SOURCE: "Simplicity and Perfection" in Tertullian, First Theologian of the West, Cambridge University Press, 1997, pp. 1-26.

[In the following excerpt, Osborn observes the essential importance of simplicity, founded on the perfection of Christ, in Tertullian's thought.]

'We also are religious and our religion is simple', objected the Roman proconsul to the martyr Speratus, at his trial near Carthage on 17 July 180. 'If you will listen calmly', replied Speratus, 'I shall tell you the mystery of simplicity.¹ Tertullian was not the only African who liked paradox.² Speratus claims simplicity for Christians rather than pagans. He counters the accusation that Christians are secret and sinister, by asserting that their secret is simplicity. He draws on the New Testament account of the mystery of salvation. The writer to the Ephesians had been concerned to tell the nations of the unsearchable riches of Christ and to bring to light 'the economy of the mystery which has been hidden from all ages in the God who created all things' (Eph. 3.9). The church declares to heavenly powers the manifold … wisdom of God (Eph. 3.10), which is the divine mystery. The end of salvation, the vision of Christ and the church present a great mystery (Eph. 5.32).

Tertullian's lust for simplicity, supported by superlatives, persists throughout his work and is a good place to begin a study of his thought. A fine exposition, which begins 'Tertullien déconcerte', goes on to insist that Tertullian took a simple and total choice when he became a Christian and that his complexity comes from his earlier intellectual formation; whether a study of his thought begins from either simplicity or complexity, it will discover a profound unity.³

A man of keen and violent disposition (acris et vehementis ingenii'),⁴ much of Tertullian's lively talk is concerned with clarifying what others have confused. Like Paul, he reiterates that he wants to know nothing but Christ crucified. Christ revealed himself, not as a tradition, but as truth (virg. 1.1). Truth is simple (ap. 23.7f.), but philosophers have mixed with it their own opinions (ap. 47.4) and sunk to a perversity (Marc. 5.19.8) which tortures truth ('unde ista tormenta cruciandae simplicitatis et suspendendae vertiatis?' an. 18.7). The soul testifies in its simplicity (test. 1.6) and its evidence is simple and divine (test. 5.1). Truth leads to beauty so female dress should be marked by simplicity (cult. 1.2.4 et passim). When Valentinians accuse ordinary Christians of simplicity, he replies 'although simple, we nevertheless know everthing' (Val. 3.5). He writes (res. 2.11) to strengthen the faith of simple believers, employing his rhetorical skill on their behalf against heretics (res. 5.1).

The Simple Beginning

The divine economy of salvation is reflected in Christian baptism, which points to past and future. Life begins at baptism; here Tertullian shows his yearning for what is simple, in 'the sacrament of our Christian water, which washes away the sins of our original blindness and frees us for eternal life' (bapt. 1.1.). Yet simplicity never displaces reason. Those who do not examine the reasons behind simple baptism, and who stay with an unexamined faith, are vulnerable through their ignorance (ibid.). The wrong kind of simplicity needs instruction, guidance and protection (res. 2.11).⁵ Tertullian rejects the naïveté of those who want a proof-text which forbids their attendance at the games (spect. 3.1) and the artless heresy which abolishes all discipline (praescr. 41.3). A heretical viper⁶ has turned many away from baptism, through that common perversity which rejects anything simple. 'Nothing, absolutely nothing, hardens human minds as much as the obvious simplicity of what God does, and the contrasting greatness of what he thereby achieves. The unadorned fact, that with such radical simplicity, without pomp, without any special preparation, and indeed, at no cost, a man is lowered into water, is dipped, while a few words are spoken, and then emerges, not much (if at all) cleaner, makes it all the more incredible that he gains eternal life in this way' (bapt. 2.1). In striking contrast, idol worship uses every possible embroidery of ritual and every additional expense.

Fussy, wretched incredulity denies God's primary properties of simplicity and power, which should be received with wonder and faith. God is found by the simple in heart (praescr. 7.10) and he appeared to Elijah openly and simply (apertus et simplex, pat. 15.6). God is too simple to have worked a Docetist deception (carn. 5.10). For the unbeliever, there is nothing in such plain acts as baptism and the pretended effects are impossible: which illustrates how God uses foolish things to confound worldly wisdom and does easily what men find most difficult.

The subtlety of God's simplicity is linked with his wisdom and power, which derive stimulus from their opposites of folly and impossibility, 'since every virtue receives its cause from those things by which it is provoked' (bapt. 2.3). So strife becomes a second theme of Tertullian's thought.⁷ He links it with Pauline paradox, and it is fundamental to the Stoicism which looked back to Heraclitus whom Justin saw as a Christian before Christ. Simplicity and weakness belong to God as his omnipotent rejection of earthly power and wisdom. Christians who follow this divine simplicity are little fishes (bapt. 1.3) who cannot live apart from the water of baptism. Here their faith is contracted to the one word … which stands for Jesus Christ, son of God, saviour.⁸

Repetition underlines simplicity and Tertullian employs it to reinforce his claims. More than this, his key words (goodness, reason and discipline) link together diverse things which are derived from one simple divine origin. Goodness explains every part of the creative act (Marc. 2.4.5). Reason is founded in God who is ever rational, and provides grounds for Tertullian's every argument (including his paradoxes) and for his constant attacks upon his opponents (paen. 1). Ratio is his favourite word. Discipline governs all details of conduct. The constant refrain of these themes provides unity in his writing.

Christians are plain people because they accept the world as God's creation. This means that they do not run of into seclusion, but live like others; they eat, dress, bathe, work, trade, sail, fight, farm and practise a craft. They do not observe the common religious rites; but they are no less human or reasonable for that (ap. 42.4). Their simple lives are matched in modesty by simple dress (cult. 2.13.3). They follow the New Testament aesthetic of 'putting on' Christ.

Simplicity, in Tertullian, sometimes exacts its price and affects his arguments. The sudden enunciation of God's name is, for most, not the testimony of a soul which is naturally Christian, but the testimony of a soul which is not very Christian. The appeal to lines of episcopal succession is controversial rather than an end to controversy and, in any case, Tertullian always wants to obey conscience rather than bishop. In his case the two rarely agree.⁹ Above all, Tertullian seems to fail in his account of divine justice and love. In his rejection of Marcion, he claims that only retributive justice can discourage sin.¹⁰

These matters will be dealt with again later. The points to note at this stage are three. First, we must expect that a passion for simplicity might induce errors. Theology, like philosophy, is a complex matter and those who cut corners suffer accidents.¹¹ Second, those who turn every corner arrive nowhere. Debate differs from argument. The orator who silences his opponent rarely uses adequate argument. Against the plea for fear as an essential deterrent against sin, Marcion simply shook his head and said 'Absit'; he was silent but not convinced. Third, theologians and other exponents of rational argument commonly make a few bad mistakes. By far the best example is Augustine, who dominated a culture for a thousand years, and whose argument for the liquidation of schismatics through the severity of love¹² is only matched, for unconvincing barbarity, by his accounts of predestination and original sin. These three dangers make an exploration of Tertullian's arguments obligatory.

