Tertullian describes this leadership of the new Christian polis
in a variety of ways, some of which evoke the Roman political system (such
as magistratus [De Cor. 13.1] and ordo [De Monog.
8.4; 11.4]). The work of van Beneden has demonstrated that Tertullian was the
first to apply this latter term such that the Church ordo evoked
similar language used in public institutions. (Pierre van Beneden, Aux
Origenes d’Une Terminologie Sacramentelle: Ordo, ordinare, ordination dans la
literature chretienne avant 313 (Louvain : Spicilegium sacrum Lovaniense,
1974), 49. See also Vilela, 228 for similar observations) Furthermore, the
Christian rulers, like the Roman rulers, have a certain authority (ius/potestas)
over the people. Tertullian ascribes to them the ius docendi, (De
Bapt. 1.3, CCSL 1:277) the ius dandi baptismi, (De Bapt.
17.1, CCSL 1:291) the potestas delicta donandi, (De Pud.
21.7, CCSL 2:1326) and the ius sacerdotis. (Exh. Cast.
7.4, CCSL 2:1025)
Given this explicit parallel with the vocabulary of Roman
structures and authority, one might expect Tertullian’s sacerdotal designations
to draw upon the pagan priesthood as well. A close examination, however,
reveals that this is decidedly not the case. Tertullian never designates
Christian leaders as sacerdos when speaking to a pagan audience. This is
particularly striking in Apology 39 where Tertullian gives a full
description of Christian social life and practice. There, he describes the
Church as a curia, a corpus with its own treasury, rites, customs,
morals, discipline, and leadership. He clearly attempts to establish common
ground between the Christian community and the Roman world; yet in this
context, he calls the Christian leaders seniores, never sacerdotes.
Had he understood the Christian ministerial priesthood as a counterpart to the
pagan priesthood, this would be the most natural place to make that point. Instead,
Tertullian avoids the designation altogether. Moreover, the one instance in
which Tertullian applies the more pagan title pontifex maximus to a
Christian bishop (On Modesty 1.1), his intention is to mock an opposing
bishop who has acquired for himself too much power. (Hans von Campenhausen
suggests also that the term pontifex maximus still would have retained pagan
overtones for Tertullian’s audience; this may be why Tertullian chooses to
employ such a designation against his opponent (Kirchliches Amt und
geistliche Vollmacht in den ersten drei Jahrhunderten [Tubingen: J.C.B.
Mohr, 1963], 252 n.3)) (Brian Alan Stewart, "'Priests
of My People': Levitical Paradigms for Christian Ministers in the Third and
Fourth Century Church" [PhD Dissertation; University of
Virginia, May 2006], 44-45)