Editing Tertullian (section)

=== Specific teachings ===
Tertullian's main doctrinal teachings are as follows:

====God====
Tertullian reserves the appellation God, in the sense of the ultimate originator of all things, to the Father,<ref name="stanford">{{cite encyclopedia |author=Tuggy, Dale |editor=Zalta, Edward N. |title=History of Trinitarian Doctrines |url=http://plato.stanford.edu/archives/sum2016/entries/trinity/trinity-history.html#Tertul |encyclopedia=The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=Stanford University |access-date=24 September 2016|date=2016}}</ref> who made the world out of nothing through his Son, the Word, has corporeity, though he is a spirit ({{lang|la|De praescriptione}}, vii.; {{lang|la|Adv. Praxeam}}, vii). However Tertullian used 'corporeal' only in the [[stoicism|Stoic]] sense, to mean something with actual material existence, rather than the later idea of flesh.

Tertullian is often considered an early proponent of the [[Nicene Creed|Nicene doctrine]], approaching the subject from the standpoint of the [[Logos (Christianity)|Logos doctrine]], though he did not state the later doctrine of the [[immanent Trinity]]. In his treatise against Praxeas, who taught [[patripassianism]] in Rome, he used the words "trinity", "economy" (used in reference to the three persons), "persons", and "substance", maintaining the distinction of the Son from the Father as the unoriginate God, and the Spirit from both the Father and the Son ({{lang|la|Adv. Praxeam}}, xxv). "These three are one substance, not one person; and it is said, 'I and my Father are one' in respect not of the singularity of number but the unity of the substance." The very names "Father" and "Son" indicate the distinction of personality. The Father is one, the Son is another, and the Spirit is another ({{lang|la|"dico alium esse patrem et alium filium et alium spiritum"}} {{lang|la|Adv. Praxeam}}, ix)), and yet in defending the unity of God, he says the Son is not other ({{lang|la|"alius a patre filius non est"}}, ({{lang|la|Adv. Prax.}} 18) as a result of receiving a portion of the Father's substance.<ref name="stanford" /> At times, speaking of the Father and the Son, Tertullian refers to "two gods".<ref name="stanford" />{{efn |{{lang|la|"Ergo, inquis, si deus dixit et deus fecit, si alius deus dixit et alius fecit, duo dii praedicantur. Si tam durus es, puta interim. Et ut adhuc amplius hoc putes, accipe et in psalmo duos deos dictos: Thronus tuus, deus, in aevum, &lt;virga directionis> virga regni tui; dilexisti iustitiam et odisti iniquitatem, propterea unxit te deus, deus tuus."}} ({{"'}}Therefore', thou sayest, 'if a god said and a god made, if one god said and another made, two gods are being preached.' If thou art so hard, think a little! And that thou mayest think more fully, accept that in the Psalm two gods are spoken of: 'Thy throne, God, is for ever, a sceptre of right direction is thy sceptre; thou hast loved justice and hast hated iniquity, therefore God, thy God, hath anointed thee.{{'"}}) {{lang|la|Adv. Prax.}} 13}} He says that all things of the Father belong also to the Son, including his names, such as Almighty God, Most High, Lord of Hosts, or King of Israel.<ref>{{lang|la|Adv. Prax.}} 17.</ref>

