisted on strict moral requirements, such as celebacy (or at most a single marriage), fasting, and rigid moral discipline. They unduly exalted martyrdom and absolutely forbade flight from persecution.
Moreover, they revealed a tendency to exalt the special charisms in the Church at the expense of the regular offices and officers. While
Marcion appealed especially to the writings of Paul, Montanus sought support more particularly in the Gospel and Epistles of John. c. Its reception in the Church. The Church was placed in a somewhat embarrassing position by Montanism. On the one hand it represented the orthodox position over against the speculations of the Gnostics, and as such deserved appreciation. And in view of the Scriptural emphasis on the nearness of the end of the world, on the great importance of the charismatic gifts, particularly prophecy, and on the necessity of keeping oneself unspotted from the world—it is not difficult to understand that many regarded it with favor. On the other hand the Church followed a true instinct in rejecting it, especially because of the fanaticism it involved and its claim to a higher revelation than that contained in the New Testament.
Questions for Further Study: Why is Marcion often ranked as a Gnostic? In what respects does he differ from the Gnostics? What contrasts dominate all his teachings? What objections did he have to most of the New Testament writings? To what New Testament books is Marcion's canon limited? How did the Church indirectly profit by the Marcionite controversy? What factors gave rise to Montanism?