Intricate Apologetic

Tertullian's defence of simplicity will always have a twist of paradox, and qualifications of fundamental force. There are his own deep conflicts. How complicated was he? One writer'¹³ produced a book to probe the disorder of his personality, another composed a large tome to show the perversity of his ethics.¹⁴ Many have followed the verdict that he is a troubled fideist.¹⁵

More disconcerting is the praise of his admirers. Even a sober scholar could write: 'Roman restraint, legal clarity and military discipline were transmuted into an intellectual and moral force in the ardent, aspiring mind and heart of Tertullian.¹⁶ Enthusiasm gallops away with another:

Ardent in temperament, endowed with an intelligence as subtle and original as it was aggressive and audacious, he added to his natural gifts a profound erudition, which far from impeding only gave weight to the movements of his alert and robust mind … Harassed from without, the African Church was also torn from within by an accumulation of evils; apostasies, heresies, and schisms abounded. Up through the confusion were thrust Tertullian's mighty shoulders, casting off the enemies of the Gospel on every side. He was not formed for defensive warfare.¹⁷

It is regrettable that some scholars want to award prizes rather than to understand what is alien to them.

A recent and restrained assessment, which touches lightly on the ideas of Tertullian in favour of his history and his literary achievement, calls him a 'Christian Sophist'.¹⁸ This is helpful, but uncomfortably ambiguous, since Tertullian spent much time attacking and repudiating what is commonly regarded as sophistry.

How complex is Tertullian? There is no lack of intricate argument, however forcefully it may be presented; worse still, in the interests of simplicity and speed, steps are often omitted and details which have appeared earlier are not repeated. We might call this 'Tertullian's Trick'; because often, when we think we have found a fallacy and caught him out, we find that he has answered our objection elsewhere. A good orator does not repeat detail. For his interpreters today, this should be less of a difficulty after fifty years of philosophical analysis; but some still look for systems and the fun of deconstructing them. Many manage to ignore the truth that conclusions are ambiguous without the argument which leads to them. In order to understand an author we must remember the cards he has already played.

To a remarkable extent, Tertullian respected conventional rhetorical forms which made his work more accessible to his contemporaries.¹⁹ Tertullian faced a complex situation, where the culture of Greece and Rome, the religion of Israel and the new faith in Jesus came together in a mixture of conflict and agreement. Each component had internal diversity within which Tertullian had to choose. A critical eclecticism was characteristic of all parties. The importance of Tertullian for cultural history is immense, and he may rightly be called the 'first theologian of the West', provided this does not limit his influence to the West or obscure his massive debt to Irenaeus.²⁰ Justin had anticipated him, by his move to Rome, and it is remarkable how much had been achieved. But Justin still writes in Greek and his ideas are difficult because undeveloped. His interest is that of an originator whose ideas are taken up and developed by others who add, alter and diverge. As a result, his own meaning is frequently uncertain.

Tertullian's achievement was not merely cultural and linguistic, but above all intellectual. For, 'despite his obvious originality, he displays those characteristics which are to be found throughout Latin Christianity: a realism which knows nothing of the Platonist devaluation of matter; a subjectivity, which gives special prominence to inner experience; and a pessimism which lays more stress on the experience of sin than on transfiguration'.²¹

Tertullian believed in change. Plato gave place to Heraclitus and the Stoics. The way up is the way down. All things change and all things renew themselves. Nothing ends except to begin again (res. 12). While Clement, for all his delight in Heraclitus, looked beyond the world of material things to Plato's intellectual realities (strom. 6.1), Tertullian saw reality in flesh and matter, and found truth in an unending series of paradoxes.

He began as an apologist and apologetic displays the contingency of theology and philosophy.²² It begins from a faith to which objections are made by opponents or experiences of widely diverse kinds.… Romans will not like his higher loyalty to Christ, radical Christians will not like his political conformism, some will find him too indulgent and others will find him too ascetic; either they will not dance when they hear the pipes or they will not lament with those who mourn. When the Baptist neither eats nor drinks, he is demonic and when Jesus eats and drinks he is a glutton and a winebibber (Matt. 11.16-19).

However consistent the position of the apologist is, it will not appear consistent until there has been careful analysis and then it may look too complex.

They live in countries of their own, but simply as sojourners; they share the life of citizens, they endure the lot of foreigners; every foreign land is to them a fatherland, and every fatherland a foreign land. They marry like the rest of the world. They breed children, but they do not cast their offspring adrift. They eat together but do not sleep together. They exist in the flesh, but they live not after the flesh. They spend their existence upon earth, but their citizenship is in heaven. They obey the established laws, and in their own lives they surpass the laws … The Jews war against them as aliens, and the Greeks persecute them.²³

To meet apparent inconsistencies, like Tertullian's denigration and exaltation of marriage and philosophy, apologetic needs linking argument (for which it may not have enough time) as well as a few general concepts (economy of salvation, logos) which maintain a scattered presence.²⁴ Tertullian goes further, so that these concepts embrace fundamental questions of theology. The remarkable thing is that, for all his vehemence, his ideas do hold together. He had a deep, abiding concern. As a Stoic, he began with an undefined consciousness of God.²⁵ As a Christian, he filled that concept with the gospel, the story of salvation which ran from creation to apocalypse. The golden thread which runs through his thought is the recapitulation of all things in Christ.

Apologetic presents an extreme case of the tensions faced by all philosophy and theology. Today, theologians are reluctant to distinguish historical from systematic theology because every theology is marked by its historical situation and specific questions. This move is mirrored in a wider reaction against the scientific positivism which was the last gesture of Enlightenment epistemology. In a wide-ranging review of the human sciences, we find one common feature: 'a willingness to emphasise the local and contingent, a desire to underline the extent to which our own concepts and attitudes have been shaped by particular historical circumstances, and a correspondingly strong dislike—amounting almost to hatred in the case of Wittgenstein—of all overarching theories and singular schemes of explanation'.²⁶ An apologist, like Tertullian, is more likely to be understood in such an intellectual climate. For we have all learnt that within the most carefully argued and tidy system, there are polarities and contradictions which cannot be ignored. What Godel showed for mathematics (that there is no self-sufficient, consistent autonomy) seems true of all rational systems.

What did Tertullian write? His many writings show the range of his apologetic.²⁷ In 197, he exhorts the martyrs (mart.), confronting the major challenge to faith which was the suffering of God's faithful people and defending the faith before a persecuting state (nat., ap.). Between 198 and 206, he argues that faith is natural (test.), he confronts the Jewish attack (Jud.)—the gospel had come to Carthage through Jewish Christians. The threat of heresy is met with a general response and a statement of the essential rule of Christian faith (praescr.). One well-argued alternative, the dualism of Hermogenes (Herm.) is dissected, analysed and refuted. The public behaviour of Christians is rigorously directed away from attendance at games (spect.), frequency of marriage (ux.) and fine clothing (cult.). Prayer (or.) and baptism (bapt.) explain matters of devotion and worship. Patience (pat.) is a private virtue while penitence (paen.) has both private and public consequences.

