Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy

Author(s): Jonathon Lookadoo

Source: Novum Testamentum , 2017, Vol. 59, Fasc. 4 (2017), pp. 366-383
Published by: Brill

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26566508

REFERENCES
Linked references are available on JSTOR for this article:
https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.2307/26566508?seq=1&cid=pdf-
reference#references_tab_contents
You may need to log in to JSTOR to access the linked references.

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

Brill is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Novum
Testamentum

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
 Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

brill.com/nt

Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy

Jonathon Lookadoo
University of Otago, Dunedin, New Zealand
jonathon.lookadoo@otago.ac.nz

Abstract

Building on recent discussions of the Paulusbild in the second century, this study ar-
gues that Polycarp’s image of Paul is framed by his use of 1-2 Timothy. The essay first
examines Polycarp’s allusions to 1 Tim 6:7, 10, similarities to the household code in
1 Tim 2:8-3:13, and the reversal of a phrase in 2 Tim 4:10. Two conclusions are then
drawn. First, Polycarp’s use of language from 1-2 Timothy fits loosely within the stan-
dards of ancient quotation. Second, Polycarp’s depiction of Paul as a suffering, pastoral
figure is closely tied to his use of language from 1-2 Timothy.

Keywords

Polycarp – Paul – 1 Timothy – 2 Timothy – image – reception

1 Introduction

The way in which Pauline reception is discussed has undergone increasingly

complex changes since Andreas Lindemann’s Paulus im ältesten Christentum.1
Lindemann urged scholars of Pauline reception to consider more than the re-
ception of phrases from Pauline letters by suggesting that the study of Pauline
reception must take into account the image of Paul and the reception of his
theology. Along with studies by Ernst Dassmann, Donald Penny, and David
Rensberger, Lindemann’s Habilitationsschrift marks an important shift in how

1  A. Lindemann, Paulus im ältesten Christentum: Das Bild des Apostels und die Rezeption der
paulinischen Theologie in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Marcion (BHT 58; Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 1979).

© koninklijke brill nv, leiden, ���7 | doi 10.1163/15685365-12341574

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 367

the study of Pauline reception is undertaken.2 Discussions of Pauline images,

narratives, theologies, biographies, and memories now occupy students of
Pauline reception in the first and second centuries.3 Yet a central issue remains
the question of whether and how a later author uses a Pauline letter. It is the
intersection of the construction of images and the usage of letters that forms
the central focus of this essay.
While studying how Paul was remembered in the second century, Benjamin
White argues that Irenaeus uses the Pastoral Epistles as paratext and hypo-
text in Adversus Haereses.4 By relying on the Pastorals to frame his depiction of
Paul, Irenaeus describes the apostle as a heresy-hunter who is concerned with
proper teaching and belief in the churches. White notes similarities between
Irenaeus and 3 Corinthians and leaves open the possibility that memories of
Paul may be shaped differently in accordance with the communities in which
Paul is received.5 Although the communities may not have license to invent

2  E. Dassmann, Der Stachel im Fleisch: Paulus in der frühchristlichen Literatur bis Irenäus
(Münster: Aschendorff, 1979); D.N. Penny, “The Pseudo-Pauline Letters of the First Two
Centuries” (Ph.D. diss. Emory University, 1979); D.K. Rensberger, “As the Apostle Teaches: The
Development of the Use of Paul’s Letters in Second-Century Christianity” (Ph.D. diss. Yale
University, 1981). See the summary of scholarship in B.L. White, Remembering Paul: Ancient
and Modern Contests Over the Image of the Apostle (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2014)
20-69.
3  M.C. de Boer, “Images of Paul in the Post-Apostolic Period,” CBQ 42 (1980) 359-380; K. Froehlich,
“Which Paul? Observations on the Image of the Apostle in the History of Exegesis,” in New
Perspectives on Historical Theology: Essays in Memory of John Meyendorff (ed. B. Nassif; Grand
Rapids: Eerdmans, 1996) 279-299; M. Kaler, “Towards an Expanded Understanding of Nag
Hammadi Paulinism,” SR 33 (2004) 301-317; J. Schröter, “Kirche im Anschluss an Paulus:
Aspekte der Paulusrezeption in der Apostelgeschichte und in den Pastoralbriefen,” ZNW 98
(2007) 77-104; G.E. Sterling, “From Apostle to the Gentiles to Apostle of the Church: Images
of Paul at the End of the First Century,” ZNW 98 (2008) 74-98; D. Marguerat, “Paul après Paul:
Une histoire de réception,” NTS 54 (2008) 317-337; repr. in “Paul After Paul: A (Hi)story of
Reception,” in Paul and the Heritage of Israel: Paul’s Claim upon Israel’s Legacy in Luke and
Acts in the Light of the Pauline Letters (ed. D.P. Moessner, D. Marguerat, M.C. Parsons, and
M. Wolter; LNTS 452; London: T&T Clark, 2012) 70-89; J.W. Aageson, Paul, the Pastoral Epistles
and the Early Church (Library of Pauline Studies; Peabody: Hendrickson, 2008) 8; Y. Redalié,
“‘Travailler de ses mains’: Un modèle, plusieurs modes d’emploi (Ac 20,33ss; 1 Tim 5,17s.; 2 Th
3,7-10),” Reception of Paulinism in Acts—Réception du paulinisme dans les actes des apôtres
(ed. D. Marguerat; BETL 229; Leuven: Peeters, 2009) 295-303; J.M. Lieu, “The Battle for Paul in
the Second Century,” ITQ 75 (2010) 3-14; R.I. Pervo, The Making of Paul: Constructions of the
Apostle in Early Christianity (Minneapolis: Fortress, 2010) 8-19.
4  B.L. White, “How to Read a Book: Irenaeus and the Pastoral Epistles Reconsidered,” VC 65
(2011) 125-149, here at 137-148; White, Remembering Paul, 149-155.
5  White, Remembering Paul, 164-165.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
368 Lookadoo

Paul in an entirely new way, stories and traditions about Paul, along with his
letters, could be creatively interpreted within various communities.
In conversation with these trends, this essay examines the reception of a
small segment of Paul’s letters within Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians by
exploring the impact of 1-2 Timothy on this letter. I will use the name “Paul”
as the author of 1-2 Timothy because his name appears as the sender in both
letters (1 Tim 1:1; 2 Tim 1:1). However, this does not necessarily assume Pauline
authorship.6 The exercise in this study only requires a date for 1-2 Timothy prior
to Philippians.7 Various other prolegomena to 1-2 Timothy and Philippians may
be left to one side since they are unlikely to dramatically affect the results of
this study. The remainder of the article will examine Polycarp’s reception of 1-2
Timothy in three ways. First, the influence of the probable citations of 1 Tim
6:7, 10 in Pol. Phil. 4:1 will be traced throughout the letter, and its application to
the situation of Valens examined. Second, the household codes in 1 Tim 2:8-3:13
and Pol. Phil. 4:2-6:3 will be compared. Third, Po­lycarp’s reversal of Paul’s con-
demnation of Demas in 2 Tim 4:10 and application of these words to Christians
who suffered will be explored. Like the later Irenaeus, Polycarp shows dexter-
ity in his treatment of 1-2 Timothy and uses Paul’s letters at significant points
in his own letter. Yet Polycarp does not depict Paul as a heresy-hunter but as
an ecclesiological hero who suffered for his sound instructions to the church.
In conclusion, observations will be made locating Polycarp’s citation of 1-2
Timothy alongside other ancient citations and showing that Polycarp’s image
of Paul as a suffering leader who is pastorally concerned with the purity of the
Philippian community is framed by the language of 1-2 Timothy.

