From its earliest proclamation, the Marcionite Church of Christ has sounded a clear trumpet: salvation history pivots not on Peter or any institutional succession that claims to derive from him, but on the incomparable vocation of the Apostle Paul. Catholic apologists argue that ecclesial authority descends through Petrine lineage, especially by appealing to the much-disputed verse “You are Peter, and on this rock …” (Matt 16:18). Yet the Marcionite Evangelicon—our earliest, most accurate Gospel witness—contains no such statement. It is a later accretion fitted to buttress an emerging episcopal monarchy in Rome. Once that interpolation is removed, the scriptural, doctrinal, historical, and pastoral evidence converges on a single, luminous fact: Paul, not Peter, is the divinely appointed herald of the true covenant of grace.
The following essay unfolds ten lines of argument showing why Pauline Primacy is intrinsic to authentic Christian faith. Each section draws on the Testamentum alone: the Evangelicon (our Gospel) and letters of the Apostolicon (Pauline Epistles). No appeal is made to Acts, the Petrine or Catholic Epistles, or any post-apostolic tradition.
I. The Unparalleled Call of Paul
Paul’s apostolic commission erupted from heaven itself, unmediated by human ordination. “Paul, an apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father, who raised him from the dead” (Galatians 1:1). When Paul recounts his experience, he emphasizes divine initiative: “But when it pleased God, who separated me from my mother’s womb, and called me by his grace, To reveal his Son in me, that I might preach him among the heathen; immediately I conferred not with flesh and blood” (Galatians 1:15-16). By contrast, Peter’s original call arose within an earthly context: a Galilean fisherman invited to follow an itinerant teacher. The difference is stark: Peter’s summons is earthly and preliminary; Paul’s is heavenly and consummate, staged after the resurrection and therefore stamped with eschatological finality.
Catholics sometimes concede the uniqueness of Paul’s call but reduce it to an extraordinary missionary appointment subordinate to Petrine governance. Yet Paul himself repudiates any such subordinate status. He declares that “But of these who seemed to be somewhat, whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man’s person: for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me” (Galatians 2:6)—a pointed rejection of hierarchical oversight from Jerusalem. Instead, Paul moves with independent authority because the risen Christ Himself is his only superior.
II. Prophetic Signs and Revelations Seal His Authority
Paul’s ministry is authenticated by supernatural experiences found nowhere in the Petrine record. He ascends to “the third heaven” (2 Cor 12:1-4). In later histories, Peter’s miracles—whatever may be attributed to him—never appear in first-person testimony.
More importantly, Paul’s revelatory experiences unlock the mystery of the previously Unknown Father, utterly distinct from the capricious Yahweh of the Hebrew Bible’s false covenant. Paul speaks of “Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ” (Laodiceans 1:3). Nowhere does he equate that Father with the war-making deity who thundered at Sinai. Peter, by contrast, remains theologically tethered to Hebrew legalism, wavering in Antioch when “men from James” arrive (Galatians 2:12).
III. Public Rebuke of Peter Undermines Any Petrine Monarchy
The confrontation in Antioch is the deathblow to any theory of Petrine supremacy. “But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.” (Galatians 2:11). If Peter were the supreme pontiff, such a rebuke would constitute ecclesial rebellion. Yet the Apostolicon extols Paul as exemplary for defending: “To whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that the truth of the gospel might continue with you.” (Galatians 2:5). Catholic exegetes retreat to tortured distinctions—Peter allegedly erred “personally” but not “doctrinally”—but the text itself states Peter’s conduct “ walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel.” Doctrine and practice were of a piece, and Peter failed on both counts.
Moreover, Paul’s rebuke is not a private whisper; it is “before them all” (Galatians 2:14), signaling that public correction of a wayward apostle is sometimes necessary to preserve gospel purity. Authority in the Church, therefore, rests not on office alone but on fidelity to the Pauline proclamation.