Though Tertullian considered the Father to be God (Yahweh), he responded to criticism of the [[Sabellianism|Modalist]] Praxeas that this meant that Tertullian's Christianity was not monotheistic by noting that even though there was one God (Yahweh, who became the Father when the Son became his agent of creation), the Son could also be referred to as God, when referred to apart from the Father, because the Son, though subordinate to God, is entitled to be called God "from the unity of the Father" in regards to being formed from a portion of His substance.<ref name="stanford" />{{efn|{{lang|la|"Si filium nolunt secundum a patre reputari ne secundus duos faciat deos dici, ostendimus etiam duos deos in scriptura relatos et duos dominos: et tamen ne de isto scandalizentur, rationem reddimus qua dei non duo dicantur nec domini sed qua pater et filius duo, et hoc non ex separatione substantiae sed ex dispositione, cum individuum et inseparatum filium a patre pronuntiamus, nec statu sed gradu alium, qui etsi deus dicatur quando nominatur singularis, non ideo duos deos faciat sed unum, hoc ipso quod et deus ex unitate patris vocari habeat."}} ("If they do not wish that the Son be considered second to the Father, lest being second he cause it to be said that there are two gods, we have also showed that two gods are related in Scripture, and two lords. And yet, let them not be scandalized by this – we give a reason why there are not said to be two gods nor lords but rather two as a Father and a Son. And this not from separation of substance but from disposition, since we pronounce the Son undivided and unseparated from the Father, other not in status but in grade, who although he is said to be God when mentioned by himself, does not therefore make two gods but one, by the fact that he is also entitled to be called God from the unity of the Father.") {{lang|la|Adv. Prax.}} 19}} ''The Catholic Encyclopedia'' comments that for Tertullian, "There was a time when there was no Son and no sin, when God was neither Father nor Judge."<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|url= http://www.newadvent.org/cathen/14520c.htm |title=Tertullian | encyclopedia = The Catholic Encyclopedia}}</ref><ref name="Princeton Theological Review 1906, pp. 56, 159">[[Benjamin Breckinridge Warfield|B. B. Warfield]] in ''Princeton Theological Review'', 1906, pp. 56, 159.</ref> Similarly [[J.N.D. Kelly]] stated: "Tertullian followed the Apologists in dating His 'perfect generation' from His extrapolation for the work of creation; prior to that moment God could not strictly be said to have had a Son, while after it the term 'Father', which for earlier theologians generally connoted God as author of reality, began to acquire the specialized meaning of Father of the Son."<ref>J. N. D. Kelly, ''Early Christian Doctrines'', Continual International Publishing Book, c. 1960, 2000, p. 112</ref> As regards the subjects of [[subordinationism|subordination]] of the Son to the Father, the ''New Catholic Encyclopedia'' has commented: "In not a few areas of theology, Tertullian's views are, of course, completely unacceptable. Thus, for example, his teaching on the Trinity reveals a subordination of Son to Father that in the later crass form of [[Arianism]] the Church rejected as heretical."<ref name="lesaint" /> Though he did not fully state the doctrine of the immanence of the Trinity, according to B. B. Warfield, he went a long distance in the way of approach to it.<ref name="Princeton Theological Review 1906, pp. 56, 159" />

====Apostolicity====
Tertullian was a defender of the necessity of apostolicity. In his ''Prescription Against Heretics'', he explicitly challenges heretics to produce evidence of the [[apostolic succession]] of their communities.<ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0311.htm|title=The Prescription against Heretics: Chapter 32}}</ref>

==== Eucharist ====
Unlike many early Christian writers, Tertullian (along with [[Clement of Alexandria]]) used the word "figure" and "symbol" to define the Eucharist, since in his book ''Against Marcion'' he implied that "this is my body" should be interpreted as "a figure of my body"; others have also suggested that he believed in a [[Lord's Supper in Reformed theology|spiritual presence in the Eucharist]].<ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=cjIsAQAAMAAJ&dq=Tertullian+spiritual+presence+Eucharist&pg=PA136 |title=Bibliotheca Sacra and Theological Review |date=1844 |publisher=Allen, Morrill, and Wardwell |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=mbBPAAAAMAAJ&dq=Tertullian+spiritually+present+Eucharist&pg=PA525 |title=The British Magazine and Monthly Register of Religious and Ecclesiastical Information, Parochial History, and Documents Respecting the State of the Poor, Progress of Education, Etc. |date=1833 |publisher=J. Petheram |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Kaye |first=John |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SZcZKlLb53AC&dq=Tertullian+spiritually+present+Eucharist&pg=PA154 |title=Works of John Kaye, Bishop of Lincoln: Miscellaneous works with memoir of the author |date=1888 |publisher=Rivingtons |language=en}}</ref>