2 Avarice

Polycarp first mentions Paul in a self-deprecating statement following the an-

nouncement that a major reason for writing the letter is because the Philippians

6  On the often-discussed questions regarding the authorship of the Pastorals, see N. Brox, Die
Pastoralbriefe: 1. Timotheus, 2. Timotheus, Titus (5th ed.; RNT; Regensburg: Friedrich Pustet,
1989) 22-60; G.W. Knight, The Pastoral Epistles (NIGTC; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 1992) 21-52;
I.H. Marshall, The Pastoral Epistles (ICC; Edinburgh: T&T Clark, 1999) 57-92; L.T. Johnson,
The First and Second Letters to Timothy (AB 35A; New York: Doubleday, 2001) 55-97; A. Merz,
Die fiktive Selbstauslegung des Paulus: Intertextuelle Studien zur Intention und Rezeption
der Pastoralbriefe (NTOA 52; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 2004) 196-202; D.A.
Campbell, Framing Paul: An Epistolary Biography (Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2014) 339-385.
7  Italicized references to Philippians refer to the letter sent by Polycarp, while mentions of
Philippians that are not italicized designate the letter written by Paul.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 369

requested Polycarp’s thoughts on δικαιοσύνη (Pol. Phil. 3:1).8 Polycarp mentions

that Paul taught accurately and reliably during his time in Philippi, and the
influence of Pauline language is still further evident in his reference to faith,
hope, and love and use of language reminiscent of Gal 4:26 (Pol. Phil. 3:2-3).9
Towards the end of this cluster of Pauline citations,10 Polycarp writes, “The
love of money is the beginning of all troubles. Therefore, knowing that we
brought nothing into the world, but we also have nothing to take out of it, let
us arm ourselves with the weapons of righteousness” (ἀρχὴ δὲ πάντων χαλεπῶν
φιλαργυρία. εἰδότες οὖν ὅτι οὐδὲν εἰσηνέγκαμεν εἰς τὸν κόσμον, ἀλλ’ οὐδὲ ἐξενεγκεῖν
τι ἔχομεν, ὁπλισώμεθα τοῖς ὅπλοις τῆς δικαιοσύνης; Pol. Phil. 4:1).11 Polycarp uses
two proverbial sayings and draws attention to the second with the phrase
“knowing that” (εἰδότες ὅτι).12 Elsewhere, he utilizes this phrase to introduce
probable citations of Eph 2:8-9 (Pol. Phil. 1:3) and Gal 6:7 (Pol. Phil. 5:1).13 In
addition to the introductory formula in Pol. Phil. 4:1, the overall similarity in
wording to 1 Tim 6:7, 10 makes it likely that there is a relationship between the
two phrases.14 Although the presence of an introductory phrase on its own

8  P. Steinmetz, “Polykarp von Smyrna über die Gerechtigkeit,” Hermes 100 (1972) 63-75, here
at 64.
9  Lindemann, Paulus, 223.
10  This phrase refers to the language from Pauline letters that occurs around Polycarp’s men-
tions of Paul (Pol. Phil. 3.2; 9.1; 11.2). See further K. Berding, “Polycarp of Smyrna’s View of
the Authorship of 1 and 2 Timothy,” VC 53 (1999) 349-360; K. Berding, Polycarp and Paul: An
Analysis of Their Literary and Theological Relationships in Light of Polycarp’s Use of Biblical
and Extra-Biblical Literature (VCSup 62; Leiden: Brill, 2002) 142-155.
11  The Greek witnesses to Philippians read χαλεπῶν, but the Latin manuscripts read malo-
rum and likely indicate κακῶν. The Greek manuscripts offer the stronger evidence at this
point, since it is likely that the Latin manuscripts accommodate the language of 1 Tim 6:10
(J.B. Lightfoot, The Apostolic Fathers: Clement, Ignatius, and Polycarp: Revised Texts with
Introductions, Notes Dissertations, and Translations [2nd ed.; 2 vols. in 5 parts; London:
Macmillan, 1889-1891] 2:3:328).
12  E.g. Eccl 5:15 (5:14 LXX); Sir 41:10; Philo, Spec. 1.294-295; Diogenes Laertius, Lives 6.50. See
the further examples collected by R.M. Grant, “Polycarp of Smyrna,” ATR 28 (1948) 137-
148, here at 145. C. Spicq, Les épîtres pastorales, (4th ed.; 2 vols; Ebib; Paris: Gabalda, 1969)
1:561-562, 564-565; M. Dibelius and H. Conzelmann, The Pastoral Epistles (Hermeneia;
Philadelphia: Fortress, 1972) 84-86; Marshall, Pastoral Epistles, 646-647, 651-653.
13  M. Theobald, “Paulus und Polykarp an die Philipper: Schlaglichter auf die frühe Rezeption
des Basissatzes von der Rechtfertigung,” in Lutherische und neue Paulusperspektive:
Beiträge zu einem Schlüsselproblem (ed. M. Bachmann; WUNT 182; Tübingen: Mohr
Siebeck, 2005) 349-388, here at 372.
14  M.W. Holmes helpfully outlines five options that include independent use of well-known
proverbial material, identical authors, shared use of similar traditions, a quotation of

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
370 Lookadoo

does not demand that Polycarp uses these phrases from 1 Tim 6:7, 10, the in-
clusion of these phrases in close proximity in both 1 Tim 6 and Pol. Phil. 4,
the presence of a Pauline cluster in Pol. Phil. 3:1-4:1, and Polycarp’s smoother
ἀλλ’ οὐδέ transition collectively indicate a high probability that Polycarp cites
1 Tim 6:7, 10 here.15
These sayings are used to characterize false teachers in 1 Tim 6:3-10.
Following a lengthy description of the opponents as improper teachers
who understand nothing, Paul says that they consider godliness to be a gain
(νομιζόντων πορισμὸν εἶναι τὴν εὐσέβειαν; 1 Tim 6:5).16 The language is polemi-
cal, but the comments on financial gain should not be written off only as a
rhetorical flourish since Timothy is instructed to flee the same things at the
end of the description (σὺ δὲ, ὦ ἄνθρωπε θεοῦ, ταῦτα φεῦγε; 1 Tim 6:11).17 Paul
modifies the comments about the opposing teachers when he redefines gain
by claiming that “godliness with self-control is a great gain” (ἔστιν δὲ πορισμὸς

