Following the death of Marcion of Sinope in 154 C.E., Apelles and other Marcionite Christians continued gathering Pauline writings that had not been included in Marcion’s original Apostolicon. Among these were the Pastoral Epistles: the First Epistle of Paul to Timothy, the Second Epistle of Paul to Timothy, and the Epistle of Paul to Titus.
Their later reception did not expand the Marcionite Canon, alter the original Apostolicon, or cause the Canon to evolve. The original Canon transmitted by Marcion—the Evangelicon and the ten epistles of the Apostolicon—remains complete and unchanged. The Pastorals were received separately for Marcionite use and now belong to the Antilegicon, the Church’s subordinate collection of Deuterocanonical writings.
Evidence for early Marcionite use of the Pastoral Epistles appears in the Marcionite-style Latin prologues attached to them, particularly the prologue to Titus:
“Titus he admonisheth and instructeth concerning the constitution of the presbytery, and spiritual conversation, and the avoiding of heretics that give heed unto Jewish fables; writing unto him from Nicopolis.”
This language resembles the teaching associated with Apelles, a disciple and successor of Marcion who described the Jewish Scriptures as containing fables and failed prophecies. Apelles may therefore have been responsible for collecting, transcribing, and prefacing the Pastoral Epistles after Marcion’s death, just as Marcion had supplied prologues to the epistles contained in the Apostolicon.
Apelles did not presume to revise his teacher’s Canon. Rather, he continued the work of locating and preserving writings attributed to the Apostle Paul while maintaining their distinction from the original Apostolicon. His activity represents the growth of the broader Marcionite textual tradition, not the expansion or alteration of the Canon.
Tertullian expressed astonishment that the epistles to Timothy and Titus were absent from Marcion’s Apostolicon. His remark confirms their absence from the original collection but does not prove that Marcion rejected them as false. Their omission may instead indicate that Marcion did not possess them when he assembled the Apostolicon.
The Pastoral Epistles are personal letters addressed to individual ministers rather than public epistles addressed to entire churches. They may consequently have circulated less widely than Galatians, Corinthians, Romans, or the other congregational epistles. Because they were also associated with the final period of Paul’s ministry, they would have had less time to circulate before Marcion began collecting the Apostle’s writings.
The absence of the Pastorals from the Apostolicon should therefore be distinguished from a deliberate rejection of them. Marcion may simply have been unaware of their existence or unable to obtain reliable copies. Their later discovery and reception by Apelles did not require their insertion into the already established Apostolicon.
Filastrius of Brescia, writing in the late fourth century, explicitly reported that Marcionites accepted the epistles to Timothy and Titus. Although Filastrius wrote as a heresiologist, his testimony directly associates Marcionite communities with the use of at least two of the Pastoral Epistles.
Ephrem the Syrian also refers to Marcionite use of I Timothy, including its citation of a saying preserved in the Evangelicon. John Chrysostom similarly provides evidence that Marcionite Christians knew and used II Timothy. These witnesses indicate that the Pastorals circulated within later Marcionite communities without demonstrating that they had ever been incorporated into Marcion’s original Apostolicon.
The Marcionite Church receives the Pastoral Epistles within the Antilegicon. The name Antilegicon is derived from the Greek antilegomena, meaning “things spoken against” or “disputed writings,” joined to the book-title ending -ikon and Latinized as -icon. It therefore signifies “the book of disputed writings.”
The Antilegicon is a separate and subordinate Deuterocanonical collection. It presently contains Titus, I Timothy, II Timothy, and the Epistle to the Alexandrians. These writings are attributed to the Apostle Paul and possess theological, historical, pastoral, and liturgical value, but their authenticity, textual history, or ancient reception has been disputed.
The Antilegicon is not part of the original Apostolicon and does not possess the same authority as the Canonical Scriptures. Its reception leaves the Canon unchanged. The Evangelicon and Apostolicon remain the original and complete Canon of the Marcionite Church, while the Antilegicon preserves disputed Pauline writings at a secondary level of authority.
The Antilegicon may be included within the complete Testamentum codex together with the Canonical and ecclesiastical books of the Marcionite Church. Physical inclusion within the same codex does not make its books part of the original Apostolicon or place them on equal footing with the Canon.
The Pastoral Epistles are therefore Scripture, but they are Deuterocanonical rather than Canonical Scripture. They are interpreted in conformity with the Evangelicon and Apostolicon and cannot be used to alter, correct, or enlarge the original Canon.
