Willemien Otten: Rhetoric and Theology in Tertullian

Forty years after the publication of Robert Sider’s Ancient Rhetoric and the Art of Tertullian (Oxford 1971) the problem of how to assess the rhetorical skill of Tertullian remains very much in the forefront of Tertullian studies today. Given the wealth of studies on Montanism, on ancient culture (cf. J.-C. Fredouille, Tertullien et la conversion de la culture antique [1972]), and on early Christian exegesis and rhetoric published in the intervening years, alongside the appearance of new editions, and a new historiographical appreciation for the rhetorical style of patristic authors (cf. E. Clark, History, Theory, Text: Historians and the Linguistic Turn [2004]), we seem to be in a better position to contextualize and situate Tertullian’s thought, which makes a workshop on “Rhetoric and Theology in Tertullian” at this time opportune. Much is involved in the investigation of Tertullian’s rhetoric, as we have to take into account that Tertullian was an occasional writer, who did not put pen to paper unless he had to solve a theological problem. But reducing his rhetoric to a mere instrument seems to do injustice to what Sider has rightly termed “the art of Tertullian”.

In pursuing Sider’s line of thought, the workshop wants to concentrate on the following fundamental dilemma: Is rhetoric for Tertullian a strategy which allows this notably antagonistic patristic thinker to go after his opponents —Catholic, Jewish, Montanists of a less spiritualist bend— as fiercely as possible, or should rhetoric be situated instead at the heart of both his literary ambitions and his controversial theological views in ways that make him significantly different from other patristic writers?

Chair: Prof. Karla Pollman (UK)

Presenters:

1. David Wilhite, (USA): “What Tertullian learned from Paul.”

2. Frédéric Chapot, France: “Rhetoric and Theology in the Adversus Praxean.”

3. Willemien Otten, USA: “Tertullian’s Rhetoric of Redemption: De carne Christi and De resurrectione mortuorum.”

Respondent:

Prof. Geoffrey Dunn, Australia