MARCION, HERETIC. - Born in Pontus ca. 85, died in Rome in the second half of the 2nd century. Nothing certain is known about his private life, but he seems to have been a shipowner (Tertullian, De praescr. 30, calls him: naucleus), a profession that was lucrative at the time (v. M. Rostovtzeff, Gesellschaft und Wirtschaft im römischen Kaiserreich, II, Leipzig n.d., p. 367 ff) and which explains how, in his first fervor of faith (Tertullian, Adv. Marc. 4, 4), he was able to donate 20,000 sesterces to the Roman community (Tertullian, De praescr. 30). In the year 144, a historically significant date for his followers, he left the Church under the influence of the Gnostic Cerdon (Tertullian, Adv. Marcion. 1, 2), and the community returned his money to him (Tertullian, De praescr. 30). Today, we are poorly informed about the doctrines of the Syrian Gnostic Cerdon.
Harnack’s account of the relationship between Cerdon and M. is unsatisfactory. Harnack sought to deny M.’s connections with Gnosticism, but this attempt failed. The idea of a foreign God is not characteristic of M. alone; rather, the distinction between a just and an unjust God is not exclusive to M. throughout Gnosticism (cf. Didymus, De Trinit., III, 42: PG 39, 392, regarding Menander and Satornilus), and the starting point of M.’s dispute with the Roman presbyters—the Gospel parable of the good and bad tree (Tertullian, Adv. Marc., I, 2)—can only be explained by a Gnostic tradition that identified the two trees in paradise with those of the Gospel parable; therefore, M.’s connection with Gnosticism is undeniable. To what extent M. embraced Gnostic speculations (e.g., those attributed to him by the Armenian Eznik) cannot be determined with certainty, but that M. was a “biblicist,” as Harnack maintains, is unlikely. In the work of I. Bidez and Fr. Cumont, Les mages hellénisés (I, Paris 1938, p. 231), the affinity of some Iranian ideas with those of M. is noted. On the other hand, the absolute authority that M. attributed to St. Paul (in contrast to the Twelve) can only be explained by the Gnostic theory that Paul was of a “pneumatikos” nature (cf. Didymus, in PG 39, 1672). Among the Marcionites, Paul sits at the right hand of God, and M. at His left (Origen, In Luc. hom., 25, ed. Rauer, Leipzig 1930, p. 162, 6 ff.), meaning that both Paul and M. belong to the “pneumatikoi,” i.e., to the good tree.
M. is the author of a work titled *Antitheses*, in which the God of the Old Testament is contrasted with that of the New Testament. The book also seems to have been called the *Proverbiae*. An attempt to reconstruct its contents is found in Harnack, *Marcion* (2nd ed., Leipzig 1924, p. 256 ff.). Here too, Iranian ideas can be discerned, for example, in the polemic against insects (cf. Harnack, op. cit., p. 270) and in the theory that the Demiurge was unaware of the existence of the supreme God (cf. Zatsparám, I, in Zaehner, in *Bulletin of the School of Oriental Studies*, 9 [1937-39], p. 577). The work emphasizes the “novelty” of the Gospel and asserts that while the Demiurge was known to Adam and others, the Father of Christ was unknown. The God of the Old Testament is just, that of the New Testament is good; the former is warlike, the latter peaceful; the former created this visible world, the latter created nothing or only the invisible world; the former demands sacrifices, the latter is content with hymns and praise.
M. never tired of denouncing the present creation, which he considered a “quid malum,” produced by evil matter (hyle) through the agency of a “just” Demiurge (Clement of Alexandria, Strom., III, 3, 12). The patriarchs and prophets knew nothing of the good God, identified with Christ (the Spirit), who in the 15th year of Tiberius manifested Himself in an apparent body and, in His descent into Hades, did not free the righteous but Cain, the Sodomites, the Egyptians, etc. This Jesus, who is a “stranger” in the world of the Creator, was also unknown to His disciples, who maintained ties with Judaism and the world of the Creator. Thus, M. deemed it necessary to reconstruct, based on Luke, a new Gospel, to which he added, in his canon of the New Testament, selected passages from the Pauline epistles, purged according to his doctrinal tendencies. This Gospel is that of Paul, who was called by God after the failure of the Twelve. One might hypothesize that M.’s own calling became necessary after the corruption of Pauline doctrine in the Church. Perhaps M. was aware of the theory of continued prophecy, as seen in the preaching of Mani. According to the *Kephalaia* of the Manicheans, after Paul other “righteous ones” appear who seek to remedy the evils of the Church. M. has been considered in this light, and it is possible that the doctrine expounded in the *Kephalaia* is based on M.’s own assertions.
The Marcionite sect admitted only those who abstained from marriage, practiced severe fasting, abstained from wine and meat, and other ascetic works, and wore black penitential garments. For the history of the sect, cf. Harnack, op. cit., p. 153 ff.; p. 177 ff. also on its ramifications.
---
**“ADVERSUS MARCIONEM”** – A poem in five books against the heresy of M., erroneously attributed to Tertullian.
The original manuscript used by G. Fabricius for the first edition (Basel 1564) is lost. Two centos attributed to a Victorinus in the Codex Vat. Regin. 582 (9th–10th centuries) are important for reconstructing the text. The poem does not convey anything new about M. and indeed contains errors. Its date is much debated. While K. Holl (*Gesammelte Aufsätze zur Kirchengeschichte*, III, Tübingen 1928, p. 13 ff.) placed it in the 5th century (ca. 475–525), M. Müller (*Untersuchungen zum Carmen adversus Marcionem*, Leipzig 1936) argued again for the 4th century. However, Holl’s strong arguments do not appear to have been refuted. Isidore of Seville (*De viris illustr.*, 8) mentions a Bishop Victorinus who composed “two very brief works in verse,” one against the Manicheans and the other against the Marcionites. It does not seem possible to identify this *opusculum admodum breve* with the present *Carmen adversus Marcionem* in five books. According to Holl, the author would have lived in Gaul.