What Possible Reason Does Tertullian Have For Not Explicitly Saying He Has an Actual Marcionite Canon in His Hand?

Introduction

Tertullian, a prominent early Christian writer, is known for his vehement opposition to various heresies, particularly Marcionism. His work "Adversus Marcionem" (Against Marcion) is a detailed refutation of Marcion's teachings and texts. A recurring question among scholars and readers is why Tertullian does not explicitly state that he possesses an actual Marcionite canon. Understanding this issue requires a deep dive into Tertullian's rhetoric, his references to Marcion's texts, and the broader context of early Christian manuscript traditions.

Tertullian's Use of the Term "Letters"

Tertullian frequently refers to "letters" or "writings" in his arguments against Marcion. The interpretation of these references is crucial. For instance, in "Adversus Marcionem" 1.1.6, he mentions:

"Non negabunt discipuli eius primam illius fidem nobiscum fuisse, ipsius litteris testibus, ut hinc iam destinari possit haereticus qui deserto quod prius fuerat id postea sibi elegerit quod retro non erat."

Which Evans translates as:

"His disciples will not deny that his original faith was with us, as his letters testify, so that henceforth he can be identified as a heretic who deserted what he had previously been for what he later chose, which was not previously his."

Here, "litteris" (letters) is often understood to refer to writings attributed to Marcion that are still in the possession of the Church. However, there is an argument to be made that "letters" might refer to Marcion's interpretations or uses of canonical texts, particularly those of Paul and Luke.

Ambiguity of the Term "Letter"

The term "letter" in Tertullian's usage can be ambiguous. For example, in "Adversus Marcionem" 1.1.6, "litteris" could be interpreted as writings or epistles, which might be Marcion's commentaries or modified scriptures. This ambiguity extends to references such as:

"Moses seems to have been the first to dedicate the God of the world in the temple of his letters" (Adversus Marcionem 1.1.6).

This passage indicates that "letters" can denote scriptural writings, aligning with Moses’ law, suggesting that Tertullian might be using the term broadly to encompass various types of writings.

The Critical Passage in Book 4

A critical passage in Book 4 further complicates the matter:

"except that Marcion also clearly learned such perverted letters not through a teacher, but through the teacher's letters" (Adversus Marcionem 4.6).

Evans translates this as:

"unless of course Marcion did not obtain his perverse writings from a teacher but learned of the teacher through the writings."

This passage suggests that Marcion's teachings were derived from the writings he possessed, presumably including Pauline epistles and the Gospel of Luke, which he allegedly altered to fit his theology.

The Nature of Tertullian’s Claims

Tertullian's reluctance to explicitly state that he holds an actual Marcionite canon might stem from several reasons:

1. Rhetorical Strategy: Tertullian might be emphasizing the heretical nature of Marcion’s interpretations rather than focusing on the physical manuscripts. By not conceding that he has Marcion’s canon, he avoids legitimizing it as a separate, coherent text.

2. Textual Integrity: By asserting that the Marcionite texts are corruptions of the true apostolic writings, Tertullian can argue that the orthodox texts are the originals, and any deviation is heretical. This supports his broader argument of maintaining doctrinal purity and apostolic tradition.

3. Authority and Authenticity: Acknowledging possession of Marcion's canon could imply that Marcion's texts had a legitimate origin. Instead, Tertullian focuses on the argument that Marcion misinterpreted and distorted pre-existing texts.

Conclusion

Tertullian’s decision not to explicitly state he possesses an actual Marcionite canon seems deliberate and strategic. By doing so, he maintains the narrative that Marcion’s writings are deviations from the true apostolic teachings rather than independent scriptures. This approach reinforces the idea that orthodoxy is grounded in unaltered, authentic tradition, and heresy is characterized by misinterpretation and corruption of these sacred texts.

In essence, Tertullian’s approach allows him to challenge Marcionite teachings effectively without granting them the status of a legitimate, separate canon, thereby preserving the integrity of the orthodox Christian texts and traditions.