Quotes From Tertullian
On Marriage and Family (200AD)

Tertullian is no doubt one of the most influential Apostolic Fathers in the area of introducing the writings of the Mishnah and Talmud into what has been called the foundation of Roman Catholic Doctrine. (We therefore declare Him to be a false teacher of epic proportions.) – Those downstream from him (Jerome and Augustine) used many of his Talmudic teachings, embroidering and enlarging on them to make names for themselves.  

St. Tertullian And do you not know that you are (each) an Eve?  The sentence of God on this sex of yours lives in this age: the guilt must of necessity live too.  You are the devil’s gateway:  you are the unsealer of that (forbidden) tree:  you are the first deserter of the divine law:  you are she who persuaded him whom the devil was not valiant enough to attack.  You destroyed so easily God’s image, man.  On account of your desertion (Of the Life and vocation God freely gave in the beginning)—that is, death—even the Son of God had to die. (The words of Tertullian turn the entire Gospels and epistles upon its head – The acetic views voiced here are completely from the Talmud – this book is the codification in the church of the Christian Burka the predecessor of the Nun Habit and the Muslim Burka)  On the Apparel of Women. Book I Chapter 1

St. Tertullian: But how are we (Christian women by our dress) a (source of) danger to our neighbour?  How do we import (Thoughts of) concupiscence (Sexual relations) into our neighbour? Which (Thoughts of ) concupiscence, if God, in “elevating (Our standard of obedience of) the law (Of Moses),” (Which) did not associate a penalty without the actual commission of fornication,  I know not (This knowing not is on the basis of any personal knowledge or revelation from the Lord because Tertullian clearly did not know the Lord. This knowing was also clearly not from scripture, the words of Christ and the Apostles or by the words of the apostolic fathers before him which Tertullian completely disregards.)  whether He allows impunity (Forgiveness or immunity from sin) to him who has (unknowingly) been the cause of perdition (Apostasy) to some other.  For that other, as soon as he has felt concupiscence (Desire for sexual relations) after your beauty, and has mentally already committed (the deed) which his concupiscence (Sexual desires) pointed to perishes; (Paul speaks of burning with desire and seeing it not as a cause for perdition, or causing one to perish, Paul’s answer to the unmarried is to marry and to the married to have more sex.) and you have been made the sword which destroys him: On the Apparel of Women. Book I Chapter 1

St. Tertullian: And, of course, that (A universal law in the church) ought to have been chosen which keeps virgins (Hooded and) veiled, (So that their looks might only) be made known to God alone; (Until after marriage) who ought to blush even at their own privilege (In some churches not to be veiled).  You put a virgin to the blush more by praising than by blaming her; because the front of sin is more hard, (Than) learning shamelessness from and in the sin itself.  For that custom which belies virgins while it exhibits them, would never have been approved by any except by some men who must have been similar in (unchaste) character (like) unto these (unchaste) virgins themselves.  Such (corrupt men’s) eyes will wish that a virgin be seen, (We are talking about her head and face) as has the virgin who shall wish to be seen.  The same kinds of (lusting) eyes reciprocally crave after each other.  Seeing and being seen belong to the self-same lust.  To blush if he see a virgin (Unhooded head and unveiled face) is as much a mark of a chaste man, as of a chaste virgin if seen by a man. On the Veiling of Virgins. Book I Chapter 2

St. Tertullian: (On the angels marrying the daughters of men)Who it has above said were “born,” thus also signifying their virginity:  first, “born;” but here, wedded to angels.  Anything else I know not   except that they were “born” and subsequently “wedded.”  So perilous (Was their unhooded and unveiled) face, then, (that) ought to (have) be shaded, which has cast stumbling-stones even so far as heaven: (All of this is not in the bible) that, when (These women shall.) stand in the presence of God, at whose bar (They shall) stand accused of the driving of the angels from their (natural) confines. (Their standing there)  may (Cause) the other angels to blush as well; and (They) may repress (Cut off) those (Of this) former evil liberty of their heads.(A liberty) now (By Christian women) to be exhibited not even before human eyes.  But even if they were (Those unbelieving) females already (sexually) contaminated by those angels that had desired them, so much the more “on account of the angels” would it have been the duty of those to be veiled, as their being (Unveiled and unhooded) would have been the most likely cause for virgins to have been the cause of those angels sinning. On the Veiling of Virgins.. Book I Chapter 7

St. Tertullian: But the authority which licenses her sitting in that seat uncovered is the same which allows her to sit there as a virgin:  a seat to which  besides the “sixty years not merely a single-husbanded women that became widowed (who) are at length (of days) elected, but “mothers” also, yes, and “educators of children;” in order, forsooth, that their experimental (experiential) training in all the affections (This strongly implies that Tertullian still understood the role of female elders in the church and their duties including training up their daughters as [Philoanderers] as Naomi had done with Ruth)   may, on the one hand, have rendered them capable of readily aiding all others with counsel and comfort, and that, on the other, they may none the less have travelled down the whole course of probation whereby a virgin female can be tested (before marriage so the husband when selected his veiled and hooded wife can be assured she is a worthy bride). So she will be truly trained and grounded in her position, On the Veiling of Virgins.. Book I Chapter 9