1 Timothy by Polycarp and a quotation of Polycarp by the author of 1 Timothy (“Polycarp’s

Letter to the Philippians and the Writings that Later Formed the New Testament,” in The
Reception of the New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers [ed. A.F. Gregory and C.M. Tuckett;
Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2005] 187-227, here at 216).
15  P.V.M. Bennecke, “Polycarp,” in The New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers (Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 1905) 84-104, here at 95-96; P.N. Harrison, Polycarp’s Two Epistles to the
Philippians (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1936) 295; Lindemann, Paulus, 223-
224; Berding, Polycarp and Paul, 67-68; P. Hartog, Polycarp and the New Testament: The
Occasion, Rhetoric, Theme, and Unity of the Epistle to the Philippians and its Allusions to
New Testament Literature (WUNT 2.134; Tübingen; Mohr Siebeck, 2002) 179; M.W. Holmes,
“Polycarp’s Letter to the Philippians,” 216. The difficulties in the comparable ὅτι οὐδέ tran-
sition in 1 Tim 6:7 are reflected in the variants of the manuscript tradition and increase
the likelihood that Polycarp also smoothed the text of 1 Tim 6:7 (Berding, Polycarp and
Paul, 68).
16  In light of Xenophon’s Ephesiaca and the Salutaris Inscription (IvE 104), G.G. Hoag pro-
poses that the false teachers are wealthy Ephesians who direct their service to Artemis
(Wealth in Ancient Ephesus and the First Letter to Timothy: Fresh Insights from Ephesiaca
by Xenophon of Ephesus [BBRSup 11; Winona Lake, IN: Eisenbraums, 2015] 167-168).
For a description of the Ephesian Artemis cult in the first century CE, see G.M. Rogers,
The Mysteries of Artemis of Ephesos: Cult, Polis, and Change in the Graeco-Roman World
(Synkrisis; New Haven: Yale University Press, 2012) 145-170.
17  R.M. Kidd, Wealth and Beneficence in the Pastoral Epistles: A “Bourgeois” Form of Early
Christianity (SBLDS 122; Atlanta: Scholars, 1990) 94. D.T. Thornton, “Hostility in the House
of God: An ‘Interested’ Investigation of the Opponents in 1 and 2 Timothy” (Ph.D. diss.
University of Otago, 2015) 210-211. Unfortunately, D.T. Thornton, Hostility in the House
of God: An Investigation of the Opponents in 1 and 2 Timothy (BBRSup; Winona Lake, IN:
Eisenbraums, 2016) appeared too late to be included in this essay.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 371

μέγας ἡ εὐσέβεια μετὰ αὐταρκείας; 1 Tim 6:6).18 He continues to show that wealth
is only of limited value by reminding Timothy that they brought nothing into
the world and are unable to take anything out (οὐδὲν γὰρ εἰσηνέγκαμεν εἰς τὸν
κόσμον, ὅτι οὐδὲ ἐξενεγκεῖν τι δυνάμεθα; 1 Tim 6:7).19 Paul and Timothy should
be content with food and shelter. On the other hand, those who desire to be
rich fall into temptations because the love of money is the root of all evils (ῥίζα
γὰρ πάντων τῶν κακῶν ἐστιν ἡ φιλαργυρία; 1 Tim 6:10).20 Avarice (φιλαργυρία)
is a characteristic of the opponents in 1 Tim 6:3-10 against which Timothy is
warned in 1 Tim 6:11, and money continues to play a role in Paul’s description
of the wealthy in 1 Tim 6:17-19.21
The application of avarice is expanded in 2 Timothy where it serves as a
sign of the distressing seasons that will come in the last days (2 Tim 3:3).22 In
contrast to these descriptions, Paul instructs Timothy to appoint an ἐπίσκοπος
who is not greedy (ἀφιλάργυρον; 1 Tim 3:3). In Tit 1:7, the ἐπίσκοπος is similarly
not to be out for dishonest gain (μὴ αἰσχροκερδῆ). Likewise, the deacons in 1
Timothy are not to be greedy (μὴ αἰσχροκερδεῖς; 1 Tim 3:8).23 This suggests that
the role of greed and illicit profit was viewed as problematic by Paul and that
his instructions for church structure functioned in part to limit their influence.
Polycarp seems to have drawn primarily from the description of the teachers
as avaricious by emphasizing the language of 1 Tim 6:10 throughout his letter.

18  A.J. Malherbe sets the discussion of αὐταρκεία in the context of contemporaneous popu-
lar philosophical discussions, while rightly warning against taking any particular paral-
lel as a source for 1 Timothy (“Godliness, Self-Sufficiency, Greed, and the Enjoyment of
Wealth: 1 Timothy 6:3-19 [Part 1],” NovT 52 [2010] 376-405, here at 392-397). See also R.J.
Karris, “The Background and Significance of the Polemic of the Pastoral Epistles,” JBL 92
(1973) 549-564.
19  F. Young, The Theology of the Pastoral Epistles (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press,
1994) 7-8.
20  R. Van Neste helpfully draws attention to the similarities in the descriptions of the oppo-
nents in 1 Timothy (Cohesion and Structure in the Pastoral Epistles [JSNTSup 280; London:
T&T Clark, 2004] 115-118).
21  On the structure of 1 Tim 6:17-19, see A.J. Malherbe, “Godliness, Self-Sufficiency, Greed,
and the Enjoyment of Wealth: 1 Timothy 6:3-19 (Part 2),” NovT 53 (2011) 73-96, here at 75-
76. On the whole passage, see J. Thuren, “Die Struktur der Schlußparänese 1 Tim 6,3-21,” TZ
26 (1970) 241-253; V. Mihoc, “The Final Admonition to Timothy (1 Tim 6,3-21)” in 1 Timothy
Reconsidered (ed. K.P. Donfried; Colloquim Oecumenicum Paulinum 18; Leuven: Peeters,
2008) 135-152, here at 138-139.
22  Young, Theology, 38-39.
23  J. Roloff notes that this thematic connection works along with ὡσαύτως to connect the
overseer and deacons closely in 1 Tim 3:1-13 (Der erste Brief an Timotheus [EKK 15; Zurich:
Benziger; Neukirchen-Vluyn: Neukirchener, 1988] 162).

