Mystical Baptisms and Misinterpretations: The Intersection of Secret Mark, Origenist Rites, and Homosexual Innuendo

The discussions surrounding the "secret gospel of Mark," the baptism of male pairs in the Origenist community, and the resulting homosexual innuendo find a significant reference in the concluding remarks of Tertullian’s Adversus Valentinianus. This work essentially rehashes and repurposes Irenaeus’s account of the Valentinian sect found in the first twelve chapters of Book One of Adversus Haereses. However, when Tertullian reaches the section in Adversus Haereses that introduces the followers of Mark, he cites “other sources” which describe what certainly sounds like a homosexual orgy, framed to resemble the aeonic assembly of the Valentinian heavens.

Tertullian references a practice among the sects, describing it as a “rule adopted for the purpose of honoring the higher pairs of contemplating and engaging frequently in the sacrament of uniting with a ‘comiti’” – using the dative of comes, meaning companion, comrade, or partner. He insinuates that this companion is referred to as “woman” by the sect and adds that they consider a man perverse and a false son of truth if he does not, during his life on earth, love a “woman” and join himself to her. Tertullian then sarcastically questions, “but what of the eunuchs we see among them?” (et quid facient spadones quos videmus apud Illos). This marks the beginning of his discussion on the supposed homosexual orgy.

The passage describes:

"These men then, men destined to enter the Pleroma, are unclothed first [emphasis mine]. To be unclothed means to put aside the souls with which they are only apparently endowed. They return to the Demiurge these souls which they received from him. They become spirits entirely metaphysical, immune to restraint or detection; in this fashion, they are received invisibly into the Pleroma secretly, if this is the way it is! What then? They are handed out to the angels who accompany Saviour. As sons, do you suppose? No. As valets perhaps? Not even this. As ghosts? I wish even this were the case! What, then, if you are not ashamed to say? As wives! For marriages they will play ‘Rape the Sabines’ among themselves. This is the reward for being ‘spirit-like’; this is the prize for believing. These are proper little stories; for example, you, Mark, or you, Gaius, at present bearded in this body and in this soul a stern husband, father, grandfather, or great-grandfather-- certainly masculine enough--then, in this harem of a Pleroma, by some angel you might be. . . ; by my silence I have already said it. Anyway, perhaps you might give birth to some new aeon."

The aside to “Gaius” is undoubtedly a contemporary reference. Is “Gaius” possibly Gaius of Rome, the prominent Roman elder and opponent of the Gospel of John? “Mark” certainly seems to be the figure of the same name connected by Irenaeus to the “second baptism” rituals already mentioned.

Mystical Interest in Male Pair Baptisms

The details in Tertullian's report make it clear that there was a mystical interest in the baptism of male pairs, with some men taking on the “female” role in the traditional ceremony. This offers a basis for understanding why the tradition of Mark could simultaneously be associated with licentious followers of Carpocrates and the “brothers” baptized together in the manner of Theodore. The followers of Mark practiced the union of initiates where some of the “comrades” were called women, and who were often castrated eunuchs.

When envisioning the eunuch Origen presiding over the baptism of both Theodore and Athenodoros, it is difficult not to see a reflection of the same “religious culture” reported by Tertullian and Irenaeus. Perhaps we can even go so far as to assume that not all the “women” in Adversus Haereses were actually “women according to the flesh.” The gender identity of figures like Origen might have been fluid, depending on whom you asked.

Misinterpretations and Mystical Practices

This blending of mystical practices with allegations of sexual impropriety was not uncommon in the early Church. The secretive nature of these rites, coupled with the close relationships between initiates, often led to misinterpretations and malicious rumors. The secrecy surrounding the Markan baptisms, the gender fluidity of participants, and the intimate bonds formed between initiates could easily be misconstrued by outsiders as evidence of illicit sexual behavior.

Conclusion

The practice of mystical baptisms and the resulting homosexual innuendo are deeply intertwined in the early Christian tradition. The reports of Tertullian and Irenaeus, along with the practices of the followers of Mark, reveal a complex religious culture where spiritual bonds and rites were often misinterpreted or deliberately misconstrued. The portrayal of Origen and the Markan sects highlights the enduring struggle between genuine mystical experiences and the rumors that inevitably arose from their secrecy. Understanding this context helps to shed light on the broader challenges faced by early Christian communities in preserving the integrity of their spiritual practices amid external suspicions and internal controversies.