St. Tertullian: We learn from the apostle, who permits (Talmudic word)  marrying indeed, but prefers abstinence; the former on account of the insidiousness of temptations, the latter on account of the straits of the times.  Now, by looking into the reason thus given for each proposition, it is easily discerned that the ground on which the power of marrying is conceded as necessity; and whatsoever necessity grants, by it’s very nature (becomes) depreciated.  In fact, in that it is written, To marry is better than to burn,” what, pray, is the nature of this “good” which is (only) commended by comparison with “evil?” So that the reason why “marrying” is more good is (merely) that “burning” is less? (The burning is less spoken of here, is an acknowledgment by Tertullian that the conjugal duties of husband and wife had been greatly altered since the death of the Apostles.) To his wife Book I Chapter 3

St. Tertullian: (On being not unequally yoked) For who but could understand that the apostle foresaw many dangers and wounds to (The) faith in marriages? (This phrase regarding “wounds to faith caused by marriage” (Augustine picks up on of and makes it great wood hay and stubble out of this in his Epistle on marriage – completely ignoring like “any good Rabbi” that the subject matter here is not “marriage” but being married unequally yoked.) (So as to understand why) he prohibited this kind (of marriage.) (And in so doing) Taking precaution, in the first place, against the defilement of holy flesh in Gentile flesh? (Holy flesh and gentile flesh is not a term used by Paul or any of the Apostles.)  At this point some one says, “What, then, is the difference between him who is chosen by the Lord to Himself in Gentile marriage, (The first gentile believers) and him who was of (The) old (Covenant) a believer, that (Were forbidden to do such) should not they (Those believers unequally yoked) be equally cautious in (The joining or communion of) their flesh (that they might also become corrupted by sexual relations with their unbelieving spouse?) whereas the one (Those in the covenant of Moses) are kept from marriage with an unbeliever, the other (Those of the new covenant) bidden to continue in it (such relations).  Why, if (As Tertullian preached) we are defiled by (marriage to) a Gentile, is not the one (with the unbelieving spouse that will to remain married) disjoined (Divorced), just as the other (married to the unbelieving spouse who has departed) is not bound?”  I will answer, if the Spirit give (me ability); alleging, before all (other arguments), The Lord holds it more pleasing that matrimony should not be contracted, than that it should at all be dissolved:  in short, divorce He prohibits, except for the cause of fornication; but continence (with even an unbelieving spouse) He commends.  Let the one, (with the unbelieving spouse) therefore, have the necessity of continuing; and the other,(that wishes to marry a unbeliever) further, even the power of not marrying.  Secondly, if, according to the Scripture, they who shall be “apprehended” by the faith in (the state of) Gentile marriage are not defiled by reason, of their communing together, others (of their household shall) also are sanctified:  without doubt, the (believing and unbelieving)  have been sanctified in (their continued) marriage, if (though) they (A believer marries a unbeliever and they) commingle themselves with “strange flesh,(The believer) cannot sanctify that (unbeliever’s) flesh in union with (That) which they were not “apprehended.” (If they were married at the time of salvation) The grace of God, moreover, sanctifies that which it finds. (And not that which man puts together)  Thus, what has not been able to be sanctified is (remains) unclean; what is unclean has no part with the holy, unless to defile and slay it by its own nature.. To his wife Book 2 Chapter 2  

St. Tertullian: Let us now recount the other sources of danger as I have preached or wounds to faith, (That were) foreseen by the apostle (Concerning believers being married to unbelievers) ; most grievous not to the flesh merely, but likewise to the spirit too.  For who would doubt that faith undergoes a daily process of obliteration by unbelieving intercourse?  “Evil confabulations corrupt good morals;” [1] [1] how much more fellowship of life, and indivisible intimacy!  Any and every believing woman must of necessity obey God.  And how can she serve two lords [2] [1]—the Lord, and her husband—a Gentile to boot?  For in obeying a Gentile she will carry out Gentile practices,—personal attractiveness, dressing of the head, worldly [3] [1] elegancies, baser blandishments, the very secrets even of matrimony tainted:  not, as among the saints, where the duties of the sex are discharged with honour (shown) to the very necessity (which makes them incumbent), with modesty and temperance, as beneath the eyes of God. To his wife Book 2 Chapter 2

Tertullian on the Rapture: :For why did the Lord foretell a “woe to them that are with child, and them that give suck,” except because He testifies that in that day of disencumbrance the encumbrances of children (Here the church of Tertullian’s day has made out of whole cloth the desolation of marriage, the desolation of family and the desolation of children as part of a "secret" or "invisible" coming of Christ)  will be an inconvenience?  It is to marriage, of course, that those encumbrances appertain; but that (“woe”) will not pertain to widows. At the first trump of the angel (Christian wives) will spring forth disencumbered (from their babies, from their children that give suck, and presumably from their “duties” as a wife[this sounds alot like feminism] and they) will freely bear (The message of the Gospel across the earth.) to the end (The time of the last trump, regardless of) whatsoever pressure and persecution, (Shall be set before them) with no burdensome fruit of marriage heaving in the womb, none in the bosom. (They will not deny the faith.) To his wife Book I Chapter 5 What we have here, is a made up fantasy concerning a rapture or catching away taking place at the first trumpet where of babies and children that are being breast fed are whisked off so that these woman can fearlessly preach the gospel. -- This is no doubt the source of the false prophesies and false visions of the rapture given in the Irvingite Revival in the mid-1800's. (The rapture as taught is the spiritualization of these children flying away instead being believers. And the mothers are spiritualized into being the churches of tribulated believers -- who are to die for their faith as a punishment of not having believed sooner.)