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
372 Lookadoo

Although Polycarp draws on language employed against the opposing teach-

ers in 1 Tim 6, he applies the statement more broadly. The comments about
avarice initiate instructions that seem to be given to all Philippian Christians.
Polycarp’s remarks about avarice introduce exhortations for the Philippians
to be armed with righteous weapons and to teach themselves to walk in the
Lord’s commandment (Pol. Phil. 4:1).24 Moreover, Polycarp has already men-
tioned avarice in ethical instructions earlier in the letter that are tied to the
resurrection (Pol. Phil. 2:2). This functions as a proleptic hint at what will be a
significant theme in the letter.25 Avarice is twice mentioned in vice lists from
the household codes (Pol. Phil. 4:3; 6:1), and the deacons are instructed to
be unavaricious between these two vice lists (Pol. Phil. 5:2). Where avarice is
closely connected to the teachers in 1 Tim 6:3-10, Polycarp expands the warn-
ings against avarice in a way more akin to 2 Tim 3:3. The expansion does not
seem to be without a concrete situation in Philippi. Rather, the calls to refrain
from avarice are enhanced due to the community’s circumstances after Valens.
Polycarp does not offer a detailed explanation of what Valens did but sim-
ply says that he misunderstood the office that was given to him (sic ignoret
is locum qui datus est ei; Pol. Phil. 11:1).26 On the basis of Valens’s misunder-
standing, Polycarp warns the Philippians to abstain from avarice (moneo
itaque, ut abstineatis vos ab avaritia).27 Polycarp then asks how it is possible
for someone who cannot govern himself to preach the same thing to another

24  In view of the similar materials in Pol. Phil. 4:1 and 1 Tim 6, David J. Downs and Wil
Rogan have pointed out that ἡ ἐντολὴ τοῦ κυρίου deserves consideration in discussions
on the meaning of ἡ ἐντολή in 1 Tim 6:14 (“‘Let Us Teach Ourselves First to Follow the
Commandment of the Lord’ [Pol. Phil. 4.1]: An Additional Note on ‘the Commandment’
as Almsgiving,” NTS 62 [2016]: 628-636). See further N. Eubank, “Almsgiving is ‘the
Commandment’: A Note on 1 Timothy 6.6-19,” NTS 58 (2012) 144-150; A. Giambrone,
“‘ According to the Commandment’ (Did. 1.5): Lexical Reflections on Almsgiving as ‘The
Commandment,’” NTS 60 (2014) 448-465.
25  P. Hartog, Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians and the Martyrdom of Polycarp:
Introduction, Text, and Commentary (Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2013) 105-106.
26  Steinmetz, “Polykarp,” 67. The Greek manuscripts of Polycarp’s letter end at Pol. Phil. 9:2
and are afterward preserved primarily in Latin translation. See the concise descriptions in
P. Meinhold, “Polykarpos,” Paulys Realencyklopädie der classischen Altertumswissenschaft
(2nd ed.; Stuttgart: Alfred Druckenmüller, 1952) 21:2:1662-1693, here at 1688-1689; B.D.
Ehrman, The Apostolic Fathers (2 vols.; LCL 24-25; Cambridge, MA: Harvard University
Press, 2003) 1:329-330 and the fuller account in Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, 2:3:316-318.
27  H.O. Maier usefully recalls that many early Christian leaders, including Valens, were likely
wealthy, heightening the significance of avarice for the community (“Purity and Danger in
Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians: The Sin of Valens in Social Perspective,” JECS 1 [1993]
229-247, here at 233).

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 373

(qui autem non potest se in his gubernare, quomodo alii pronuntiat hoc; Pol. Phil.
11:2). This may allude to Paul’s instruction to the overseer in 1 Tim 3:5 in which
Paul asks how one will be able to care for God’s house if he cannot govern
his own house. Immediately following Polycarp’s question, he writes, “If some-
one cannot keep oneself from avarice, he will be polluted by idolatry, and will
likewise be judged among gentiles” (si quis non se abstinuerit ab avaritia, ab
idololatria coinquinabitur, et tanquam inter gentes iudicabitur; Pol. Phil. 11:2).
Polycarp claims that he has not heard of any such thing among the Philippians,
and this seems to imply that the problem of avarice is closely connected to
Valens (Pol. Phil. 11:3). The issue that arose with Valens was significant enough
for Polycarp to warn the Philippians repeatedly not to follow Valens’s example,
although Polycarp does not give up hope for restoration between Valens and
the Philippians (Pol. Phil. 11.4).
Where avarice is closely connected to the false teachers in 1 Tim 6:3-10,
Polycarp uses these words as a programmatic rationale to avoid avarice and the
failure of Valens. While the topic plays a significant role in both 1 Timothy and
Philippians, Polycarp gives φιλαργυρία a more consistently prominent role than
1 Timothy by consistently using the same word and expanding the communal
applications. Even so, Polycarp stands in broad agreement with the under-
standing of φιλαργυρία that is evident in 1 Timothy. He draws on the language
of Paul’s letter in order to highlight Paul’s pastoral role in protecting the church
while simultaneously continuing this practice in his own writing.

3 The Household Codes

Polycarp includes a household code among his instructions to Christians in

Philippi that outlines the way in which members of the community should
act with regard to specific roles that they play (Pol. Phil. 4:2-6:3).28 The house-
hold code begins almost immediately after his comments on avarice and use
of 1 Tim 6:7, 10 (Pol. Phil. 4:1). The placement of Polycarp’s household following
a probable citation of 1 Tim 6:7, 10 increases the likelihood that Polycarp makes
use of the household code in 1 Timothy when he instructs the Philippians.29
Polycarp discusses married women, widows, deacons, young men, young

28  Similar teachings are found Eph 5:21-6:9; Col 3:18-4:1; 1 Tim 2:8-3:13; Tit 1:5-2:10; 1 Pet 2:13-
3:7; 1 Clem. 1:3; 21:6-8; Ign. Pol. 4-5; Did. 4:9-11 (P. Camelot, Ignace d’Antioche, Polycarpe de
Smyrne: Lettres. Martyre de Polycarpe [4th ed.; SC 10; Paris: Cerf, 1969] 181n.4). This essay
focuses on Pol. Phil. 4:2-6:3 and 1 Tim 2:8-3:13.
29  Hartog, Polycarp and the New Testament, 230-231.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
374 Lookadoo

women, and elders, but he also sprinkles instructions to the entire Philippian
congregation throughout the household code. Men, women, the overseer, and
deacons are the primary groups addressed in 1 Tim 2:8-3:13.30 Additionally, Paul
refers at length to widows in 1 Tim 5:3-16. The structure of Polycarp’s house-
hold code is divided further than the one found in 1 Tim 2:8-3:13, but there are
similarities between the descriptions of the elders and deacons in Pol. Phil.
5:2; 6:1 and the descriptions of the overseer and deacons in 1 Tim 3.31 Here also
Polycarp makes use of language from 1 Timothy in service to his own unique
household code.32
As part of Polycarp’s instructions that the deacons of God and Christ should
be blameless, he advises the deacons not to be insincere (δίλογοι; Pol. Phil.
5:2). Along with an admonition against acting slanderously, the instructions
about insincerity form part of a description of the way that deacons should
act in which Polycarp uses alliteration and assonance. The first two descrip-
tions begin with δ, and three later descriptions successively begin with ε, al-
though the first description is modified by a two-word prepositional phrase in
which both words begin with π (μὴ διάβολοι, μὴ δίλογοι, ἀφιλάργυροι, ἐγκρατεῖς
περὶ πάντα, εὔσπλαγχνοι, ἐπιμελεῖς).33 The instructions to the deacons in 1 Tim
3:8 likewise warn against being insincere (διλόγους) in addition to warning
against overindulgence in wine and greed.34 However, as Polycarp concludes
his instructions to the deacons, he expands his rhetorical aim to include
all Philippian Christians by using first person plural verbs. He offers an

