B. Montanism, the Great Mother and the Virgin Mary

Thus there appeared in Asia Minor in the middle of the second century a Christian movement characteristized by intense apoca­lypticism, ecstasy, morals bordering on asceticism, and emphasis on the role of women.

Except for the apocalyptic hope for the descent of the new Jerusalem, all major distinctive marks of the pagan cult of Cybele reappear in Montanism. Both were highly emotional religions built on faith, not reason. Tertullian made the famous statement that human wisdom corrupts and the Christian needs no further inquiry after enjoying the gospel. “Away with all attempts to pro­duce a mottled Christianity of Stoic, Platonic, and dialectic com­position!... With our faith we desire no further belief!”^{[452] [453] Such blind faith, expressing itself in total dedication to the respective objects of faith, was characteristic of the followers of Magna Mater as well. They, too, were very pious, devoted people who could undergo much physical inconvenience, such as fasting, in the fulfillment of their religious obligations, they observed the deco­rated tree in their sanctuary and sincerely mourned the death of their god and just as sincerely rejoiced in his resurrection. The Montanists’ fasts and xerophagies and their rejection of bodily comforts suggest a joyless people. If they followed Tertullian’s advice to abstain from all forms of secular entertainment and to concentrate always on their religion,[454] they must have been a dark and sinister looking group. In Cybele’s worship, such total dedication and highly pitched emotion, induced by music, dance and mass frenzy, drove some to the ultimate dedication, that is, self-emasculation. This does not seem to have been practiced by the Montanists, although Montanus himself may have been an emasculated man.}

At this point we should recall the night preceding the Hilaria when mysteries took place concerning which we have very little information.^[457] Clement’s reference to some kind of “bedroom” experience indicates a possible mystical union with the divine consummated in a Hieros Gamos or sacred intercourse such as we discussed in connection with the cult of Dionysus.^[458] In this light, consider the report by Epiphanius of a Montanist vision: “These Quintillians or Priscillans say that in Pepuza either Quintilia or Priscilla, I cannot say exactly which, one of them, as I said, lay down to sleep and Christ came to her and slept with her in this

way, as this misled woman said, ‘in the shape of a woman (έν ιδέα γυναικός) Christ came to me dressed in a shining robe he put wisdom into my heart and revealed to me that this place is holy and that Jerusalem will descend from heaven here!’”^[459] Did this prophetess have an experience of “sacred marriage” with Christ? Do we have here a Montanist vestige of the “bedroom” mystery about which Clement wrote? To connect that mysterious event with the New Testament image of Christ as a bridegroom would be an easy step to take.^[460] Indeed, Tertullian admonished virgins with these words: “You are wedded to Christ, to Him you have surrendered your flesh, to him you have espoused your maturi­ty.”^[461] Again he said: “You are wedded to Christ: to Him you have surrendered your body; act as becomes your Husband’s disci­pline.”^[462] Christ as the husband of the virgin who dedicated her life to him became a popular image during the Middle Ages, which also left many testimonies of ascetic women who had mystic visions involving Christ.

The report of Epiphanius does not make clear whether there were two, or only one such appearance of Christ. If there were two, then he first came and “slept with” the prophetess in a holy marriage and later gave a prophecy. If there was only one appearance, then, according to Epiphanius’ report, Jesus “slept with” the prophetess “in the shape of a woman.” In any case, it seems clear that the revelation about Pepuza was given by a female figure. Now, about the same time this vision is alleged to have taken place, another was reported by Hermas in Cumae. He saw in sleep the vision of a lady who gave him a revelation and he naturally associated this woman with the Sybil of Cumae,^[464] who was venerated at that place. If the dream of the Montanist prophetess was similar to that of Hermas, then the ιδέα γυναικός that the prophetess in Pepuza saw may have also been a local goddess who was worshipped at that place^[465] and was known to give oracles just like the Sybil. In the mind of the prophetess, permeated with the love of Christ, this goddess was transformed into Christ, just as the Sybil of Cumae became the symbol of the “church” for Hermas.