During his middle period (207-8) when signs of Montanist²⁸ influence begin to appear, substantial works are directed against heretical dualism. The work Against Marcion (Marc.)²⁹ owes its present form to this period, but builds on earlier work. Valentinians are attacked both in the short work which bears their name (Val.) and in the anti-docetic works which defend the flesh (carn., res.). Chastity (cast.) and modest dress (virg.) continue the ascetic strain of ethics while the hostility of the state to Christians is further considered (cor., scorp.) and a particular oppressor is challenged (Scap.). Idolatry is condemned as false and the source of all evil (idol.) and the nature of the soul is examined (an.).

During the final period of his writing (213-22), Tertullian is plainly at odds with catholic, 'psychic' (unspiritual)³⁰ Christianity. Rigorous ethical demands are expressed in the rejection of flight during persecution (fug.) and remarriage (mon.), and the commendation of fasting (iei.) and modesty (pud.). His attack on Praxeas defends the distinction of persons within the trinity and the distinction of substances within the incarnate Christ (Prax.). Yet the chains of secular culture retain their subordinate place below the 'better philosophy' (pall.).

Tertullian's one central idea (the economy of salvation perfected in Christ) runs from his Apologeticum to the better philosophy (pall.) and his theology of trinity and incarnation (Prax.). This provides internal unity to his thought, within all complexity. It is the constant factor. Montanism is the result, not the cause, of Tertullian's concern for the perfection of the divine economy.

Tertullian has two external controls on the complexities of apologetic and theology: brevity and paradox. Brevity had been claimed as a Christian virtue from the beginning (I Tim. 1.3f.). Justin (I apol. 14) took the brevity of Christ's sayings as proof he was not a sophist, and Irenacus contrasted the short word of the gospel with the long-winded law. Sextus (sent. 430) linked brevity with the knowledge of God. For Tertullian, truth and brevity (Marc. 2.28.3), certainty and brevity (an. 2.7) go together. The Lord's Prayer is a compendium of the whole gospel (or. 9.1). Conciseness is a welcome necessity; prolixity is a bore (virg. 4.4). On this theme scripture, especially the Wisdom literature, and Stoic tradition coincided.³ We have already noted some reasons for brevity. As an orator and a preacher, Tertullian leaves a lot out, so that he will not lose his audience. As a Stoic and a follower of Paul, he accepts paradox as a common means of ordering truth. Indeed there is a primal paradox. 'Truth and hatred of truth come into our world together. As soon as truth appears, it is the enemy' (ap. 7.3).

We return to his simplicity. Tertullian was himself, not a Christian Cicero. Seneca is often one of us (saepe noster); we are never his. A Christian builds his faith on his own foundation, not that of another (an. 26.1). Christ was not mistaken when he solemnly entrusted the proclamation of his gospel to simple fishermen instead of skilful sophists (an. 3.3). As his follower, Tertullian rejoices in the mere name of Christian and the message of the little fishes: 'Jesus Christ, son of God, saviour'. A simple criterion governs the Christian's logic. Confronted by exuberance of words and ideas, he applies a constant criterion of truth. In contrast, Marcion loves uncertainty, and prefers it to the certainty of the rule of faith. 'Now if to your plea, which itself remains uncertain, there be applied further proofs derived from uncertainties, we shall be caught up in such a chain of questions, which depend on our discussion of these equally uncertain proofs and whose uncertainty will endanger faith, so that we shall slide into those insoluble questions which the apostle dislikes' (Marc. 1.9.7). In opposition Tertullian insists 'I shall therefore insist, with complete confidence that he is no God who is today uncertain, because until now he has been unknown; because as soon as it is agreed that God exists, from this very fact it follows that he never has been unknown, and therefore never uncertain' (Marc. 1.9.10).

Divine Unicity³²

The first question of early Christian theology was: is there one God, good and true, who is creator of this world of sin and evil? For Tertullian, God's own simple unity is ultimate. 'God is not God if he be not one' (Marc. 1.3.1). He holds the universe in his hand like a bird's nest. Heaven is his throne and earth is his footstool (Marc. 2.25.2). However, because he is found through faith in Jesus, he does not conform to ultimate Neoplatonic simplicity. We shall see that, for Tertullian as for other second-century theologians, the way to one God is through the son and the spirit.³³

Marcion is equally convinced about God's unicity, which he places above the duality of creation and redemption, and claims: 'One single work is sufficient for our god; he has liberated man by his supreme and most excellent goodness, which is of greater value than all destructive insects' (Marc. 1.17.1).³⁴ But Marcion, says Tertullian, is a great muddler and his higher god has produced nothing which might give ground for believing in his existence. How can he be superior when he can show no work to compare with, for example, the human being produced by the inferior god? The question 'does this god exist?' is answered from what he has done and the question 'what is this god like?' is determined by the quality of his work. Marcion's uncreative god does not pass the first test, so the second does not apply.

In the alleged interests of unity, Marcion multiplies. He may begin from two gods, but he finishes with many more and his account is far from simple.

So you have three substances of deity in the higher regions, and in the lower regions four. When to these are added their own Christs—one who has appeared in the time of Tiberius, another who is promised by the creator—Marcion is obviously being robbed by those persons who assume that he postulates two gods, when he implies that there are nine, even if he does not know it. (Marc. 1.15.6)

Here Tertullian is drawing his own polemical conclusions from Marcion's views and does not help his case; but there is more than caricature because, once mediators are introduced, multiplication sets in.³⁵

There are also historical confusions for Marcion. His god turned up at his destined time, because of certain astrological complexities, which Marcionites enjoy, even if the stars were made by the lesser god; for the greater god may have been held back by the rising moon, or some witchery, or by the position of Saturn or Mars (Marc. 1.18.1). Whatever the delay, he glided down in the fifteenth year of Tiberius, to be a saving spirit. Yet the pest-laden wind of his salvation did not begin to blow until some year in the reign of Antoninus Pius. This delay implies difference and confusion. For from Tiberius to Antoninus Pius, 115 years and 6½ months elapsed; the god whom Marcion then introduced cannot be the god whom Christ revealed, for the interim between Christ and Marcion rules out identity.

Beyond this confusion lie Marcion's great dichotomies—the antitheses of law and gospel, creation and salvation—which run from beginning to end (Marc. 1.19.4). Marcion's god could not have been revealed by Christ who came before Marcion introduced the division between two gods. Yet Marcion claims that he restored a rule of faith which had been corrupted, over all those intervening years; Tertullian wonders at the patience of Christ who waited so long for Marcion to deliver him (Marc. 1.20.1).