30  R. Schwarz, Bürgerliches Christentum im Neuen Testament? Eine Studie zu Ethik, Amt
und Recht in den Pastoralbriefen (ÖBR 4; Klosterneuberg: Österreichisches Katholisches
Bibelwerk, 1983) 31.
31  T. Söding helpfully locates the place of the episcopacy near to apostleship in the Pauline
corpus (Rom 1:5; 1 Cor 9:2; Gal 2:8; “1 Timotheus 3: Der Episkopos und die Diakone in der
Kirche”, in 1 Timothy Reconsidered [ed. K.P. Donfried; Colloquim Oecumenicum Paulinum
18; Leuven: Peeters, 2008] 63-86, here at 71). On the social background in 1 Tim 3:1-13, see
K. Zamfir, Men and Women in the Household of God: A Contextual Approach to Roles and
Ministry in the Pastoral Epistles (NTOA 103; Göttingen: Vandenhoeck und Ruprecht, 2013)
279-280.
32  B. Dehandschutter, “Polycarp’s Epistle to the Philippians: An Early Example of ‘Reception,’”
in The New Testament in Early Christianity: La réception des écrits néotestamentaires dans
le christianisme primitive (ed. J.-M. Sevrin; BETL 86; Leuven: Peeters, 1989) 275-291, here at
281-282.
33  A similarly assonance-laden construction is used in Polycarp’s directives to presby-
ters using ε and α (εὔσπλαγχνοι, εἰς πάντας ἐλεήμονες, ἐπιστρέφοντες τὰ ἀποπεπλανημένα,
ἐπισκεπτόμενοι πάντας ἀσθενεῖς, μὴ ἀμελοῦντες χήρας ἢ ῤφανοῦ ἢ πένητος; Pol. Phil. 6:1).
34  H. Paulsen, Die Briefe des Ignatius von Antiochia und der Polykarpbrief (HNT 18; Die apos-
tolischen Vätern 2; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1985) 118.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 375

eschatologically oriented rationale for pleasing Jesus that sees its ultimate
fulfillment in Jesus’s raising of believers. Alongside this, he reasons that if he
and the Philippians walk worthily of Jesus, they will rule with him.35 A similar
statement is made to Timothy in which Paul also uses the first person plural
when he writes, “If we endure, we will also rule with him” (2 Tim 2:12).36
We have just concluded a discussion of avarice in Polycarp and the letters
to Timothy. Yet it is worth noting again that Paul warns the overseer not to be
avaricious (ἀφιλάργυρον; 1 Tim 3:3), while the deacons are not to desire dishon-
est gain (μὴ αἰσροκερδεῖς; 1 Tim 3:8). When Polycarp speaks to the deacons and
the elders, he also instructs them not to be avaricious (ἀφιλάργυροι; Pol. Phil.
5:2; 6:1). These commands help to define the entire community,37 and the same
instruction is given to the widows (Pol. Phil. 4:3). The previous section argued
that Polycarp focuses more on φιλαργυρία than 1 Timothy. Yet Philippians is
similar to 1 Timothy in that it emphasizes a proper relationship to money in
contrast to a specific situation. The Philippian leaders must not be greedy be-
cause Valens was proven to be greedy (Pol. Phil. 11:1-4). In a similar way, the
overseer and deacons in 1 Tim 3 must not desire their position for its money
because the false teachers viewed godliness as a source of gain (1 Tim 6:5).38 In
addition to reinforcing the centrality of avarice in Philippians and the similari-
ties in meaning between the two letters, this comparison of φιλαργυρία in the
household codes further illustrates the concrete situations to which both let-
ters react.
Such similarities between the letters are noteworthy, but Polycarp’s house-
hold code is not simply a reprisal of the one found in 1 Tim 2:8-3:13. The in-
structions to particular individuals are briefer than those found in 1 Timothy,
and he offers instructions to more sets of people within the congregation. His
instructions to the deacons and elders are more concise than the comparable
instructions in 1 Tim 3:1-13, but Polycarp offers an equal amount of instruc-
tion to the young men (Pol. Phil. 5:3). This contrasts with 1 Tim 2:8-3:13 where
nothing is said to young men and only 1 Tim 2:8 is devoted to any men who are

35  ᾧ ἐὰν εὐαρεστήσωμεν ἐν τῷ νῦν αἰῶνι, ἀποληψόμεθα καὶ τὸν μέλλοντα, καθὼς ὑπέσχετο ἡμῖν
ἐγεῖραι ἡμᾶς ἐκ νεκρῶν καὶ ὅτι, ἐὰν πολιτευσώμεθα ἀξίως αὐτοῦ καὶ συμβασιλεύσομεν αὐτῷ,
εἴγε πιστεύομεν (Pol. Phil. 5:2).
36  εἰ ὑπομένομεν, καὶ συμβασιλεύσομεν. H. von Campenhausen, “Polykarp von Smyrna und
die Pastoralbriefe,” in Aus der Frühzeit des Christentums: Studien zur Kirchengeschichte
des ersten und zweiten Jahrhunderts (Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1963) 197-252, here at 225;
Berding, Polycarp and Paul, 76-77.
37  Maier, “Purity,” 246-247.
38  Johnson, First and Second Letters to Timothy, 215.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
376 Lookadoo

not included among the overseer or deacons. Moreover, Polycarp instructs the
young men to be blameless as he also instructed the deacons to be blameless
(ἄμεμπτοι; Pol. Phil. 5:2-3). The young men are similarly to be concerned with
purity even as he taught the elders to be concerned with the good (προνοοῦντες
ἁγνείας; Pol. Phil. 5:3; προνοοῦντες ἀεὶ τοῦ καλοῦ; Pol. Phil. 6:1). In addition to
receiving similar instructions to the deacons and elders, the young men are
placed between them in the structure of the household code. In these ways,
they are tied more integrally into Polycarp’s letter than the scattered remarks
to Timothy about young men in 1 Tim 4:12; 5:1.39
If one accounts for Paul’s treatment of widows later in 1 Timothy, Polycarp
is noticeably briefer in his discussion than the more detailed comments in
1 Tim 5:3-16.40 Paul says that the widows are worthy of honor (1 Tim 5:3), but
his primary concern is to discuss how the church should care for widows.41 He
instructs children and grandchildren to take care of widows where possible
(1 Tim 5:4) and exhorts younger widows to remarry in order not to burden the
church (1 Tim 5:14).42 The church is responsible for the care of those widows
who cannot remarry and whose families cannot care for them. Polycarp’s treat-
ment of the widows differs not only in length but also insofar as the care of
widows is discussed. The question of how widows are to be cared for is not at
issue in Pol. Phil. 4:3 but instead the question of how the widows are to act.43
Polycarp’s discussion contains a set of admonitions regarding proper behavior,
another mention of avarice that connects the widows to a central rhetorical