We find a parallel to this prophecy in the teaching of the Gnostic heretic, Marcus, as preserved by his adversary, Irenaeus: “He declared that the infinitely exalted Tetrad descended upon him from the invisible and indescribable places in the form of a woman (for the world could not have borne it coming in its male form) and expounded to him alone its own nature and the origin of all things...”^[467] In the next section we are told that the Tetrad said: “I wish to show you Aletheia (=Truth) herself, for I have brought her down from the dwellings above...”^[468] Marcus, who was also active about the middle of the second century, used here concepts and even words similar to those of the Montanist prophetess: the “Tetrad” descended upon him in the form of a woman and revealed Truth (i.e. Wisdom). Now, the curious thing is that Marcus was active in the Rhone valley, which had a I large population of Greek speaking people from the Near East. Irenaeus was their bishop. Among these Christians we can detect certain Montanist traits such as eagerness for martyrdom and chiliastic tendencies.^[469] We also learn from Irenaeus that Marcus accorded an unusually important role to women in his ministry. Irenaeus speaks of this in very much the same way that “ortho­dox” critics, such as Eusebius and Epiphanius, speak about the Montanists: these women were “deluded” by Marcus, they are wretched women driven to madness, and Marcus even imparted to them his demon of prophecy.

Behold, my Charis has descended upon thee; open thy mouth and prophesy. On the women replaying “I have never at any time prophesied, nor do I know how to prophesy”, then, engaging, for the second time, in certain invocations, so as to astound his deluded victim, he says to her Open thy mouth, speak whatsoever occurs to thee, and thou shalt prophesy.

The gift of prophecy was not conferred by Marcus upon men. Thus, some Montanist elements may have found their way into Gnostic thinking and it is an intriguing thought that the emphatic part given to women in the process of salvation by many later Gnostic systems^[471] may have had some Montanist roots. But since Marcus and the Montanist prophetesses were contemporaries, an influence of one on the other is not certain. The possibility must be left open that they drank from the same fountain and inas­much as their ecstatic experiences resemble each other so closely, that common fountain may have been in Asia Minor.

Epiphanius’ reference to the bedroom experience of the prophe­tess may become clearer if we compare it with similar expe­riences of pagans. Classical literature offers several examples of persons being “filled with god” through an act of intercourse in which the divine was believed to enter the human. Herodotus indicated that this was the case in Babylon, in Thebes, and in Patara: before giving oracles the women in these temples slept with the god.^[472] This was the popular belief concerning the Pythia in Delphi; Origen and Chrysostom report that the traditional explanation of her prophetic frenzy was that Apollo entered her through her private parts as she sat on the tripod.^[473] In the temple of Larisa in Corinth, says Pausanias, Apollo speakes through a woman, “who is kept from the beds of men”; once in each month “a ewe-lamb is slaughtered at night, she tastes its blood, and the god possesses her.”^[474] Like early Christian virgins and medieval nuns, this woman was forbidden sexual relations with a man because she was married to Apollo.

Montanists were radical Christians who took their faith seriously. This led them to the acceptance of martyrdom even more eagerly than other Christians. An example of this eagerness is Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who died a martyr’s death in 155 or 156. We take note again of the location of Smyrna, not far from the center of Montanism, and of the year of the bishop’s marty- dom, which may coincide with the appearance of Montanus. Whether Polycarp was in any way under the influence of the emerging “new prophecy” — which may be older than Monta­nus himself—our sources do not say, but the written account of his execution, the “Martydom of Polycarp,” contains a reference to Quintus, “a Phyrgian” who encouraged others, in addition to himself, to give themselves up voluntarily. “Phrygian” usually refers to adherents of Montanus and thus Quintus may have been a Christian enthusiast who sought martyrdom.^[475] In the same report we read that along with Polycarp “twelve others from Philadelphia” also died; again, the location of Philadelphia brings us into the neighborhood where the “new prophecy” flourished.^[476] We also read in Eusebius^[477] that the Christians of Lyons and Vienne made a record of their sufferings and sent it to “the brethren in Asia Minor and Phrygia.” From this document we gather that some of the martyrs may have come from the Mon­tanist area of influence since some have Greek names. Such was Alexander, “a Phrygian by race and a physician by profession, who had lived in Gaul for many years and was known to almost everyone for his love toward God and boldness of speech, (for he was not without a share of the apostolic gift)...”^[478] This “apostolic gift” must have been the gift of the Holy Spirit, for Alexander, too, was entheos and his image, as it appears in the report of Eusebius, strongly resembles that of a Montanist. The enthusiasm of the Montanists led them into extreme actions such as rigoristic fast­ing and ascetic morals. As the ultimate sacrifice they sought martyrdom, the final and complete renunciation of the world which they believed would unite them immediately with Christ. How different is this from the self- mutilation and bloody castra­tion of Cybele’s priests? Both were driven by frenzy, and what the Galli did in their supreme sacrifice in order to be united with their goddess, the Montanists did through martyrdom. The abuse of their bodies, especially their sexual continence, was a bloodless castration; in martyrdom the element of blood was not missing.^[479] It is no surprise, then, to learn that Asia Minor was the place where the word “martyr,” which originally meant simply some­one who testified or witnessed, received the coloring it later had in Christian usage. Asia Minor was the place where the traditio­nal Christian concept of martyrdom first developed.^[480]