This argument suggests again the cost of simplicity and the apparent naivete of Tertullian in the interests of apologetic. By itself, the argument has no force whatever. Marcion claimed that he was a reformer who went back to the original gospel and apostle.³⁶ However, Tertullian makes the argument respectable by referring to Paul (in Galatians) who was not commending another god and another Christ, but attributing the annulment of the old dispensation to the creator himself who (through Isaiah and Jeremiah) had declared the intention that he would do something new and make a new covenant. Later, by exact examination of the prophets (Marc. 3), Luke's Gospel (Marc. 4) and Paul (Marc. 5), he shows that the evidence for Marcion's primitive gospel is not to be found.³⁷ Tertullian further states that the first Christians were certain about God the creator and about his Christ, while they argued about almost everything else, and that certainty continues in all apostolic makes churches. This argument is sound, since Marcionites could not point to a particular ancient church which followed their teaching (Marc. 1.21.3).

Divine simplicity has no vulgar fractions. God is eternal, rational and perfect; his salvation is universal, whereas Marcion's God leaves out Jews and Christians because they belong to the creator. More importantly, because he saves only souls and not bodies, the strange god never provides more than a 'semi-salvation'. Surely a god of perfect goodness could save the whole of man? 'Wholly damned by the creator, he should have been wholly restored by the god of sovereign goodness' (Marc. 1.24.4). Marcion's god cannot do anything to protect his believers from the malignant power of the creator, as it works through everything from thunder, war and plague to creeping, crawling insects. 'Just how do you think you are emancipated from his kingdom when his flies still creep over your face? … You profess a God who is purely and simply good; however you cannot prove the perfect goodness of him who does not perfectly set you free' (Marc. 1.24.7).

There are now perverse and muddled objections made against the almighty God, lord and founder of the universe," who 'has been known from the beginning, has never hidden himself, has shone in constant splendor, even before Romulus and long before Tiberius' (Marc. 2.2.1) The riches of his wisdom and knowledge are deep, his judgements are unsearchable and his ways past finding out (Rom. 11.34); therefore his simplicity will not be evident to the natural man, who cannot receive the things of the spirit. 'And so God is supremely great just when man thinks he is small, God is supremely best just when man thinks him not good, he is especially one when man thinks there are two gods or more' (Marc. 2.2.6). Innocence and understanding have gone, for man 'has lost the grace of paradise, and that intimacy with God, by which, had he obeyed, he would have known all the things of God' (Marc. 2.2.6).

Indeed, simplicity marked creation, for all came from and was marked by the one goodness of God (Marc. 2.4.6). The gift of freedom was part of this goodness and it was never revoked. Otherwise Marcion would protest 'What sort of lord is this ineffective, instable, faithless being who rescinds his own decisions?' (Marc. 2.7.3) None of these negative epithets should ever be applied to the unmixed goodness of God.

The same simplicity marks his providence which dispenses light and darkness, good and evil. But how can this fail to compromise his simple goodness? Because the evil which he dispenses is a punishment for sin and therefore good (Marc. 2.14.3).

Is there a simple gospel? Such simplicity may be hard to see; but it is there to be found, as indeed in the different Gospels of the apostles, John and Matthew, and of the apostolic men, Luke and Mark. All follow the same rule of one creator God and his Christ, born of a virgin, fulfilling law and prophets. 'It does not matter if there be some variation in the arrangement of their narratives, provided that there is agreement in the substance of the faith' (Marc. 4.2.2). Marcion's mutilated Gospel subverts the substance of the gospel. It bears no name, for he stopped short of inventing a title. No written work should be recognized if it cannot hold its head erect, offer some consistency and promise some credibility by naming a title and an author.

Truth is to be distinguished by its simplicity, with which proud men fuss and fiddle, so mixing it with falsehood that nothing certain remains. 'When they had found a simple and straightforward God, they began to disagree about him, not as he had been revealed to them, but in order to debate about his properties, his nature, his place' (ap. 47.5). Some say he is physical, others incorporeal, some that he is made of atoms, others that he consists of numbers. Some claim he governs the world, perhaps from inside or perhaps from outside, others declare that he is idle. Such confusion is not primitive but contrived, not ancient wisdom but modem muddle. There is nothing as old as the truth of the scriptures which philosophers have perverted in every possible way.

Yet Christians wear the cloak of the philosopher, because of its simplicity and because they have found the better philosophy (pall. 6). The toga may offer higher status in the community; but it is an elaborate thing of many folds (pall. 1.1). While everything changes, not all change is good. Primitive simplicity is challenged by luxury. It was a bad day when Alexander, on fire with his triumph over the Persians, exchanged his armour for a pair of puffed-up, Persian trousers, made of silk. When philosophers move into purple, what is to stop them from wearing golden slippers (pall. 4.7)? What could be less philosophical than that?

The change to the philosopher's cloak is justified by its simplicity as a garment, in contrast to the many folds of the toga which are a cumbersome nuisance (pall. 5.1). The cloak is the most convenient garment and saves time in dressing (pall. 5.3). Further, it designates independence and freedom from the duties of forum, elections, senate, platforms and every other part of public life. It wears out no seats, attacks no laws, argues no pleas, is worn by no judge, soldier or king. 'I have seceded from the community. My sole business is with myself and my one care is not to care.' When accused of laziness, it replies, 'No one is born for another, and he dies for himself alone' (pall. 5.4). Simplicity of detachment is achieved because the philosophers' cloak has become Christian and found the better philosophy (pall. 6.2) in Jesus Christ, son of God and saviour. So the law of change is justified. We cannot avoid change; we should ensure that it is change to the good.³⁹

Perfection in Dishonour: 'Jesus Christ, Son of God, Saviour'

The answer to the question about one God, good and true, was: 'Yes there is one God, if he not only created the world, but also acted to renew it in Jesus Christ.' God's utter disgrace was the pledge of mankind's salvation. God came to man's level, so that man might reach God's level. God became small that man might become great (Marc. 2.27.7).

Simplicity was not empty. All was summed up in Christ. Following Paul, Tertullian (pud. 14 et passim) knew nothing but Christ and him crucified. This was the sole hope (unica spes) of the world, the necessary dishonour (necessarium dedecus) of faith (carn. 5.3). In a word, God is one God, when the son hands over the kingdom to the father.

Behind the fish ('Jesus Christ, son of God, saviour')⁴⁰ lay the even simpler confession of Jesus as Messiah or Christ (Matt. 27.17, 22; John 1.41; Acts 9.22; 1 John 5.1). When the gospel moved from its Jewish context into the Greek world, this title meant less and 'Christ' became a surname for Jesus. The basic confession then became 'Jesus Christ is Lord' (parallel to the 'Emperor is Lord' of the imperial cult)⁴¹ or 'Jesus Christ is son of God'. Christians had their own answer to pagan and Jewish acclamations, such as 'one is Zeus-Serapis', 'great is Diana of the Ephesians', or even 'Hear 0 Israel. … This simple formula was used as a confession of faith at baptism, being expanded first into a twofold faith in father and son, then into a threefold faith in father, son and spirit, and receiving various supplements. The simplicity of the fish remained. There was one lord, one faith, one baptism.