39  This may be partly due to the depiction of the audience in 1 Timothy as οἶκος θεοῦ so that
the focus is on the leaders of the household. On the household theme, see L. Oberlinner,
Die Pastoralbriefe: Erster Timotheusbrief (HThKNT 11.2.1; Freiburg: Herder, 1994) 216;
M. Gourges, Les deux lettres à Timothée: La lettre à Tite (Commentaire biblique: Noveau
Testament 14; Paris: Cerf, 2009) 179; K. Zamfir, “Is the ekklēsia a Household (of God)?
Reassessing the Notion of οἶκος θεοῦ in 1 Tim 3.15,” NTS 60 (2014) 511-528.
40  See the outline in W.D. Mounce, Pastoral Epistles (WBC 46; Nashville: Thomas Nelson,
2000) 274.
41  P. Trebilco, notes that widows, along with elders (1 Tim 5:17) and non-Christian slave
masters (1 Tim 6:1), are one of three groups that are honored, but these honorees do not
include the wealthy (The Early Christians in Ephesus from Paul to Ignatius [WUNT 166;
Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 2004] 382).
42  U. Wagener, observes the intensification that occurs in 1 Tim 5:14 with the first-person ad-
dress (Die Ordnung des “Hauses Gottes”: Der Ort von Frauen in der Ekklesiologie und Ethik
der Pastoralbriefe [WUNT 2.65; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1994] 211).
43  This is different from the discussion of church leaders in 1 Tim 3:1-13 which focuses on
their actions and character (Aageson, Paul, 145-146).

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 377

theme in the letter, and an intriguing reference to the widows as God’s altar.44
This image may derive its force from the command for the widows to pray for
all people, which, in turn, brings the widows into a central role in the church
and does not limit them to their homes.45
In sum, Polycarp’s household code is similar to the household code of
1 Tim 2:8-3:13 and may draw some inspiration from it in its treatment of dea-
cons and elders. Yet Polycarp constructs his own household code that is specific
to the needs of Philippian Christians by devoting a proportionate treatment to
the deacons, young men, and elders and by offering a different perspective on
widows from the issue addressed in 1 Tim 5:3-16. Polycarp uses Paul’s authority
to teach the Philippian church about its intra-ecclesial relationships. Since Pol.
Phil. 4:2-6:2 follows immediately after Polycarp’s citation of 1 Tim 6:7, 10 (Pol.
Phil. 4:1), Paul is again invoked as the Philippians teacher even as Polycarp re-
uses and modifies earlier Pauline material to develop the image in a fresh way.

4 The Present Age

Polycarp’s second mention of Paul comes in a list of people who have en-
dured suffering for following Jesus (Pol. Phil. 9:1). The list includes Ignatius,
Zosimus, Rufus, and some from Philippi. Polycarp concludes the list with a
climactic mention of Paul and the rest of the apostles.46 The passage seems
to follow the line of thought in 1 Clement’s exhortation to “set our eyes on
the good apostles” (λάβωμεν πρὸ ὀφθαλμῶν ἡμῶν τοὺς ἀγαθοὺς ἀποστόλους;
1 Clem. 5:3). The similarities between the place deserved by Peter (εἰς τὸν
ὀφειλόμενον τόπον; 1 Clem. 5:4) and the place deserved by those whom Polycarp
mentions (εἰς τὸν ὀφειλόμενον αὐτοῖς τόπον; Pol. Phil. 9:2) provides further indi-
cation of a possible echo of 1 Clement.47 Based on the reference to Ignatius, it

44  If Theobald is correct that the information following Polycarp’s more common phrase
εἰδότες ὅτι draws on basic scriptural knowledge (Pol. Phil. 1.3, 4.1, 5.1, 6.1), Polycarp links the
widows to these other statements with the participial phrase γινούσκας ὅτι in Pol. Phil. 4.3
(“Paulus und Polykarp an die Philipper,” 372-373; Hartog, Polycarp’s Epistle, 64).
45  C. Osiek, “The Widows as Altar: The Rise and Fall of a Symbol,” SecCent 3 (1983) 159-169.
46  C.M. Nielsen, “Polycarp, Paul and the Scriptures” ATR 47 (1965) 199-216, here at 211; M.W.
Holmes, “Paul and Polycarp,” in Paul and the Second Century (ed. M.F. Bird and J.R. Dodson,
LNTS 412; New York: T&T Clark, 2011) 57-69, here at 64.
47  Although K. Berding issues a helpful reminder not to exaggerate Polycarp’s reliance upon
1 Clement (“Polycarp’s Use of 1 Clement: An Assumption Reconsidered,” JECS 19 [2011] 127-
139). On Peter in these two letters, see the recent studies by T. Still (“Images of Peter in the

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
378 Lookadoo

is possible that Zosimus and Rufus were killed because they followed Jesus.48
Polycarp assures the Philippians that their actions were not in vain and that
they suffered with the Lord. He concludes, “For they did not love the present
age but the one who died on behalf of us and was raised by God on account
of us” (οὐ γὰρ τὸν νῦν ἠγάπησαν αἰῶνα, ἀλλὰ τὸν ὑπὲρ ἡμῶν ἀποθανόντα καὶ δι’
ἡμᾶς ὑπὸ τοῦ θεοῦ ἀναστάντα; Pol. Phil. 9:2). Their refusal to love the present age
should be imitated by the Philippians, but it simultaneously mimics the lack of
love that the Philippians should have for money (φιλαργυρία).49
With the phrase, οὐ γὰρ τὸν νῦν ἠγάπησαν αἰῶνα, Polycarp evokes words that
are found in 2 Tim 4:10. However, he makes the term negative and applies it to
a different sort of people. When Paul uses the phrase in his letter to Timothy,
he employs it as a reason for Timothy to hurry to meet him (2 Tim 4:9). In what
follows, he outlines his desire to see Timothy in part because he only has Luke
with him (2 Tim 4:11). While narrating how he has come into this situation,
Paul describes the way in which Demas left him and went to Thessalonica. The
reason is that he loved the present age (ἀγαπήσας τὸν νῦν αἰῶνα; 2 Tim 4:10).50 In
addition to 2 Tim 4:10, the phrase ὁ νῦν αἰών is only used in 1 Tim 6:17 and Tit 2:12
within the nt.51 Although the scarcity of other attestation is not a guarantee
that Polycarp knows 1-2 Timothy, this observation combined with the proxim-
ity of Polycarp’s reference to his mention of Paul and the similarity between
Polycarp’s language and that of 2 Tim 4:10 collectively increases the likelihood
that Polycarp borrows from Paul.