In Montanism many elements which appeared in the cults of Magna Mater or Cybele and of Dionysus were adapted and accommodated. In all three, religious experiences shared several characteristic manifestations which distinguished them from other cults. One of these was enthusiasm, that is, the feeling of being entheos, filled with god, and the desire to be absorbed into god in a mystical union. Enthusiasm led to hallucinations and prophecy, ecstatic experience of the divine. All three cults were open to both men and women and a “bedroom-experience” may have been a part of each of them. In addition, all three demon­strate masochistic tendencies, ranging from the extreme of self- mutilation to that of sexual abstention. Of course, the worship of Magna Mater was very much alive when Montanism flourished and the two religions existed side by side for a long time. This is not a unique phenomenon, for there are many examples of such influences being absorbed by one religion from another. This happened, and is still happening today to Christianity in the South American countries; it happened to nineteenth century Judaism in Germany. It also happened to “orthodox” Christianity during the second and third centuries when it attempted to pre­sent itself to the Roman world in Greco-Roman categories. And so we find that the religious inclination and mentality of the peoples of Asia Minor that created and nurtured the cult of Cybele also created in Montanism a form of Christianity that reflected that Cybelene spirit. Our scant references indicate that even the worship services of the Montanists showed the influence of the pagan cult. As we have seen, Epiphanius reported that the Mon­tanists carried torches in their services, prophesied, shed tears, and made everyone weep “as if they were in penitential mourn­ing and by their behavior were mourning the fate of men.” Is this not similar to the pagan service of The Arbor Intrat on March 22? When the pagans wept for Attis, they indeed bemoaned the “fate of men”; they struggled with the same problem of life and death and they, too, found their answer in salvation by divine inter­vention. To say to this, as the Christian critics of Magna Mater said, “Yes, but the pagans are motivated by evil demons and Christians are not,” is not a very convincing argument. We must accept the probability that in Montanism Christianity absorbed significant elements from the pagan cult of Magna Mater.^[481]

But it would be incorrect to classify Montanism as a pagan religion, as if it were an offshoot of the cult of Magna Mater. That was not at all the case. Montanism was a Christian movement, although perhaps a deviant one, which absorbed not only pagan customs. J. Messingberd Ford, in a well researched article^[482] attempted to show that the decisive influence on Montanism, in its original Phrygian and later North African form, came from Judaism. Inclusion of women in the clergy, weeping at worship services, and many other elements that we find peculiar to Mon- tanism could be found in Judaism. “The rather heterodox Jewish background of Asia Minor, especially of Phrygia, provided mate­rial and practices which Montanism could adopt,” Professor Ford claims." This is certainly true, but it does not explain why other heterodox forms of Judaism, such as that in Alexandria, to take one example, did not influence Christianity and bring about a Montanist movement. It seems that Montanism, with its distin­guishing characteristics, could arise only in Asia Minor. Never­theless, Montanism did not grow out of the cult of Cybele; had that been the case, it would have been simply another pagan cult.