IV. Authentic Literature versus Pseudepigraphical Claims
The Apostolicon provides letters whose authenticity shines through unmistakable style, personal detail, and early attestation. Even scholarly critics who question individual epistles admit they collectively bear a singular theological voice unmatched elsewhere in the New Testament. By contrast, scholarly consensus—Catholic, Protestant, and secular alike—acknowledges that 2 Peter is pseudepigraphical and that 1 Peter is at minimum heavily redacted by a later amanuensis. These letters do not appear in the Marcionite canon precisely because their provenance is doubtful.
To stake ecclesial infallibility on documents of questionable origin is perilous. Marcionites prefer the surer foundation of Paul’s own hand: “Ye see how large a letter I have written unto you with mine own hand.” (Galatians 6:11). Authentic voice grounds authentic doctrine; forged voice breeds forged dogma.
V. A Later Interpolation: Matthew 16:18—and Why That Matters
Catholic dogma rests on a verse that the earliest Gospel in circulation—Marcion’s Evangelicon—does not contain. The omission cannot be accidental; it is textual evidence that the original gospel proclamation never envisaged a Petrine office endowed with universal jurisdiction. When later editors compiled the multi-source canonical Matthew, they inserted a Petrine pericope to bolster Roman claims. The Marcionite Church refuses that interpolation. The absence of Matthew 16:18 in the Evangelicon leaves Catholic polemics without bedrock.
VI. Universal Scope of Paul’s Gospel
Paul alone speaks of a mission that abolishes every ethnic and social boundary: “For the grace of God that bringeth salvation hath appeared to all men” (Titus 2:5). Peter’s recorded ministry remains circumscribed by hesitation, legal scruples, and Jerusalem politics. Only Paul announces that the true covenant operates apart from the Law.
The logical consequence is that Paul’s gospel is not a sub-department within a greater Petrine superstructure; it is the charter of the Church universal. Catholicism inverts that hierarchy, treating Paul as a brilliant but subordinate professor under the chairmanship of Peter. Marcionite Christianity restores the proper order: the Pauline charter defines the Church, and any ministry—including Peter’s—must conform itself thereto.
VII. Ecclesial Architecture: Pauline Networks versus Petrine Thrones
Paul establishes churches through itinerant evangelism, appointing local presbyters (elders) and deacons (Laodiceans 4:11-13; 1 Tim 3:1-13; Tit 1:5). Oversight is collegial and moral: “Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.” (Tit 1:8). Peter leaves no comparable blueprint. Catholic tradition fills the vacuum by retrofitting second-century episcopal structures back onto the first century, claiming that Peter secretly consecrated Linus, then Cletus, then Clement as Rome’s bishops. Yet the Petrine Epistles never mention such actions, and no trace appears in Paul’s own letter to the Romans—an astonishing silence if Rome already possessed a Petrine monarch.
By contrast, Paul writes to the Romans but never to a single bishop. Authority in Rome, as elsewhere, flowed from the gospel itself and is shared among faithful believers.
VIII. Succession by Fidelity, Not by Flesh
Paul provides the only explicit apostolic succession plan in Scripture: “And the things that thou hast heard of me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men, who shall be able to teach others also.” (2 Tim 2:2). The chain is doctrinal, not biological; spiritual, not administrative. A bishop is qualified by adherence: “Holding fast the faithful word as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers.” (Tit 1:8).
Catholic polemic insists that an unbroken line of ordinations descending from Peter confers automatic legitimacy. Yet ordinations devoid of Pauline doctrine amount to empty ceremony. By contrast, communities that hold the Pauline gospel—regardless of geographical location—constitute authentic successors of the apostle. The Marcionite Church, therefore, measures succession not by historical paperwork but by the living presence of Pauline proclamation and practice.
IX. Historical Witness: Marcion, Tertullian, and Beyond
When Marcion published the first Christian canon (circa 128 CE), he placed Paul at the head of ecclesial authority. Tertullian, a fierce opponent of Marcion, concedes that Paul’s letters were universally revered and that even his Catholic contemporaries sometimes labeled Paul “the apostle of the heretics.” Such a label inadvertently confesses Paul’s independence from the emerging catholic consensus. Rather than capitulate to later ecclesial accretions, the Marcionite Church preserves that primitive recognition of Paul’s distinct status.