Apostolic Fathers”) and P. Hartog (“Peter in Paul’s Churches: The Early Reception of Peter
in 1 Clement and in Polycarp’s Philippians”) in Peter in Early Christianity (ed. H.K. Bond and
L.W. Hurtado; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015) 161-167, 168-180 (respectively).
48  See the discussions in T. Zahn, Ignatius von Antiochien (Gotha: Perthes, 1873) 291-293;
Lightfoot, Apostolic Fathers, 2:3:337; W. Bauer, Die Briefe des Ignatius und der Polykarpbrief
(HNT; Die Apostolische Väter 2; Tübingen: Mohr Siebeck, 1920) 293; Hartog, Polycarp’s
Epistle, 135-136. While it is possible that Polycarp mentions both martyrs and those who
accompanied Ignatius, Camelot reminds readers that “nous ne connaissons rien de plus
sur ces compagnons d’Ignace” (Ignace, 188n.1).
49  Hartog (Polycarp and the New Testament, 138-145) and P. Oakes (“Leadership and Suffering
in the Letters of Polycarp and Paul to the Philippians,” in Trajectories through the New
Testament and the Apostolic Fathers [ed. A.F. Gregory and C.M. Tuckett; Oxford: Oxford
University Press, 2005] 353-373, here at 367-369) both link avarice and suffering in
Philippians.
50  S. Bénétreau argues that this phrase presents Demas’s concerns as human or earthly and
contrasts this with loving the appearance of Christ (2 Tim 4:8; Les épîtres pastorales: 1 et 2
Timothée, Tite [Vaux-sur-Seine: Edifax, 2008] 436).
51  Von Campenhausen, “Polykarp,” 223; Marshall, Pastoral Epistles, 271-272.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 379

Yet Polycarp reverses Paul’s statement in 2 Tim 4:10. Paul uses the phrase
to speak of a negative model and to urge Timothy to visit him.52 Polycarp
employs similar words to encourage the Philippians to imitate the examples
of those whom he mentions. The same language is employed without nega-
tive adverbs to contrast the actions of Demas with what Timothy should do
and with negative adverbs to exhort the Philippians to imitate positive mod-
els. Polycarp utilizes Paul’s language to position him as an encouraging prec-
edent for the Philippians to pursue. Paul suffered, and, in so doing, he did not
make the mistake of Demas in loving the present age. The Philippians should
follow suit.
Polycarp’s use of Paul as a model for the Philippians to emulate is placed
in the middle of a section in which the Philippians are called to imitate Jesus.
More specifically, Polycarp exhorts the Philippians to imitate Jesus’s example
in his endurance of suffering.53 After a series of brief statements that suggest
Polycarp knew of christologies that he regarded as problematic (Pol. Phil. 7:1),
Polycarp urges devotion to Jesus, “who bore our sins in his own body on the
tree” (ὃς ἀνήνεγκεν ἡμῶν τὰς ἁμαρτίας τῷ ἰδίῳ σώματι ἐπὶ τὸ ξύλον) and “endured
everything so that we might live in him” (ἵνα ζήσωμεν ἐν αὐτῷ, πάντα ὑπέμεινεν;
Pol. Phil. 8:1). Along with Polycarp, the Philippians are to become imitators of
his endurance (μιμηταὶ οὖν γενώμεθα τῆς ὑπομονῆς αὐτοῦ; Pol. Phil. 8:2), just as
Polycarp will insist below that they mimic the endurance of Ignatius and the
others (Pol. Phil. 9:1). The Philippians should also glorify him if they suffer be-
cause of his name, “for he set this example for us in his own person” (τοῦτον
γὰρ ἡμῖν τὸν ὑπογραμμὸν ἔθηκε δι’ ἑαυτοῦ; Pol. Phil. 8:2). Ignatius, Paul, and the
Philippians are then listed as other examples to follow because they endured
suffering on account of their commitment to Jesus and exemplify Polycarp’s
call to endurance. After such an admirable list of examples for the Philippians
to follow, Polycarp changes his address to the second person and implores the
Philippians to stand firm in the examples and ethical instructions in Pol. Phil.
8-9 (in his ergo state; Pol. Phil. 10:1).54 However, the imitation motif continues
into these imperatives as Polycarp instructs the Philippians to follow the ex-
ample of the Lord (domini exemplar sequimini; Pol. Phil. 10:1). These impera-
tives form the climax of Polycarp’s ethical instruction about δικαιοσύνη that

52  B. Fiore, The Function of Personal Example in the Socratic and Pastoral Epistles (AnBib 105;
Rome: Biblical Institute, 1986) 219-222.
53  M.W. Holmes, “Polycarp of Smyrna, Epistle to the Philippians,” in The Writings of the
Apostolic Fathers (ed. P. Foster; London: T&T Clark, 2007) 108-125, here at 119-120.
54  Hartog, Polycarp’s Epistle, 139.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
380 Lookadoo

began in Pol. Phil. 3:1 and prepare the way for Polycarp’s direct confrontation of
the issue that has arisen with Valens in Pol. Phil. 11:1-4.55
In this context of imitation, Polycarp’s reference to Paul and others who en-
dured suffering because they did not love the present age illustrates two things.
First, Paul is viewed as a model for the Philippians because of his suffering. As
Paul and the other apostles did not love the present age, the Philippians should
love the brotherhood and cherish one another. By doing so, they likewise re-
ject love of the present age. Second, Polycarp applies Pauline language found
in 1-2 Timothy in service of his depiction of those who endure. In particular,
Polycarp’s language comes close to Paul’s description of Demas in 2 Tim 4:10.
Yet Polycarp is not constrained to make use of this language in precisely the
same way as Paul. Rather, he reverses the flow of meaning in order to imple-
ment ὁ νῦν αἰών in the context of positive ethical exhortation and to include the
author of the phrase as a model for the Philippians.

5 Concluding Observations

Two observations are worth noting in conclusion. First, Polycarp uses language
from 1-2 Timothy as a linguistic resource through which to emphasize themes
found in Paul’s letters, but he does not always employ the language in pre-
cisely the same manner as Paul. As in 1 Timothy, Polycarp discusses avarice and
stresses the importance of proper behavior within the household as impor-
tant elements in right living. Yet Polycarp’s discussion of avarice ranges more
widely than the scattered mentions of it in 1-2 Timothy, particularly insofar as
Polycarp extends the language of 1-2 Timothy to the entire congregation and
warns against avarice with respect to Valens. Polycarp’s application of avarice
is more expansive than 1 Tim 6, while his close connection of avarice to the
Philippians because of Valens is analogous to but more specific than the con-
nection of avarice to church leaders because of the false teachers. Likewise,
Polycarp urges the Philippians to be willing to suffer using similar language to
2 Tim 4:10, but he reverses Paul’s earlier statement. Polycarp can employ Paul’s
language to make a similar point, but the language does not have to be utilized
in precisely the same way. The language of 1-2 Timothy thus serves Polycarp as
a linguistic means to make similar thematic points tailored to Polycarp’s own
rhetorical situation.