==== Baptism ====
Tertullian advises the postponement of baptism of little children and the unmarried, he mentions that it was customary to baptise infants, with sponsors speaking on their behalf.<ref>"The delay of baptism is preferable; principally, however, in the case of little children. For why is it necessary&nbsp;... that the sponsors likewise should be thrust into danger?&nbsp;... For no less cause must the unwedded also be deferred—in whom the ground of temptation is prepared, alike in such as never were wedded by means of their maturity, and in the widowed by means of their freedom—until they either marry, or else be more fully strengthened for continence." {{cite book |title=[[Ante-Nicene Fathers (book)|The Ante-Nicene Fathers: The Writings of the Fathers Down to A.D. 325]] |volume=3 |at=Part III, Chapter 18 |year=1885 |publisher=Christian Literature Company |editor-first1=Alexander |editor-last1=Roberts |editor-first2=James |editor-last2=Donaldson |editor-first3=Arthur Cleveland |editor-last3=Coxe |editor-first4=Philip |editor-last4=Schaff |display-authors=etal}} For the text, see [[s:Ante-Nicene_Fathers/Volume_III/Ethical/On_Baptism/XVIII|Wikisource]].</ref> He argued that an infant ran the risk of growing up and then falling into sin, which could cause them to lose their salvation, if they were baptized as infants.<ref name=":2">{{Cite book |last=Esler |first=Philip F. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6fyCAgAAQBAJ&dq=Tertullian+ex+opere+operato&pg=PA570 |title=The Early Christian World |date=2002-09-11 |publisher=Routledge |isbn=978-1-134-54919-1 |language=en}}</ref>

Contrary to early Syrian baptismal doctrine and practice, Tertullian describes baptism as a cleansing and preparation process which precedes the reception of the Holy Spirit in post-baptismal anointing ({{lang|la|De Baptismo}} 6). {{lang|la|De Baptismo}} includes the earliest known mention of a prayer for the consecration of the waters of baptism.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Johnson |first=Maxwell E. |title=The rites of Christian initiation: their evolution and interpretation |date=2007 |publisher=Liturgical Press |isbn=978-0-8146-6215-1 |edition=revised and expanded |location=Collegeville, Minnesota |oclc=123485489}}</ref>

Tertullian had an {{lang|la|[[ex opere operato]]}} view of the baptism, thus the efficiency of baptism was not dependent upon the faith of the receiver.<ref name=":2" /> He also believed that in an emergency, the laity can give the baptism.<ref>{{Cite book |last1=Still |first1=Todd D. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7GLm2X6BRdEC&dq=Tertullian+outside+the+church+no+salvation&pg=PA176 |title=Tertullian and Paul |last2=Wilhite |first2=David |date=2012-12-20 |publisher=A&C Black |isbn=978-0-567-00803-9 |language=en}}</ref>

==== The Church ====
According to James Puglisi, Tertullian interpreted that in Matthew 16:18–19 "the rock" refers to Peter. For him, Peter is the type of the one Church and its origins, this Church, is now present in a variety of local churches.<ref name=":3">{{Cite book |last=Puglisi |first=James |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=SZ2vkWM8IpwC&dq=Tertullian+pope+calixtus&pg=PA36 |title=How Can the Petrine Ministry Be a Service to the Unity of the Universal Church? |date=2010-11-09 |publisher=Wm. B. Eerdmans |isbn=978-0-8028-4862-8 |language=en}}</ref>.He mocked [[Pope Callixtus I|Pope Calixtus]] or [[Agrippinus of Carthage|Agrippinus]] (it is debated which one he was referring to) when he challenged him on the Church forgiving capital sinners and letting them back into the church.<ref name=":3" /> He believed that the people who committed grave sins, such as sorcery, fornication and murder, should not be let inside the church.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Gomez |first=Cristina Lledo |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=7mObDwAAQBAJ&dq=Tertullian+Fornicators&pg=PT79 |title=The Church as Woman and Mother: Historical and Theological Foundations |date=2018 |publisher=Paulist Press |isbn=978-1-58768-694-8 |language=en}}</ref>