Early second-century authors such as Polycarp and even the interpolated epistles of Pseudo-Ignatius cite Paul far more frequently than Peter. Even Clement of Rome, writing from the very see that would later trumpet Petrine authority, grounds his exhortation in Paul’s example rather than Peter’s. The historical record, therefore, aligns with the Marcionite conviction: Paul’s voice rang clearest across the Mediterranean in the critical decades after the resurrection, shaping doctrine and discipline in every province.
X. The Pastoral Fruits of Pauline Theology
A tree is known by its fruit. Under Pauline teaching believers discover liberty from the crushing burden of Law: “Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.” (Galatians 5:1). They rise into mystical union: “For ye are dead, and your life is hid with Christ in God.” (Col 3:3). They manifest ethical renewal: “Teaching us that, denying ungodliness and worldly lusts, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world” (Titus 2:6).
By contrast, ecclesial systems erected on Petrine supremacy often descend into legalistic control, regulating meals, festivals, indulgences, penances, and endless canonical minutiae. This is not accidental but flows from a foundational error: if authority stems from lineage rather than gospel, institutional maintenance eclipses spiritual liberation.
XI. Answering Catholic Objections
-
“Peter received the keys of the kingdom.”
The Evangelicon nowhere records such a grant. Even if granted, keys symbolize the preaching office (cf. Laodiceans 6:17), a commission shared by all apostles and extended supremely to Paul as herald to the nations. -
“Acts portrays Peter as the chief.”
Marcionites do not consider Acts apostolic. More tellingly, Paul’s own letters—contemporary and self-attested—present no Petrine governance over him. Internal evidence trumps later narrative constructs. -
“Early bishops of Rome trace back to Peter.”
Documentary evidence before the late second century is silent on a Petrine lineage. The earliest extant Roman list (Irenaeus) dates from c. 180 CE, well after episcopal monarchies developed. Paul’s silence regarding a Roman bishop speaks volumes. -
“Church fathers honored Peter.”
They equally honored Paul—and often prioritized him. Moreover, patristic florilegia must be weighed against apostolic documents themselves, where Paul’s voice predominates.
XII. Living under Pauline Primacy Today
For the Marcionite believer, Pauline Primacy is not an antiquarian dispute but a living paradigm. It means:
-
Freedom of conscience from extrabiblical mandates.
-
Direct access to the Father without sacerdotal intermediation.
-
Congregational autonomy under the banner of Pauline doctrine.
-
Universal mission unhindered by ethnic, social, or cultural barriers.
Practically, our worship centers on reading the Apostolicon aloud, celebrating the Evangelicon as a narrative witness to Christ, sharing the Eucharistic cup as a sign of liberation from the Hebrew Law, and disciplining believers into the Pauline ethics of faith-working-through-love.
Conclusion: The Choice Before Every Seeker
Two competing visions beckon the modern Christian. One enthrones the Petrine lineage, investing ultimate authority in a single see whose historical claims rest on disputed texts and late traditions. The other follows the clear, authentic, revelatory voice of Paul—the chosen vessel, hand-picked by the risen Christ to unveil: “Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but now is made manifest to his saints.” (Col 1:26).
The Marcionite Church of Christ invites every seeker to weigh these witnesses. Examine the Apostolicon; trace its logic of grace; feel its emancipating power. Then look to the superstructure erected upon Petrine supremacy and note how often it drifts back into Paul’s condemned legalism. Decide where the Spirit of the Lord truly breathes freedom.
We have chosen Paul. We choose him because the Lord Jesus chose him; because history vindicates him; because Scripture amplifies him; because the gospel lives in him. And because in Paul’s proclamation we encounter, without veil or shadow, the Unknown Father who has become our Father, the Lord Christ who has become our Liberator, and the Spirit who quickens us into everlasting life.
To confess Jesus as Lord is, inevitably, to confess the primacy of Paul. Let every community, every teacher, and every conscience return to that apostolic foundation—“For other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ.” (1 Cor 3:11)—as heralded uniquely and definitively by the Apostle to all peoples.
