Discussion Jumpstarter
Study leader reference - not a definitive answer
Question 4
Tertullian’s reported counsel in Carthage (around AD 200)—to meet in groups of two or three rather than pay fines—highlights a specific kind of conscience; what motivations (fear of compromise, refusal to “buy” permission, loyalty to Jesus’ words in Matthew 18:20) seem to be driving that approach, and how would those motivations land in your church culture today?
Another way to ask: Tertullian advised meeting in groups of two or three instead of paying fines. What reasons do you think were behind that (not compromising, not “buying” permission, trusting Matthew 18:20), and how would your church react to those reasons today?
Discussion Jumpstarter
Direct Answer
The transcript suggests Tertullian’s approach was driven by conscience concerns about paying for permission to worship (possibly seen as compromise or a bribe) and by confidence that Jesus truly meets believers in “two or three” gatherings. In many church cultures today, that motivation would confront assumptions that larger gatherings are necessary and that paying costs to comply is morally neutral.
- He recounts a law in Carthage (~AD 200): Christians could meet but “they would be fined, and they would have to pay a fine.”
- He admits uncertainty on the details but suggests the issue: “whether… paying a fine was some kind of compromise… or… in the nature of a bribe.”
- He reports Tertullian’s stance: “He was against paying anything to meet.”
- Practical alternative: “What we do is we meet in groups of two or three.”
- Biblical anchor: Matthew 18:20—Jesus’ presence with “two or three… gathered together in my name.”
- He generalizes the principle: size “isn’t important to Christian assemblies.”