The Marcionite Prologues to the Letters of Paul

[p. 136*] This hypothesis is, it seems, supported by two facts: that there were, in the Western tradition, manuscripts of the letter to the Romans without chs. 15 and 16; that further Marcionite influences are also otherwise to be found in it; and that numerous Vulgate manuscripts have preserved for us prologues that derive from the Marcionite church. It is first necessary to examine these prologues more closely:

Marcionite Prologues to the Letters of Paul.¹

Galatians: “Galatae sunt Graeci. hi verbum veritatis primum ab apostolo acceperunt; sed post discessum eius temptati sunt a falsis apostolis, ut in legem et circumcisionem verterentur. hos apostolus revocat ad fidem veritatis scribens eis ab Epheso.” — The Galatians are Greeks. They first received the word of truth from the apostle; but after his departure they were tempted by false apostles to be turned to the law and circumcision. The apostle recalls them to the faith of truth, writing to them from Ephesus.

1 Corinthians: “Corinthi sunt Achaei. et hi similiter ab apostolo audierunt verbum veritatis et subversi multifarie a falsis apostolis, quidam a (ad) philosophiae verbosa (-am) eloquentia (-am), alii a (ad) secta (-am) legis Judaicae inducti. hos revocat apostolus ad veram evangelicam sapientiam scribens eis ab Epheso per Timotheum.” — The Corinthians are Achaeans. They likewise heard the word of truth from the apostle, and were led astray in various ways by false apostles — some to the wordy eloquence of philosophy, others led into the sect of the Jewish law. The apostle recalls them to the true evangelical wisdom, writing to them from Ephesus through Timothy.

2 Corinthians: “Post actam paenitentiam consolatorias scribit eis a Troade et conlaudans eos hortatur ad meliora.” — After penance had been performed, he writes them words of consolation from Troas and, commending them, exhorts them to better things.

Romans: “Romani sunt in partibus Italiae. hi praeventi sunt a falsis apostolis et sub nomine domini nostri Jesu Christi in legem et prophetas erant inducti. hos revocat apostolus ad veram evangelicam fidem scribens eis a Corintho.” — The Romans are in the regions of Italy. They were forestalled by false apostles and, under the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, were led into the law and the prophets. The apostle recalls them to the true evangelical faith, writing to them from Corinth. (Harnack notes: “ab Athenis” [“from Athens”], although attested early and strongly alongside “a Corintho,” is nevertheless probably an error.)²

[p. 137*] 1 Thessalonians: “Thessalonicenses sunt Machedones, qui accepto verbo veritatis perstiterunt in fide etiam in persecutione civium suorum; praeterea nec receperunt ea quae a falsis apostolis dicebantur. hos conlaudat apostolus scribens eis ab Athenis.” — The Thessalonians are Macedonians who, having received the word of truth, persevered in the faith even amid the persecution of their fellow citizens; moreover they did not accept what was said by false apostles. The apostle commends them, writing to them from Athens.

2 Thessalonians: “Ad Thessalonicenses secundam scribit et notum facit eis de temporibus novissimis et de adversarii detectione. scribit ab Athenis.” — To the Thessalonians he writes a second [letter] and makes known to them the last times and the unmasking of the adversary. He writes from Athens.

Laodiceans [= Ephesians]: “(Laudiceni sunt Asiani. hi praeventi erant a pseudo-apostolis .... ad hos non accessit ipse apostolus ... hos per epistulam recorrigit) ....³” — (The Laodiceans are Asians. They had been forestalled by pseudo-apostles .... the apostle himself did not come to them ... he corrects them by letter) .... [Harnack prints the ellipses as such: this is a conjectural reconstruction of a lost prologue, not a continuous transmitted text — see footnote 1.]

Colossians: “Colossenses et hi sicut Laudicenses sunt Asiani, et ipsi praeventi erant a pseudapostolis nec ad hos accessit ipse apostolus, sed et hos per epistulam recorrigit — audierant enim verbum ab Archippo qui et ministerium in eos accepit —, ergo apostolus iam ligatus scribit eis ab Epheso.⁴” — The Colossians, too, like the Laodiceans, are Asians, and they likewise had been forestalled by pseudo-apostles, nor did the apostle himself come to them, but he corrects them, too, by letter — for they had heard the word from Archippus, who also received a ministry among them — therefore the apostle, now in bonds, writes to them from Ephesus.