'Jesus Christ, son of God, saviour' points to the economy of salvation and the recapitulation of all things in Christ, who is Christus Victor.⁴² Recapitulation is chiefly linked with Irenaeus;⁴³ but it also dominates the New Testament and the theology of Ignatius, Justin, Clement of Alexandria, Tertullian and Athanasius. It includes three sets of motifs: Christ corrects and perfects all that is; as Christus Victor he is the climax of the economy of saving history; and as the perfection of being, goodness and truth, he gives life to the dying, righteousness to sinners and truth to those in error.

Tertullian describes the work of salvation as continuous with creation.⁴⁴ The human race is summed up, 'that is to refer back to the beginning or to revise from the beginning' (Marc. 5.17.1), reformed (Marc. 3.9.5) and restored (pat. 15.1).⁴⁵ Redemption through a ransom paid (fug. 12.2f.) leads to liberty (carn. 14.3).⁴⁶ Christ as mediator (sequester, res. 51.2) is clothed with humanity (Prax. 12.3) and reconciles (Marc. 5.19.5) man to God.⁴⁷ The sacrifice of Christ, the paschal lamb, is offered by the great high priest (Jud. 14.8). His voluntary death is a propitiation but not a vicarious satisfaction for sin.⁴⁸ As teacher, Christ brings illumination through saving discipline (ap. 47.11; pat. 12.4) and a better philosophy (pall. 6.2).⁴⁹ As divine physician, he heals sinners (scorp. 5.8).⁵⁰ By his descent to hell, he has restored (an. 55.1f.) patriarchs and prophets.

Finally, by the trophy of the cross, he has triumphed over death, the last enemy (Marc. 4.20.5). His victory is not that of the warrior Messiah for whom the Jews had looked (Jud. 9.1-20), but is the spiritual overthrow of the armies of wickedness (Marc. 4.20-4). This salvation was also a new creation (iei. 14.2; Marc. 5.12.6).⁵¹

The saving victory of Jesus began as his fulfilment of Jewish prophecies, within the saving history. … Why did the gospel come so late in human history? The answer lay in the plan of God's saving economy or dispensation which prepared the way for and found its climax in the victory of Christ who overthrew the powers of darkness. For apocalyptic dwelt on cosmic triumph as well as on fulfilment of prophetic hope. Jesus reigned as the son of God over all created things and every power in heaven and on earth. Devils fled in fear before his name.

To Jews, therefore, Tertullian's answer is direct. There is only one question: whether Christ, announced by the prophets as the object of universal faith, has, or has not, come (Jud. 7.1). The proof is plain in the rapid, universal spread of the gospel.⁵² It is evident that⁵³ no gate or city is closed to him, his sound is gone out into all the earth, gates of brass are opened and he reigns over all.

But Christ's name reaches out everywhere, is believed everywhere, is worshipped by all the nations we have listed, rules everywhere, is everywhere adored, is bestowed equally everywhere upon all; in his presence no king receives more favour, no barbarian receives less joy; no dignities or families merit special distinction; to all he is equal, to all king, to all judge, to all 'God and lord'. Nor might you hesitate to believe what we assert, since you see it actually happening. (Jud. 7.9-8.1).

Christ is the bull who, in fulfilment of Joseph's blessing,⁵⁴ tosses the nations to the ends of the earth, on the horns of his cross, which was also foretold in the outstretched hands of Moses (Exod. 17.8-16). How else can we explain the peculiar position of Moses, as he sat with arms outstretched, rather than kneeling or prostrate on the earth, unless it be that the name of Jesus was his theme? Jesus would one day engage the devil in single combat and conquer by the sign of the cross (Jud. 10.1). He is the God who reigns from the tree,⁵⁵ who came once in humility and will come again with glory (Jud. 10.12). Death reigned from Adam to Christ who concluded the rule of death by dying on the tree of the cross. The government is on his shoulder. No other king rules in this way. 'But only the new king of the new ages, Christ Jesus, has carried on his shoulder the dominion and majesty of his new glory, which is the cross' (Marc. 3.19.3).

The victory of Christ is strongly affirmed in demilitarized military terms. For he who straps his sword on his thigh is fairer than the children of men and grace pours from his lips. He who so rides in majesty, rides in meekness and righteousness, which are not the 'proper business of battles' (Ps. 45.2-4). His strange warfare of the word invades every nation, bringing all to faith, and ruling by his victory over death (Marc. 3.14.6).

Christ conquers as a human being, when his obedience triumphs over the same devil before whom Adam fell (Marc. 2.8.3). This second conflict was all the more painful to the devil because he had won the first contest, and was all the sweeter to the man who, by a victory, recovered his salvation, a more glorious paradise and the fruit of the tree of life (Marc. 2.10.6).

'O Christ even in your novelties you are old!' (Marc. 4.21.5) Incidents in the mission of the disciples (the feeding of the multitude, the confession of Peter, being ashamed of Christ) show him to be the Christ of the creator (Marc. 4.21.5). All Christ's words and deeds, even his resurrection, point back to the prophets (Marc. 4.43.9). All that Christ did was part of a continuous saving economy, which God began immediately after the fall of Adam. His goodness now took the form of justice, severity and even, as the Marcionites claim, cruelty. 'Thus God's goodness was prior and according to nature, his severity came later and for a reason. The one was innate, the other accidental; the one his own, the other adapted; the one freely flowing, the other admitted as an expedient' (Marc. 2.11.2). There is unbroken continuity in God's goodness which, since the fall, has had an opposition with which to contend. Spontaneous goodness is replaced by justice which is the agent (procuratio) of goodness. Goodness needed a new means to contend with its adversary and fear of punishment was the only effective way (Marc. 2.13.2).

While he reforms rather than destroys, and restores rather than abolishes (Marc. 2.29.3), there is change and correction. In the place of an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth, he offers a cheek for a cheek, with the difference that it is the second cheek of the victim rather than the cheek of the aggressor which is struck (Marc. 4.16.4); this kind of imaginative paradox is typical of Tertullian. This brilliant example is emblematic of the recapitulation which both fulfils and corrects.