This distinction allows the Marcionite Church to receive the Pastorals without retroactively attributing them to Marcion’s collection. It also reflects the historical role assigned to Apelles: he preserved additional Pauline writings for the use of the Church while respecting the settled form of the Apostolicon inherited from Marcion.
The versions of the Pastoral Epistles contained in the Antilegicon are shorter than the forms transmitted in later catholic manuscripts. The Marcionite Church holds that the surviving conventional texts underwent expansion and revision during the development of proto-Catholic doctrine and ecclesiastical organization.
The Pastorals contain numerous passages that appear directed against Marcionite or related Christian teachings. Such material is especially susceptible to identification as later interpolation because it reflects controversies that arose after the period in which the epistles purport to have been written.
The reconstructed texts seek to recover an earlier Pauline form beneath these later additions. They are based primarily upon early quotations, allusions, and attestations preserved by Clement of Alexandria around the beginning of the third century. Clement’s extensive use of Pauline material provides evidence for forms of the Pastorals circulating before many later doctrinal and textual developments became fixed.
Additional readings were gathered from other patristic witnesses dating before the First Council of Nicaea in 325 C.E., including material preserved in biblical catenae. These exegetical chains sometimes retain early textual forms or quotations not otherwise preserved in complete manuscripts.
A verse was ordinarily included where it was directly quoted, clearly alluded to, or otherwise attested in early Christian literature. Limited exceptions were made where a verse was reflected in a Marcionite prologue or was necessary to preserve the grammatical and narrative continuity of the reconstructed epistle.
The reconstruction does not assume that every unattested verse is necessarily inauthentic. It instead offers a conservative text limited principally to material for which early evidence survives. The resulting epistles are therefore shorter and less encumbered by passages associated with later anti-Marcionite controversy and ecclesiastical development.
The principal modern resources used in this reconstruction are Philip Schaff’s edition of the Ante-Nicene Fathers and Maegan C. M. Gilliland’s study, The Text of the Pauline Epistles and Hebrews in Clement of Alexandria. These sources provide access to the early patristic quotations and textual evidence upon which the reconstructed forms substantially depend.
The prologues attached to the Pastorals also contribute to the reconstruction. Their concise descriptions of the purpose, recipient, and place of composition resemble the prologues associated with the Marcionite Pauline collection. Their language supports the conclusion that these epistles were collected and transmitted within a Marcionite environment, possibly under the direction of Apelles.
The Church does not claim that the surviving Pastorals can be restored with complete certainty. Their original form, authorship, and early circulation remain disputed. Their placement in the Antilegicon openly acknowledges those uncertainties while preserving the material that the Marcionite tradition received as Pauline.
No future discovery concerning the Pastorals would alter the historical contents of Marcion’s Apostolicon. Even should stronger evidence establish their Pauline authorship or permit a more complete reconstruction of their earliest texts, they would remain later-recovered writings received through the Antilegicon rather than books originally included by Marcion in the Apostolicon.
The distinction is both historical and theological. The Canon is not an indefinitely expanding collection of every ancient text that may be associated with Paul. It is the particular and settled collection transmitted by Marcion of Sinope: the Evangelicon and Apostolicon. The Antilegicon exists to preserve other disputed Pauline writings without changing that original inheritance.
Through the Antilegicon, the Marcionite Church continues the careful work associated with Apelles. It gathers, studies, reconstructs, and preserves writings attributed to the Apostle while maintaining the unique and superior authority of the Canon established by Marcion.
The Pastoral Epistles may accordingly be used for theological study, pastoral instruction, historical inquiry, and appropriate liturgical readings. Their teachings are received wherever they conform to the Evangelicon and Apostolicon, and disputed passages are judged according to the Canonical Scriptures.
The reconstruction of I Timothy, II Timothy, and Titus therefore represents neither an expansion of the Marcionite Canon nor an evolution of the Apostolicon. It is the recovery of a subordinate body of disputed Pauline writings received by Apelles and later Marcionite Christians for the benefit of the Church.
The Evangelicon and Apostolicon remain unchanged as the original Canon. The Antilegicon remains a separate Deuterocanonical collection. Together with the ecclesiastical books, they may be preserved within the complete Testamentum codex while retaining their distinct histories, classifications, and degrees of authority.