Philippians: “Philippenses sunt Machedones. hi accepto verbo veritatis perstiterunt in fide nec receperunt falsos apostolos. hos apostolus conlaudat scribens eis a Roma de carcere per Epaphroditum.” — The Philippians are Macedonians. Having received the word of truth, they persevered in the faith and did not accept false apostles. The apostle commends them, writing to them from Rome, from prison, through Epaphroditus.

Philemon: “Philemoni familiares litteras facit pro Onesimo servo eius. scribit autem ei a Roma de carcere.” — To Philemon he writes a personal letter on behalf of his slave Onesimus. He writes to him from Rome, from prison.

1 Timothy: “Timotheum instruit et docet de ordinatione episcopatus et diaconii et omnis ecclesiasticae disciplinae.” — He instructs Timothy and teaches him concerning the ordination of the episcopate and of the diaconate, and the whole discipline of the church.

2 Timothy: “Item Timotheo scribit de exhortatione martyrii et omnis regulae veritatis et quid futurum sit temporibus novissimis et de sua passione.” — Likewise he writes to Timothy concerning the exhortation to martyrdom, and the whole rule of truth, and what is to come in the last times, and concerning his own passion.

Titus: “Titum commonefacit et instruit de constitutione presbyterii et de spiritali conversatione et haereticis vitandis qui in scripturis [p. 138*] Judaicis credunt” (tendentious correction in Cod. Reginensis: “Judaicis fabulis”) — He admonishes and instructs Titus concerning the appointment of the presbyterate and concerning spiritual conduct and the avoidance of heretics who put their trust in the Jewish scriptures (tendentious correction in Cod. Reginensis: “Jewish fables”).

These prologues are simply the prologues of the European Latin Bible; for they stand in 14 of the 20 old principal Vulgate manuscripts, the oldest of which is the Fuldensis. They were also known to Pelagius,⁵ who is the oldest witness for them. They are translated from the Greek (see, under Thessalonians: “nec receperunt ea quae a falsis apostolis dicebantur” = τὰ ὑπὸ τῶν ψευδαποστόλων λεγόμενα; and under Timothy: “omnis regulae veritatis” = παντὸς τοῦ κανόνος τῆς ἀληθείας), but are no longer extant in Greek. That they are Marcionite is obvious, and, following the demonstrations of de Bruyne and Corssen, is generally acknowledged. It suffices to establish their uniformity, and then to observe that “lex et circumcisio” [“the law and circumcision”] (Gal.) = “lex et prophetae” [“the law and the prophets”] (Rom.) = “secta legis Judaicae” [“the sect of the Jewish law”] (Cor.) = “scripturae Judaicae” [“the Jewish scriptures”] (Tit.). Accordingly, the prologues reject, as false, the Christianity that upholds the Old Testament; they call the great Church a Jewish sect, and describe the Old Testament as a Jewish book. With the Judaizing opponents of Paul — whom they never call by name, but designate simply as “the apostle” — the prologues identify all missionaries before and alongside Paul, and describe their mission as false (though the original apostles are not in view here⁶). Where their activity had already taken place, “the apostle” must “revocare” [“recall”], or, respectively, “recorrigere” [“correct”] (Rom., Laod., Col.). Where it occurred afterward, he must likewise “revocare” (Gal., Cor.). Especially characteristic, however, is that the letters are examined, materially, solely on the point of how the congregations have conducted themselves with respect to the “verbum veritatis” [“word of truth”], or the “fides veritatis” [“faith of truth”], the “vera evangelica sapientia” [“true evangelical wisdom”], [p. 139*] the “vera evangelica fides” [“true evangelical faith”], and “fides” [“faith”]. By these aptly varied expressions (the keyword “veritas,” or “verus,” is genuinely Marcionite and derives from the letter most important to M.; Gal. 2:5, 14: ἡ ἀλήθεια τοῦ εὐαγγελίου [“the truth of the gospel”]) the Pauline Christianity free of the Old Testament is always to be understood. On the letters to the Thessalonians and to Philippians this point of view is simply imposed by force. In the prologue to Colossians, “verbum” [“word”], without the addition “veritatis” [“of truth”], probably means the false gospel.