Recapitulation is both retrospective and prospective, both fulfilment of the past and promise of the future. Because of his preoccupation with Marcion, Tertullian seems more concerned with fulfilment than with promise. Furthermore, the miracle of new life through baptism did not do as much as he hoped. Clement of Alexandria and Irenaeus celebrate more vividly the present glory of new life in Christ. In this difference some have seen the contrast between Greek and Latin Christianity.⁵⁶ Yet the disciples of the new covenant receive a new way to pray from the new grace of a renewing God (or. 1) and Christians believe in one God in a new way (Prax. 3).⁵⁷

The economy would not have been complete until he, to whom it had all been directed, had come. The mass of fulfilled prophecy is too great for anyone to deny. In him we find the sure mercies of David. It is he, not David, who is a witness, prince and commander to the nations, and on whom all nations now call (Marc. 3.20.10). His new word is decisive and brief,⁵⁸ a compendium which offers relief from the burdensome details of the law. Isaiah foretold new things and Jeremiah a new covenant (Marc. 4.1.6). Finally, to those who, in the face of all this evidence, deny the kingdom of Christ, there remains the second coming which will not be in humility, but in power and glory (Marc. 3.7.8).

Marcion is wasting his complicated time when he tries to separate the strange, simple goodness of Christ from the alleged evil of the creator (Marc. 1.2.3). The first Christians disagreed about almost everything else; but they did not waver from undivided faith in the creator and his Christ (Marc. 1.21.3). Even Marcion allows Christ to appear on the mountain with Moses and Elijah, the first who formed God's people and established the old covenant, the second who reformed God's people and consummated⁵⁹ the new covenant (Marc. 4.22.1). 'He, who made, is best able to remake,⁶⁰ seeing that it is a far greater work to make than to remake, to give a beginning than to give it back again' (res. 11.10). The wonder of the gospel should not obscure the marvel of creation.

Problems of Recapitulation

The summing up of all things in Christ, who is Christus Victor, shaped the theology of the first three centuries. It has persisted since then, in varying form, whether it be in the Eucharist of eastern and western churches or in hymns like Vexilla regis prodeunt and Ein' feste Burg or in the Easter liturgy of every tradition. Its place in the Latin Mass, in the Greek Christos Niketes and in the Lutheran tradition⁶¹ is equally secure. It found its strongest statement in Athanasius' De Incarnatione and its difficulties are most apparent in the conclusion of this work.

For as when the sun is up darkness no longer prevails, but if there is any left anywhere it is driven away; so now, when the Divine Manifestation of the Word of God is come, the darkness of the idols prevails no longer, but every part of the whole earth is everywhere illuminated by his teaching … and men, looking to the true God, the Word of the Father, abandon idols, and themselves come to a clear knowledge of the true God.

Now this is the proof that Christ is God, the Word and Power of God. For, human things ceasing, and the Word of Christ remaining, it is plain to all that the things which are ceasing are temporary, but that He who remains is God and the true Son of God, the Only-begotten Word. (de inc. 55, Bindley trans.)

The triumphal claims of this passage concerning the destruction of evil do not fit reality then or now. There does not appear to have been a change of government. Indeed, from the beginning there were difficulties with recapitulation. Death, despite the sting of martyrdom, may have been destroyed; but sin was still clearly present. Christians were not displaying the climax of divine and human history, for mediocrity spread widely in the early church. Laodiceans were neither hot nor cold, but drastically indigestible (Rev. 3.15f.).⁶² Tertullian speaks of mediocritas nostra (paen. 6.1) and develops a doctrine of original sin.⁶³

From such disappointment, two types of perfectionism emerged—apocalyptic and Gnostic. Irenaeus and Tertullian both viewed with sympathy the New Prophecy of the followers of Montanus. Clement of Alexandria gave critical recognition to some elements of Valentinianism. Irenaeus had wonderful millenarian expectations. If all was summed up in Christ, what remained had to be sensational—a thousand branches on every vine and a thousand grapes on every twig. Lions normally eat only the best of animal steaks.⁶⁴ Yet in the last days, says Irenaeus, we know from the scriptures that lions will eat straw. They cannot eat the lambs with whom they lie down. If the straw is so good as to be attractive to lions, we shall truly feast on what is provided for us.

The perfectionist movement known as Gnosticism was not confined to Christianity. The desire to surpass (supergredi) others is always widespread; to the question 'What must I do to be saved?' is added the question 'What must I do to be a better Jew or Christian, than my neighbour?' Gnosticism is a complex movement. Tertullian saw that its final strength and weakness lay in its claim to surpass reason. Like all theosophy, Gnosticism presents philosophy without argument, which is like opera without music, Shakespeare without words and ballet without movement. Complex argument can be replaced by pretentious narrative. The Gnostic reply is always that his critic is shallow (not profound) or even intellectually and morally depraved.⁶⁵ The relevance of Gnosticism for Tertullian is first, its reaction against mediocrity in favour of perfection and second, its movement from argument to story. Unlike Clement of Alexandria, he neither appreciated its abstract tendency nor offered a higher competitive gnosis.

Perfectionism had emerged as a problem very early in Christian history. The Letter to the Ephesians affirmed strongly that all has been summed up in Christ and that the church is the eschatological miracle which rises from earth to heaven. There is no way in which this miracle can be surpassed. The believer must simply hold to the one faith within the one body, walk in the light and stand firm in the whole armour of God.

Apologists claimed evidence for finality in the moral excellence of Christian lives and in the spread of the gospel. Such moral excellence was the ground for Justin's conversion, and Tertullian made much of it. He pointed to the chastity and integrity of Christians, the courage of the martyrs and the mutual love of the community. This claim caused his discontent with the church universal. He remained within the community of the church at Carthage;⁶⁶ but he certainly expressed dissent. When his bishop offered absolution for the sins of adultery and fornication, Tertullian was outraged, because this controverted his claim that Christians were eschatological paragons of virtue. Tertullian wrote off the majority of Christians as psychics or carnal, in contrast to the spiritual Christians of whom he was one.

The spread of the gospel was a second proof of recapitulation. We are of yesterday, Tertullian said, but we fill the forums and the towns. We are in every country, growing from seed which is the blood of martyrs. The world, too, is a better place; marshes are drained and roads are better.⁶⁷ Theodicy could point to a future consummation in Christ's return and to the present and visible fruits of his triumph. When Christians faced persecution the latter were precious signs. Even persecution, said Justin, showed that the demons (or pagan gods) were fearful. It was different when Christians had gained political power. Christians soon realized that they were not at the eschaton.

Perfection in God

In a Christian empire theodicy ceased to be the first question, until Augustine faced the end of empire in his City of God, and explained why Christians could not expect to win any but the final and decisive test.

While recapitulation of all things in Christ, which dominated the theology of Tertullian, Irenaeus and the early Athanasius, gave way in the fourth century, to christology and trinity, the questions could never be held apart. The first question and answer were 'Is there one God?' and 'Only if the creator has acted to redeem the world in Christ.' The second question 'How can one God be both father and son?' is necessary if God is to be credible. The divine economy has to be within God; it cannot be the detachable plan of a changeable being. The economy of the mystery had been hidden from all ages in the God who made all things (Eph. 3.9).

Christology moved to the centre. How could God be both father and son? Recapitulation might remove distinctions in God. Tertullian spoke of the entire dishonour of his God; but he attacked the monarchianism of Praxeas for crucifying the father, and proposed a doctrine of trinity. The christological debates were inevitable. Before they finished, recapitulation no longer had to do with history and Christus Victor, but with the trinity which summed up the divine being.