Montanism was a Christian movement which developed from the same Christianity in Asia Minor which produced the book of Revelation. Many scholars now regard Revelation as the most immediate basis of Montanism.^{[483] [484] Revelation is a “mighty pro­phecy”[485] in which prophets and prophetic word and work are emphasized[486]; ecstatic visions abound[487]; the second coming of Jesus is presented as an immediate and urgent message[488]; the descent of the heavenly Jerusalem is predicted.[489] Steadfastness in the faith is commanded,[490] martyrdom is elevated to the highest honor,[491] and a thousand year rule of Christ (millenarianism) is predicted.[492] In Revelation 14.4 we even have a reference to a hundred and forty four thousand men “who have not defiled themselves with women, for they are chaste;... and in their mouth no lie was found, for they are spotless.” And of course it is in Revelation 12 that we find that exalted figure of a woman “clothed with the sun.” Since Revelation was written during the last decade of the first century, our conclusion is that as early as that time elements appeared in the Christian churches of Asia Minor which were later recognizable in Montanism. We re­member also, that all seven churches to which the letters were addressed in chapters 2-3: Ephesus, Smyrna, Pergamum, Thya­tira, Sardis, Philadelphia, Laodicea, were all in the neighborhood of Phyrgia where Montanism originated. Not much later, some­where around 110-117 A.D, Ignatius, the bishop of Antioch, was transported through Asia Minor as a prisoner, to be executed in Rome. On his journey he wrote letters to the congregations in Ephesus, Philadelphia, Smyrna, Magnesia, Tralles, Rome, and to Polycarp. These cities, with the exception of Rome, are also in the same region, and in these letters, words, expressions and para­phrases can be found which turn up also in Montanist litera­ture.[493] It was Christianity in Asia Minor that produced Monta­nism. That Christianity, however, was already permeated with the spirit characteristic of that region. In the earliest form of Christianity, as reflected in the book of Revelation, the letters of Ignatius, and similar documents, we can feel the heartbeat of the peoples who came to the church via the mysteries of the Great Mother. These Christians or their parents may have been at one time devotees of the pagan mysteries; if not, they were certainly exposed to their influence, and they brought these ideas with them when they were converted.}

The mainstream church later accused the Montanists of various crimes. Apollonius, whose anti-Montanist book was used extensively by Eusebius,^[494] accused them of covetousness and robbery, and described the prophets as appearing like the “galli” of Cybele: “If they deny that their prophets have taken gifts, let them admit this, that if they have been convicted, they are not true prophets, and we will give countless proofs of this. But it is necessary to test all the fruits of a prophet. Tell me, does a prophet dye his hair? Does he pencil his eyelids? Does he love orna­ments? Does he gamble and dice? Does he lend money? Let them state whether these things are right or not, and I will show that they have been done among them.”^[495] Cyril of Jerusalem (died 386) said that Montanus “cut the throats of wretched little chil­dren, and chopped them up into unholy food, for the purpose of their so-called mysteries,”^[496] thus repeating an old charge against the Christians generally.^[497] Eusebius, who certainly cannot be accused of covering up the Montanists’ shortcomings, mentions nothing about this charge, which can be safely classified as slander. Of more interest is a short and often neglected remark of Epiphanius who says that the Montanists are also called “Ar/o/y- ritai because in their mysteries they offer bread (άρτος) and cheese (τυρός)...”^[498] In an agricultural society these are essential staples of life-sustaining food. If the Montanists indeed used these elements in their Eucharist, they again paid reverence to the Great Mother who was the protectress of both plant and animal fertility.