From the internal relations of part of the first ten prologues to one another, de Bruyne has, with acuity, determined the original order of the letters in the collection, and it turned out to be — the Marcionite order. This is a further proof of their origin. But must not the ten prologues, in the first collection for which they were composed, have stood immediately one after another, since Prologue II simply continues Prologue I, Prologue III continues the second (“scribit eis”), and Prologue VIII simply continues the seventh? But if they stood side by side [in a continuous series], they will presumably derive from a larger work — must one not then think of Marcion’s “Antitheses”? These were, as Tertullian informs us, an “appendix” to his new Bible. White writes in his edition (p. 41): “The arguments [prologues] form a single series and are evidently coherent with one another, so that they appear to have been composed by some Marcionite author, and perhaps by Marcion himself.” Yet, as tempting as the hypothesis is that M. himself was the author, it is nevertheless not probable; for had Tertullian found these prologues in the Marcionite collection that lay before him — whether in the Antitheses, or separately as introductions to the letters — he would certainly not have refrained from bringing their evil tendency to light and refuting it. They are therefore to be set down to the account of a somewhat later Marcionite;⁷ but their wide dissemination in the catholic Church of the West requires the assumption that they arose at the latest at the beginning of the 3rd century. They [p. 140*] are not written for scholars, but for simple people; even “the Romans are in the regions of Italy” the author felt he had to say. They arose out of polemic against Catholicism and are meant to give the interpretation of the Pauline letters a Marcionite direction. It is downright puzzling that the Catholics did not see through this tendency and unsuspectingly received the prologues. Only the West’s dire poverty in texts and in aids for understanding the holy scriptures in the earliest period, and its ignorance, could have led it to seize on every written record and adopt it uncritically.

A further word must be said about the three prologues to the Pastoral Epistles. I formerly, too hastily, followed the obvious view that they could not be Marcionite, since M. did indeed reject the Pastoral Epistles. But Corssen has taught me better. Not only are these prologues, in form and content, of the same character as the others,⁸ but it is decisive that, in the prologue to Titus, out of the expression at 1:14, (μὴ προσέχοντες) Ἰουδαϊκοῖς μύθοις [“(not giving heed) to Jewish myths”], there has here become “(de haereticis vitandis qui) in scripturis Judaicis credunt” [“(concerning heretics to be avoided, who) trust in the Jewish scriptures”]. This is plainly a malicious Marcionite quid pro quo: in place of Jewish myths, the Old Testament itself is substituted. But then the conclusion is unavoidable that part of the later Marcionites acknowledged the Pastoral Epistles and — presumably with incisive corrections — took them up into their Bible.⁹ What a peculiar reversal! The Marcionite prologues, together with the Marcionite Pauline letters to which they belong, penetrate into the territory of their mortal enemy, the catholic Church, and are received there;¹⁰ but even before that, [p. 141*] conversely, Marcionites — even if only a minority — had received the Pastoral Epistles into their collection of Pauline letters out of the catholic Bible. For deciding the question, however, of whether the Marcionite translation of the Pauline epistles preceded the catholic one in Rome and is its mother, these prologues are of no significance, especially since it is doubtful whether they derive from Marcion himself, and since they are found only in Vulgate manuscripts.¹¹ They could have entered the ecclesiastical tradition at any arbitrary moment; yet the assumption is not advisable that this happened at a time when the struggle with the Marcionite church in the West was still burning hot; for it is hardly credible that people were already so obtuse at that time as to take over this material from the enemy’s camp. Only after the struggle in the West had ended — because there were only a few Marcionites left there — and when the need for Bible manuscripts and for introductions to the Bible had grown enormously great, that is, from around 400 onward, will Latin translations of the Pauline letters have been picked up wherever they were found. One may therefore assume that the Western church only allowed these prologues unsuspecting entry from the end of the 4th century onward. This is also supported by the fact that there are no Itala manuscripts with these prologues, and that Pelagius is their first witness.