This was not, as some have thought, a mistake. The history of the councils of the fourth century is no more elevating than the history of councils in any century: 'After Constantine, there is not much that is not humiliating—the long period of dogmatic squabbling while the Empire was falling to pieces; the destruction or loss of most of the irreplaceable treasures of antiquity; the progressive barbarisation of Europe; we need not follow the melancholy record.'⁶⁸ Arius did miss the point of the whole early tradition, that faith in one God is only possible if that God redeems the world which he first made; but his lack of perception sparked off a genuine advance. For faith in divine redemption can never rely on fulfilled prophecy, external plan or natural evidences, but only on the being of God.

This profound move is apparent in the theology of Gregory Nazianzus.⁶⁹ After the fall of Adam, God corrected and sustained, in diverse ways, the fallen race (orat. 38.13.36.325). When it became clear that a stronger medicine was needed, the incarnation provided the peak of God's saving work. The key to salvation is that Christ is God (orat. 33.16f.36.236). God is father, son and holy spirit. The full deity of the son must be preserved (orat. 33.17.36.236). In the incarnation there is condescension (orat. 37.2.36.284f.) and recapitulation (orat. 2.23f. 35.284f.). God sums up and contains all (orat. 38.7.36.317). 'A few drops of blood recreate the whole world and draw men together into a unity' (orat. 45.29.36.664). The new Adam is a suffering God (orat. 30.1.36.36.104) who overcomes human sin. For Gregory, even where the economy is given pre-eminence, the summing up which is its centre is the triune God. Indeed it is recapitulation which makes God one and perfects human knowledge of the divine.

Tertullian anticipates this move from recapitulation to incarnation and trinity. Christus Victor reflected the prophetic apocalyptic tradition.… This was for Tertullian, the unica spes, the necessarium dedecus, the sacramentum oikonomiae. In the end, the mass of prophetic fulfilment is replaced by this one claim, and by faith in the triune God.

Simplicity and recapitulation, which dominated early Christian theology, including that of Tertullian, found their place in one God, father, son and spirit. Tertullian's ideas persist into the fourth century and indeed into the twentieth century, where a metaphysical poem ends:

A condition of complete simplicity
(Costing not less than everything)
And all shall be well and
All manner of thing shall be well
When the tongues of flame are in-folded
Into the crowned knot of fire
And the fire and the rose are one.⁷⁰

Notes

¹ Speratus speaks in reply to the proconsul's claim, 'Et nos religiosi sumus et simplex est nostra religio.' Speratus says, 'Si tranquillas praebueris aures tuas, dico mysterium simplicitatis.' Passio sanctorum Scillitanorum, 3f. See Acta Martyrum, ed. H. Musurillo, The acts of the Christian martyrs (Oxford, 1972), 86.

² This term is commonly used of Tertullian in the sense of apparent contradiction (Cicero: 'admirabilia contraque opinionem omnium' (Paradoxa Stoicorum, 4)), rather than in the more complex logical sense (Zeno, Russell). See J. van Heyenroot, Logical Paradoxes, in P. Edwards (ed.), Encyclopedia of Philosophy, vol. v (New York, 1967), 45-51. The two senses will sometimes over-lap.

³ 'This unity lies behind the pseudo-paradoxes and pseudo-contradictions.' J.-C. Fredouille, Tertullien et la conversion de la culture antique (Paris, 1972), 485.

⁴ Jerome, vir. illust. 57.

⁵ In this bad sense, the greater part of the faithful are simplices (ne dixerim imprudentes et idiotae) who, having moved from many gods to one God, panic at the exposition of the trinity (Prax. 3.1). The same people are uncertain about the value of martyrdom, find their doubts exploited by Gnostics (scorp. 1.5), and cannot answer objections against the maduess of dying for God (scorp. 1.7).

⁶ The Cainite heresy which honoured Cain because he resisted the evil God of the Old Testament. Tertullian's snakes prefer dry places.

⁷ See discussion of paradox in ch. 3 and of opposites in ch. 4.

⁸ To this formula we shall return in the second part of this chapter.

⁹ Charles Munier, La tradition apostolique chez Tertullien, in Collected studies series CS341, Autorité épiscopale et sollicitude pastorale, L 'année canonique, 33 (Paris, 1979), 175-92 (192).

¹⁰ See below, ch. 5. Despite initial simplicity, Tertullian develops a complex argument here.

¹¹ Gerhard Ebeling often set out his lectures in numbered chapters, sections, paragraphs and even propositions. When he once came to chapter 4, section 3, paragraph 5, proposition 2, he paused and said with a smile, 'Entschuldigen Sie, bitte, wenn ich alles zu einfach mache!'

¹²On the Epistle of John, 7.8. See my, Ethical patterns in early Christian thought (Cambridge, 1976), 179-81.

¹³ B. Nisters, Tertullian, seine Persönlichkeit und sein Schicksal (Münster, 1950).

¹⁴ C. Rambaux, Tertullien face aux morales des trois premiers siècles (Paris, 1979).

¹⁵ See following chapters for discussion of A. Labhardt, Tertullien et la philosophie ou la recherche d'une 'position pure', MH, 7 (1950), 159-80.

¹⁶ H. von Campenhausen, The fathers of the Latin church (London, 1964), 6.

¹⁷ B. B. Warfield, Studies in Tertullian and Augustine (Oxford, 1930), 3f.

¹⁸ T. D. Barnes, Tertullian, A historical and literary study, 2nd edn (Oxford, 1985), 211-32.

¹⁹ See R. D. Sider, Ancient rhetoric and the art of Tertullian (Oxford, 1971), and the work of C. Munier, J.-C. Fredouille and H. Steiner who sees this valuable area of study as 'wohl erschöpft'.

²⁰ Note the necessary qualification of G. L. Prestige, God in patristic thought (London, 1936), 97: 'He was very far, indeed, from being merely the father of Latin theology. His ultimate influence on Greek theological speculation was probably very considerable.'

²¹ J. Daniélou, Latin Christianity, 341.

²² See D. Allen, Motives, rationales, and religious beliefs, APQ, 3 (1966), 112ff., for a useful account of the logic of objection and rebuttal.

²³Ad Diognetum, 5.

²⁴ A recent writer calls this 'polemical Christianity'. (A. J. Guerra, Polemical Christianity: Tertullian's search for certainty, The Second Century (1990), 108). He points out that Tertullian draws on five kinds of support for his position (scripture, reason, moral excellence, spiritual witness and tradition) and that he uses different combinations when he attacks different enemies.

²⁵ In modern jargon, 'a God-shaped blank'.

²⁶ Quentin Skinner, The return of grand theory to the human sciences (Cambridge, 1985), 12.

²⁷ On the chronology of Tertullian's works, I accept the argument and conclusions of R. Braun, Deus Christianorum, 563-77.