Perhaps as the Montanists were driven out of the “orthodox” fold they reverted more to their pagan roots and adopted more ideas associated with Cybele. Thus they may have put more emphasis on the feminine character of God, leading Epiphanius to report that “they give thanks to Eve, because she first ate from the tree of knowledge.”^[499] In the same breath Epiphanius also says that they honored the sister of Moses^[500] as a prophetess, as they did the four daughters of Philip the evangelist^[501] who were unmarried and prophesied. Thus it is conceivable that the Montanists even­tually elevated Mary to a position of prominence in their faith. But our sources about this are late and unreliable. Under the name of the Syrian bishop Maruta of Maipherkat (died ca. 420) a catalog of heresies was preserved^[502] which lists the Montanists, who intro­duced “unbecoming speech” (indecora dicta), falsified the Scrip­tures, observed four fasts per year, each lasting forty days, and “they call the blessed Mary divine (Div am)” \ they say that an archon united himself with her and so was the Son of God born of her. The report of the Syrian bishop is certainly not correct as far as original Montanism is concerned; they were, as we have seen, doctrinally quite orthodox. If they had been guilty of any such deviation, Eusebius and Epiphanius would have been delighted to report it. But whether later Montanism developed along these lines is a different question. Here, since we have no information, we must work with hypotheses. First, we remember that Eve and Mary were brought into relationship with each other as early as the second century by many “orthodox” authors,^[503] so a Monta­nist reference to Eve could just as naturally lead to Mary. But they arrived at this parallelism in a different way: for the “orthodox” Eve and Mary were in a direct line of the “history of salvation”, for the Montanists their association would have reflected an emphasis on the role of women in religion. The deepest roots of that emphasis reached back to the worship of the Great Mother, i.e., the religious life of Asia Minor which was centered around a feminine divinity. It is entirely possible that as Montanists be­came estranged from the mainstream church, uninstructed and simple believers in some remote Anatolian villages began to accord to Mary honors similar to those which their ancestors accorded to Cybele. This, of course, is only a hypothesis, but we do know that a Christian sect called the Philomarianites (Those who love Mary) did exist, and that in this sect priestesses celebrated the Eucharist and offered bread as sacrifice to Mary. Possibly they had Montanist roots. In any case, in that sect, too, the worship of the Mother Goddess resurfaced in Christianity. In our next chap­ter we shall investigate that sect, the Kollyridians.

Montanism faded out of Christian history but not without leaving its pronounced mark. This movement carried into Chris­tian thinking a dependence upon the inexhaustible power of the feminine aspect of God. Even today, without noticing it, every Christian is exposed to expressions of faith which would have seemed quite natural to followers of Cybele. Our Good Friday and Easter celebrations are held at the same time in the spring when pagan mourners lamented the death of Attis and rejoiced at his resurrection. The festival day of the Annunciation, when the angel Gabriel announced to Mary that she would conceive Jesus, is March 25, the day of the pagan Hilaria. This is exactly nine months before December 25, when Christians celebrate the birth of Jesus. March 25 is the spring equinox, when the days begin to grow longer than the nights and what the pagans celebrated in their spring festival, Christians celebrate by remembering the growth of the body of Jesus in the womb of Mary.^[504]

No wonder then, that many pagan temples, originally dedi­cated to Cybele or some other fertility goddess, became Christian churches. In Rome alone several churches now stand which replaced former pagan sanctuaries, among them Santa Maria Maggiore which was built on the Esquiline hill by Pope Sixtus III (432-440). Tradition has it that he built this church because Roman women were still going there to a temple of Juno Lucina, the great mother goddess who assisted women in childbirth.^[505] The building of this church was probably inspired by the Council of Ephesus in 431 when Mary was officially declared “Mother of God,” but whatever the case may be the new doctrine is amply illustrated by the church’s mosaics. Another church, the Santa Maria Sopra Minerva, was built in 1280 among the ruins of the temple of Minerva. Santa Maria Ara Coeli stands on the site of Juno Moneta. According to Christian legend, Emperor Augustus saw a vision of the Virgin Mary, clothed in light and carrying the baby Jesus in her arms, at this site and decided to build an altar, which he called Ara Coeli, the Altar of Heaven. The church is still the home of the Santo Bambino, the miracle working statue of the baby Jesus. Santa Maria in Trastevere and perhaps even the Pantheon may claim such distinguished heritage. The list could go on, but we must finish with the most important one, the center of Roman Catholic Christianity, St. Peter’s in the Vatican: on this site stood a sanctuary of Cybele and Attis, which was called the Phrygianum. Around it taurobolia were held and these were com­memorated by altars. The Vatican hill seemed to be favored by pagans for this purpose, in spite of the fact that the older temple of Cybele was on the Palatine hill.^[506] The temple on the Vatican probably dates from the second century A.D., i.e., prior to the Con- stantinian church erected there; the pagan temple was probably build by the Emperor Antoninus Pius.

