COlsCLUSION. 207 



mei [)art of the second century, is said by TertuUian to have 

 rejected three of the epistles which we now receive, namely, 

 the two epistles to Timothy and the epistle to Titus. It 

 appears to me not improbable, that Marcion might make 

 some such distinction as this : that no apostolic epistle was 

 to be admitted which was not read or attested by the church 

 to which it was sent ; for it is remarkable, that together 

 with these epistles to private persons, he rejected also the 

 catholic epistles. Now the catholic epistles and the epistles 

 to private persons agree in the circumstance of wanting this 

 particular species of attestation. Marcion, it seems, acknow- 

 ledged the epistle to Philemon, and is upbraided for his In- 

 consistency in doing so by Tertullian,* who asks, " Why, 

 when he received a letter written to a single person, he 

 should refuse two to Timothy and one to Titus, composed 

 upon the affairs of the church ?" This passage so far favors 

 our account of Marcion's objection, as it shows that the ob- 

 jection was supposed by TertuUian to have been founded in 

 something which belonged to the nature of a private letter. 



Nothing of the works of Marcion remains. Probably he 

 was, after all, a rash, arbitrary, licentious critic — if he de- 

 served indeed the name of critic — and who offered no reason 

 lor his determination. What St. Jerome says of him inti- 

 mates this, and is besides founded in good sense : speaking 

 of him and Basilides, " If they assigned any reason," says 

 he, " why they did not reckon these epistles," namely, the 

 first and second to Timothy and the epistle to Titus, " to be 

 the apostle's, we would have endeavored to answer them, 

 and perhaps might have satisfied the reader ; but wdien the^ 

 take upon them, by their own authority, to pronounce one 

 epistle to be Paul's, and another not, they can only be replit.-<? 

 tc in the same manner."! Let it be remembered, however, 

 that Marcion received ten of these epistles. His authority, 

 therefore, even if his credit had been better than it is, forms 

 q, very small exception to the uniformity of the evidence. Of 



* Lardner, vol. 14, p. ^Ti.'^. t Ibid, p -158. 