²⁸ See below, ch. 10.

²⁹ See below, ch. 5.

³⁰ The term is taken from Paul (I Cor. 2.14; 15.44-6)…

³¹ J.-C. Fredouille, Tertullien et la conversion de la culture antique, 33, notes Zeno (D.L. 7.59), Cicero, Seneca (ep. 38), Tacitus and Marcus Aurelius (med. 4.51).

³² This word, popular among French theologians, is useful to express Tertullian's claim concerning the unity and uniqueness of God.

³³ Clement of Alexandria solved this problem with his thematic statement [about] negative theology… (strom. 5.11.71). See also G. L. Prestige's account of Tertullian's 'organic monotheism', God in patristic thought, 98f.

³⁴ Which, for Marcion, deny the perfect goodness of their maker.

³⁵ See below, ch. 5 for the problem of polemic and ch. 9 for a discussion of Valentinianism and the bureaucratic fallacy.

³⁶ Tertullian's argument is used today, at a popular level, by Orthodox against Roman Catholics and by Roman Catholics against Protestants.

³⁷ This is an example of Tertullian's Trick: omitting steps which he mentions elsewhere.

³⁸ 'deus omnipotens, dominus et conditor universitatis'.

³⁹ This is the point where Tertullian and Stoics differ markedly from Alexandrians and Platonists.

⁴⁰ See F.J. Dölger, … [Der] heilige Fisch in den antiken Religionen und im Christentum (Münster, 1922).

⁴¹mart. Pol. 8.2.

⁴² Because the concept of salvation easily becomes too subjective, 'victor' is often to be preferred as a translation … (TWNT VII, 1,005-24). In the Old Testament, salvation points to the rescue of those oppressed by military power or injustice; because of human limitations, God emerges as the ultimate deliverer. In the New Testament, the same notion of rescue is found in God's relation to the whole human race. In the classical world, saviours could be gods, men who helped or healed, philosophers, statesmen or rulers. Hadrian is frequently celebrated as the saviour of a town or a person. On a wider scale, the emperor brought in, as saviour, the golden age. Philo gives the title of saviour to God who delivers his people, preserves the world, and liberates the soul from passion (sobr. 55; immut. 129; somn. 1.112; leg. all. 11.105).

The message of the angels to the shepherds (Luke 2.1 0f.) links the titles 'saviour' and 'lord'. In the Fourth Gospel, the son is seen as the saviour of the world (John 3.17; cf. I John. 4.14). In the New Testament, the title of 'saviour' is found less frequently than the verb 'save' and the noun 'salvation'. This may be a reaction against Jewish expectations of a national deliverer (TWNT VII, 1,021). The Pastoral Epistles find the title important for the rejection of heretical claims.

⁴³ G. Aulen, Christus Victor (London, 1953), 32-51.

⁴⁴ A. Viciano, Cristo salvador y liberador del hombre (Pamplona, 1986), 269-350.

⁴⁵Ibid., 118-23.

⁴⁶Ibid., 126-9.

⁴⁷Ibid., 129-33.

⁴⁸Ibid., 133-8 and 318-20.

⁴⁹Ibid., 138-40.

⁵⁰Ibid., 141-3.

⁵¹Ibid., 341-50.

⁵² 'Die Kirchengeschichte ist eine Siegesgeschichte des Christenthums'. G. Leonhardi, Die apologetischen Grundgedanken Tertullians (Leipzig, 1882), 7. It was indeed the universal character of Christianity which brought it into conflict with the state.

⁵³ Tertullian misquotes Isa. 45.1, reading Kurios for Cyrus.

⁵⁴ Deut. 33.17. Moses gives this blessing to Joseph.

⁵⁵ Ps. 96.10 is often so quoted in early Christian writing; no adequate reason has been found for the reading. See E. F. Osborn, Justin Martyr (Tubingen, 1973), 103-5, and J. H. Charlesworth, Christian and Jewish self-definition in light of the Christian additions to the Apocryphal writings, in E. P. Sanders et al. (eds.), Jewish and Christian self-definition, vol. 11, Aspects of Judaism in the Graeco-Roman period (London, 1981), 27-55.

⁵⁶ See Daniélou, Latin Christianity, 341.

⁵⁷ And as for Novalis, Easter is 'ein Weltverjüngungsfest'.

⁵⁸ See The short word, in Osborn, Beginning of Christian philosophy, 206-40.

⁵⁹ Elijah is an eschatological figure who came as John the Baptist.

⁶⁰ As so often, Augustine takes up Tertullian's ideas, 'qui fecit, refecit'. Ep. 231.6. He discards Tertullian's exaggeration of creation's superiority over recreation. Tertullian reverses the priority in Prax.

⁶¹ Aulen, Christus Victor.

⁶² Today it is claimed that 'unambitious mediocrity is of course part of the Anglo-Saxon tradition' (Iris Murdoch, The sovereignty of good (London, 1970), 50), and the arguments against enthusiasm in National Socialism and Islamic Fundamentalism are overwhelming.

⁶³ See below, ch. 8.

⁶⁴ They would not be interested in the contemporary Cheeseburger.

⁶⁵ The issue is more complex. See the discussion on Valentinianism, ch. 9, below.

⁶⁶ See David Rankin, Tertullian and the church (Cambridge, 1995), 41-51.

⁶⁷ To 'disseminate' with Post-modernists, the camels are running on time.

⁶⁸ W. R. Inge, The Platonic tradition in English religious thought (London, 1926), III.

⁶⁹ See E. F. Osborn, Theology and economy in Gregory the Theologian, in H. C. Brennecke, E. L. Grasmück and C. Markschies (eds.), Logos, FS for L. Abramowski (Berlin, 1993), 361-83.

⁷⁰ T. S. Eliot, Four Quartets (London, 1944), 44 Note also p. 33:

Here the impossible union
Of spheres of existence is actual,
Here the past and future
Are conquered, and reconciled.

Tertullian's Works

an.

de anima

ap.

apologeticum

bapt.

de baptismo

carn.

de carne Christi

cast.

de exhortatione castitatis

cor.

de corona

cult.

de cultu feminarum, libri II

fug.

de fuga in persecutione

Herm.

adversus Hermogenem

idol.

de idololatria

iei.

de ieiunio

Jud.

adversus Judaeos

Marc.

adversus Marcionem, libri V

mart.

ad martyras

mon.

de monogamia

nat.

ad nationes, libri II

or.

de oratione

paen.

de paenitentia

pall.

de pallio

pat.

de patientia

praescr.

de praescriptione haereticorum

Prax.

adversus Praxean

pud.

de pudicitia

res.

de resurrectione mortuorum

Scap.

ad Scapulam

scorp.

scorpiace

spect.

de spectaculis

test.

de testimonio animae

ux.

ad uxorem, libri II

Val.

adversus Valentinianos

virg.

de virginibus velandis