==== Marriage ====
Tertullian's later view of marriage, such as in his book ''Exhortation to Chastity'', may have been heavily influenced by Montanism. He had previously held marriage to be fundamentally good, but after his conversion{{dubious|date=March 2024}} he denied its goodness. He argues that marriage is considered to be good "when it is compared with the greatest of all evils". He argued that before the coming of Christ, the command to reproduce was a prophetic sign pointing to the coming of the Church; after it came, the command was superseded. He also believed lust for one's wife and for another woman were essentially the same, so that marital desire was similar to adulterous desire. He believed that sex even in marriage would disrupt the Christian life and that abstinence was the best way to achieve the clarity of the soul. Tertullian's views would later influence much of the [[Western Christianity|western church]].<ref name=":5">{{Cite book |last=Schafer |first=Steven |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=X0uvDwAAQBAJ&dq=Tertullian+Fornicators&pg=PA10 |title=Marriage, Sex, and Procreation: Contemporary Revisions to Augustine's Theology of Marriage |date=2019-09-09 |publisher=Wipf and Stock |isbn=978-1-5326-7182-1 |language=en}}</ref> 

Tertullian was the first to introduce a view of "sexual hierarchy": he believed that those who abstain from sexual relations should have a higher hierarchy in the church than those who do not, because he saw sexual relations as a barrier that stopped one from a close relationship with God.<ref name=":5" />

==== Scripture ====
Tertullian did not have a specific listing of the canon; however, he quotes [[First Epistle of John|1 John]], [[First Epistle of Peter|1 Peter]], [[Epistle of Jude|Jude]], [[Revelation]], the [[Pauline epistles]] and the [[four Gospels]]. In his later books, he also started to use the [[The Shepherd of Hermas|Shepherd of Hermas]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=McDonald |first=Lee Martin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VfvUDQAAQBAJ&dq=Tertullian+canon&pg=PA80 |title=The Formation of the Biblical Canon: Volume 2: The New Testament: Its Authority and Canonicity |date=2017-01-26 |publisher=Bloomsbury |isbn=978-0-567-66885-1 |language=en}}</ref> Tertullian made no references to the [[book of Tobit]]; however, in his book ''Adversus Marcionem'' he quotes the [[book of Judith]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Hengel |first=Martin |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=LUmGZ0NiweAC&dq=Tertullian+tobit&pg=PA117 |title=Septuagint As Christian Scripture |date=2004-05-01 |publisher=A&C Black |isbn=978-0-567-08287-9 |language=en}}</ref> He quoted most of the [[Old Testament]] including many [[deuterocanonical books]], however he never used the books of [[Books of Chronicles|Chronicles]], [[Book of Ruth|Ruth]], [[Book of Esther|Esther]], [[2 Maccabees]], [[Second Epistle of John|2 John]] and [[Third Epistle of John|3 John]].<ref name=":6">{{Cite book |last1=Tertullianus |first1=Quintus Septimius Florens |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kHYl6rhy4FkC&dq=Tertullian+apocrypha&pg=PA13 |title=Tertullian |last2=Dunn |first2=Geoffrey D. |date=2004 |publisher=Psychology Press |isbn=978-0-415-28231-4 |language=en}}</ref> He defended the [[Book of Enoch]] and he believed that the book was omitted by the Jews from the canon. He believed that the [[epistle to the Hebrews]] was made by [[Barnabas]].<ref name=":6" /> For Tertullian, scripture was authoritative; he used scripture as the primary source in almost every chapter of his every work, and very rarely anything else.<ref name=":6" /> He seems to prioritize the authority of scripture above anything else.<ref name=":7">{{Cite book |last1=Tertullianus |first1=Quintus Septimius Florens |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kHYl6rhy4FkC&dq=Tertullian+apocrypha&pg=PA13 |title=Tertullian |translator-last=Dunn |translator-first=Geoffrey D. |date=2004 |publisher=Psychology Press |isbn=978-0-415-28231-4 |page=15 |language=en}}</ref>

When interpreting scripture, he would occasionally believe passages to be allegorical or symbolic, while in other places he would support a literal interpretation. He would especially use allegorical interpretations when dealing with Christological prophecies of the Old Testament.<ref name=":7" /> Scripture was a record of the earlier Tradition that should not be interpreted outside that tradition: scripture should not be cherry-picked and early interpretations should be preferred over later ones.