55  Oakes, “Leadership and Suffering,” 354-355.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 381

The variety of ways in which Polycarp’s use of 1-2 Timothy becomes evident
is striking.56 Polycarp demonstrates a range of allusive manners that stretch
from the close usage of 1 Tim 6:7, 10 in Pol. Phil. 4:1 to the reversal of 2 Tim
4:10 in Pol. Phil. 9:2. Such a variety of means of reference can also be found in
other studies of how ancient authors cited text.57 To take one example, Philo
of Alexandria’s treatment of Plato is generally faithful to the writings as they
appear in manuscripts. However, the precise degree of faithfulness to the text
varies from direct and nearly verbatim citations to variations of word order,
improvement, deletion, and substitution.58 Polycarp’s variation with respect
to 1-2 Timothy is analogous.
Second, Polycarp does not merely cite Paul’s letters as abstract authorities,
though he clearly expects Paul’s words to carry weight. He employs language
from the letters in order to teach the Philippians and to recall an image of Paul
that he expects the Philippians to know. Polycarp portrays Paul as a caring
pastoral figure and a man who suffered on behalf of his churches for his will-
ingness to imitate Jesus. Polycarp’s use of Paul’s teachings about avarice and
the household codes supports his description of Paul in Pol. Phil. 3:2. Paul is
described as wise, an accurate and reliable teacher, and a letter writer. These
letters still offer the Philippians encouragement in faith. Polycarp likewise ap-
peals to Paul’s teaching to support his plan for dealing with the problem caused

56  Of course, the methodological choice that one makes to determine when a later text is
indebted to an earlier one has significant implications (A.F. Gregory and C.M. Tuckett,
“Reflections on Method: What Constitutes the Use of the Writings that Later Formed the
New Testament in the Apostolic Fathers,” in The Reception of the New Testament in the
Apostolic Fathers [ed. A.F. Gregory and C.M. Tuckett; Oxford: Oxford University Press,
2005] 61-82, here at 70).
57  J. Whittaker, “The Value of Indirect Tradition in the Establishment of Greek Philosophical
Texts or the Art of Misquotation,” in Editing Greek and Latin Texts: Papers Given at the
Twenty-Third Annual Conference on Editorial Problems, University of Toronto 6-7 November
1987 (ed. J. Grant; New York: AMS, 1989) 63-95; C. Stanley, “Paul and Homer: Greco-
Roman Citation Practice in the First Century CE,” NovT 32 (1990) 48-78; A. van den Hoek,
“Techniques of Quotation in Clement of Alexandria: A View of Ancient Literary Working
Methods,” VC 50 (1996) 223-243; C.E. Hill, “‘In These Very Words’: Methods and Standards
of Literary Borrowing in the Second Century,” in The Early Text of the New Testament (ed.
C.E. Hill and M.J. Kruger; Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2012) 261-281.
58  Direct citations: Philo, Aet. 38—Plato, Tim. 33c-d; Fug. 82—Theaet. 176b-c; word order:
Opif. 21—Tim. 28c; improvement: Ebr. 8—Phaed. 60b-c; deletion: Mos. 2.2—Resp. 473c-d;
substitution: Spec. 2.249—Phaedr. 247a. See further D.T. Runia, “The Text of the Platonic
Citations in Philo of Alexandria,” in Studies in Plato and the Platonic Tradition: Essays
Presented to John Whittaker (ed. M. Joyal; Aldershot: Ashgate, 1997) 261-291.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
382 Lookadoo

by Valens’s error. Paul teaches (sicut Paulus docet) that the saints will judge the
world (Pol. Phil. 11:2),59 and thus Valens is presently reckoned as an outsider
to the community. Paul’s relationship to the Philippians through his work as
teacher and through his letters are emphasized to elevate the Philippians so
that they will act rightly (Pol. Phil. 11:3). Polycarp seems to imitate Paul by com-
municating through a letter.60 He also supports Paul’s teaching by employing
themes and language from 1-2 Timothy. Like Paul did before him, Polycarp
warns about the dangers of loving money and insists that community relations
must be ordered. He demonstrates care for the Philippians by writing in re-
sponse to their request and sending Ignatius’s letters along with his reply (Pol.
Phil. 13:2). Polycarp’s understanding of Paul’s care for truth does not lead him to
portray Paul as a heresy-hunter, as Irenaeus and 3 Corinthians would later do.61
He is instead viewed as a pastoral teacher who builds up the Philippians with
his teachings on avarice and household relations and whom Polycarp follows.62
Polycarp’s use of 2 Timothy points to another significant element of
Polycarp’s image of Paul, namely, that he suffered in addition to caring for the
well-being of his congregations. Paul is mentioned in the context of examples
that the Philippians should remember and imitate when they experience dis-
tress (Pol. Phil. 9:1). When language from 2 Tim 4:10 is utilized soon after in
association with Paul’s example, Polycarp recalls Paul’s memory to encourage
the Philippians to endure hardship. In this context, however, Paul’s name does
not appear alone as it does in Pol. Phil. 3:2; 11:2, 3. Rather, Paul is one example
among several whom the Philippians have known to have suffered. Polycarp
sees Paul as an important authority upon which to rely, but the example that
Paul set in his life vis-à-vis suffering is not completely inimitable (Pol. Phil. 9:1),
even if his wisdom about justification is more difficult to improve upon (Pol.
Phil. 3:2). Nevertheless, Paul models a life that does not love the present age,
and Polycarp calls attention to this exemplar when instructing the Philippians
to do the same.
This modest study hopes to have contributed to a better understanding of
how Paul was depicted in the second century by examining Polycarp’s use of
1-2 Timothy in Philippians. He employs language from 1 Tim 6:7, 10 as a major

59  Polycarp draws on 1 Cor 6:2 (J.D.G. Dunn, Neither Jew nor Greek: A Contested Identity
[Christianity in the Making 3; Grand Rapids: Eerdmans, 2015] 694). On Pauline resonanc-
es in Pol. Phil. 11, see Dehandschutter, “Polycarp’s Epistle,” 282-283.
60  M.W. Holmes, “Paul and Polycarp,” 58-60.
61  See again White, “How to Read,” 137-148; White, Remembering Paul, 149-155.
62  Pervo, Making, 141.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
Polycarp, Paul, and the Letters to Timothy 383

theme in the letter, composes a household code that draws upon 1 Tim 2:8-3:13,
and considers Paul a model of how to react to hardship by reversing the state-
ment about the present age found in 2 Tim 4:10. Polycarp’s use of Paul’s letters
strengthens his own rhetorical position by giving a Pauline ethos to his teach-
ing while also giving insight into Polycarp’s understanding of Paul as a caring
pastor, teacher about greed and household relations, and example of suffering.

Novum Testamentum 59 (2017) 366-383

This content downloaded from

122.200.2.50 on Tue, 29 Jun 2021 20:16:58 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms