Exploring the Authorship of the Letter to Theodore: A Journey Through Time

Chapter Eight of Brett Landau and Geoffrey Smith's book, The Secret Gospel of Mark: A Controversial Scholar, a Scandalous Gospel, and the Fierce Debate Over Its Authenticity, delves into the complex question of the authorship and date of the Letter to Theodore. This chapter meticulously examines whether the letter can be attributed to Clement of Alexandria or if it is a product of a later period, possibly composed using sources that postdate Clement.

Establishing the Date: Terminus Post Quem and Terminus Ante Quem

To determine the age of the Letter to Theodore, scholars establish two key points: the terminus post quem (the earliest possible date of composition) and the terminus ante quem (the latest possible date). The letter must have been written after the lifetime of Clement of Alexandria, who died around 215 CE, and before it was copied into Isaac Voss's edition of Ignatius's letters, which dates to the second half of the eighteenth century. This broad time frame, spanning over sixteen centuries, necessitates a more precise dating to understand the text's origins.

Did Clement Write the Letter to Theodore?

Morton Smith, the discoverer of the letter, believed it to be an authentic work of Clement after a detailed comparison of its language with Clement's known writings. Smith's analysis highlighted striking linguistic parallels, which he argued supported Clement's authorship. However, this evidence also allows for the possibility that a later author, familiar with Clement's style, could have imitated it. Thus, linguistic similarities alone cannot definitively prove Clement's authorship.

The Influence of Eusebius

One of the most compelling pieces of evidence against Clement's authorship is the apparent influence of Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History, written in the 320s CE. The letter contains three key elements that suggest the author was familiar with Eusebius's work:

1. Knowledge of Carpocrates: The author of the letter includes details about Carpocrates that align more closely with Eusebius's account than with Clement's. Eusebius adds to Irenaeus's portrayal of Carpocrates, suggesting that Carpocrates used demonic influence to enslave a presbyter to obtain the Secret Gospel of Mark. This elaboration is not found in Clement's writings but matches Eusebius's description, indicating that the letter's author likely used Eusebius as a source.

2. The Concept of a "More Spiritual Gospel": The letter refers to Mark's Secret Gospel as "a more spiritual gospel," an expression not found in Clement's known works. However, Eusebius quotes Clement's Hypotyposeis, which describes John's Gospel as a "spiritual gospel." The letter's author might have used Eusebius's description to craft a narrative that expands on this idea, suggesting an author writing after Eusebius.

3. Mark's Journey to Alexandria: The letter claims that Mark brought Christianity to Alexandria, a tradition first mentioned by Eusebius. Clement, despite being from Alexandria, does not mention this in his works. This discrepancy suggests that the letter's author may have misinterpreted Eusebius or deliberately used his account to lend authenticity to the letter.

Pseudepigraphy and the Fourth Century

Given the reliance on Eusebius, the letter is likely a pseudepigraphic work—written in someone else's name—and cannot date earlier than the fourth century. This aligns with A.D. Nock's initial skepticism when he suggested the letter might be from the medieval period, a time when such compositions were common.

The Secret Gospel of Mark: An Ancient Rewriting?

Even if the Letter to Theodore is a later composition, the excerpts from the Secret Gospel of Mark within it might still originate from an earlier time. Ancient Christians frequently rewrote and expanded Mark's Gospel, addressing perceived deficiencies or contradictions. For instance, Mark's abrupt ending and the mysterious figure of the young man fleeing naked in Gethsemane provided ample material for imaginative expansions. The Secret Gospel attempts to resolve these issues by adding narratives that fill in these gaps, much like other ancient rewritings of Mark.

Homoerotic Elements and Historical Context

The Secret Gospel of Mark includes a homoerotic narrative involving Jesus and a young man, leading some modern scholars to question its authenticity based on contemporary understandings of sexuality. However, same-sex relationships have been a part of human history across cultures, and their representation varies widely. The relationship depicted in the Secret Gospel—intimate but not explicitly sexual, framed within a mentor-novice dynamic—suggests a concern with same-sex relationships within a specific historical and cultural context. This concern is not necessarily modern but could reflect attitudes from another era where such relationships were understood differently.

Conclusion: A Text from the Past

The evidence suggests that the Letter to Theodore is a pseudepigraphic work composed after the fourth century, drawing on Eusebius's Ecclesiastical History. The Secret Gospel of Mark, while possibly ancient, appears to be another example of early Christian rewritings of canonical texts. The homoerotic elements, framed within a Christian spiritual context, indicate a nuanced approach to same-sex relationships, challenging simplistic modern interpretations. Overall, the Letter to Theodore and the Secret Gospel of Mark remain intriguing documents that offer insights into the complex history of early Christian texts and their transmission.