This paper evaluates the category of proto-orthodoxy by considering the scholarly debate surrounding the Acts of Paul and Thecla. The lack of consensus as to whether the Acts of Paul and Thecla should be considered a proto-orthodox text not only illustrates problems with the category, but it also invites an analysis of the text that shelves questions about its categorical status and prioritizes how the text uses the example of Thecla to make Pauline memory meaningful for a new audience. By critiquing the major scholarly attempts to classify the Acts of Paul and Thecla and proposing an alternative way to analyze the text, this paper argues that the construction of “proto-orthodoxy” as a discrete category inhibits our ability to analyze texts on their own terms and distorts our view of early Christian history.