But the story does not end here. In the thirteenth century A.D., a Muslim family, fleeing the Mongol invasion of Afghanistan, settled in Rum, the name given to Anatolia by the Arabs because it was a Roman province. Here one of the greatest mystics of the Muslims, Rumi Jalal Al-din (1207-1273), son of the Afghan re­fugee, lived and taught. He presented his teachings in poetry and is revered now not only for the beauty of his poems but also for the depth of his thought.^[507] Love was the basis of Rumi’s theology. He taught that the experience of love leads to unity with the divine, which can be approached through dance. The first music was God’s creative word “which caused creation to dance out of not- being and to unfold in flowers, trees and stars. Everything created participates in the eternal dance,” of which the dance of the mys­tic is only a branch.^[508] This was the beginning of a mystical Muslim fraternity, the Whirling Dervishes^[509] who, in their long, white robes turn around in rhythmic circles with their eyes closed and appear to be in a trance. This is well known, but few people realize that Rumi was living in Konya, the ancient city of Iconium, which is right in the middle of the area where both Montanism and the cult of Cybele were centered. Thus, the fertile soil of Asia Minor gave us not only the cults of Cybele and Dionysus, but also Christian Montanism, and this highly refined, spiritualized orgia, the mystic dance of the Muslim dervishes.

Asia Minor, more than any other area of the Mediterranean, was subject to such “outpouring of the Spirit” which filled the hearts of those who then became entheoi, “filled with god.” So it is not surprising to recall that Apollo, the great god of prophecy, was also of Anatolian origin,^[510] and that Paul, who himself spoke in tongues, saw visions and knew a man who was “caught up into the third heaven,”^[511] was also born and educated in a city of Asia Minor, Tarsus. Did he know Cybele? It would have been impos­sible for him not to, since no person in a city where a festival of the Great Mother was held could avoid noticing it. And when in 1 Corinthians 13 he hailed love as superior to “tongues of men and angels,” noisy gong and clanging cymbal, prophetic power and torture of the body, did he borrow these images from the services of Cybele, which he must have witnessed many times?^[512] Many scholars believe that the man he “knew” and whose experiences he describes in 1 Corinthians 12.1-4 was actually himself,^[513] and if this is so, then his exposure to the influence of Cybele may have been more than just casual. He had experiences that were very similar to those enjoyed by the followers of Cybele and Dionysus: he was in ecstasy, he did not know whether he was “in the body or out of the body” and he was unaware of his physical existence. He had a temporary vision of Paradise and heard “things that cannot be told.” It is even possible that the spirit of enthusiasmos that permeated the people of Asia Minor may have left its mark in Paul’s theology, too. For if it is true, as I have suggested, that the cults of Cybele and Dionysus can only be understood in the context of the pattern of the primordial and the eschatological, the beginning and the end, then the many references of Paul to henosis, unification, becoming one, and his emphasis on a return, in Christ, to the primordial condition, in which there is no male and female, begin to sound like a Christian expression of what the pagans also hoped for and imitated in their services.^[514] E. R. Dodds^[515] pointed out that ecstatic prophecy was practised in Asia Minor already at a very early time, as early perhaps as the fourteenth century B. C. in the Hittite kingdom. This type of prophecy, like Apollo’s, which was communicated through the Pythia, was the result of enthusiasm, i.e., being filled with God. In 1 Corinthians 14, Paul praises prophesy and ecstatic speech as one of the supreme gifts of the Spirit: “Make love your aim and ear­nestly desire the spiritual gifts, especially that you may prophesy. For one who speaks in tongues speaks not to men but to God; for no one understands him, but he utters mysteries in the Spirit...” Thus, to the degree that certain Christians still follow Paul’s example in glossolalia and other charismatic manifestations of the Spirit, they are indebted to Cybele and Dionysus to a greater degree than many of them care to admit.^[516]