The Secret Gospel and the Mystery of Theodore: Reconstructing a Historical Chronology

Under this developing historical chronology, it is plausible that Clement of Alexandria corresponded with Theodore before 230 CE. It is at least possible that all three men—Clement, Origen, and Theodore—left an increasingly unstable Egypt in the years leading up to the so-called Crisis of the Third Century, when the Roman Empire faced significant internal turmoil. We can therefore reconstruct the following timeline for these key figures and the “secret gospel” of Alexandria:

190 CE: Clement makes reference to an elusive text, the Gospel according to the Egyptians, while discussing his predecessor Julius Cassianus, ἐγκράτεια (self-control), and castration.

225–230 CE: Clement receives an inquiry about the gospel guarded in St. Mark’s Church in Alexandria from Theodore. This lost inquiry mentions "naked man with naked man," which, given Theodore’s philosophical background, pertains to the Platonic reference in the Gorgias but which Clement turns around as a "carnal" interest on the part of Theodore’s sources.

231–235 CE: Theodore becomes a pupil of Origen in Caesarea after receiving Origen’s letter. At some point thereafter, Theodore, now called Gregory, pens his Letter to Origen.

The Catalyst: Clement’s Letter to Theodore

Clement’s letter was likely initiated by Theodore learning something about the secret gospel of Egypt and asking a philosophically minded question, “tell me about γυμνὸς γυμνῷ.” Clement assumed Origen to be Theodore’s source, interpreting the phrase “naked man with naked man” not as an innocent reference to Plato’s judgement of the dead but as something sordid, possibly due to a name association with Carpocrates.

Origen’s Baptismal Innovations

Epiphanius’s reporting on Origen’s “sexual deviance” in Egypt provides a partial window into the historical context for Clement’s Letter to Theodore. Clement presumed that “naked man with naked man” was an indication of improper conduct, perhaps influenced by Origen’s own practices. Theodore’s Letter to Origen suggests not one but two initiates in the baptismal font over which Origen presided. His companion, Athenodoros, is described as his “brother,” raising the question: was this a “brother-making” ritual?

Misinterpretations and Innovations

It doesn’t take a wild imagination to presume that to outsiders, two youths naked in water with Origen acting the role of priest might have seemed like a homosexual marriage. The rite may have been an innovation on the part of Origen, or Clement might have been aware of the unusual appearance of the shared practice. Gregory’s account of his time with Origen notably downplays the details of his discipleship, possibly to obscure the dual baptisms Theodore underwent.

Controversies and Historical Context

Gregory Thaumaturgus’s biographical accounts and the references in the Philosophumena suggest that the controversies surrounding baptism and initiation rites were well-known issues in early Christian communities. The Alexandrian baptismal rituals, prone to misinterpretation, placed anyone associated with them under suspicion. The use of homosexual innuendo to discredit figures like Origen and, later, Morton Smith, highlights a recurring tactic in ecclesiastical polemics.

Conclusion

By reconstructing the chronology and examining the historical context, we gain a deeper understanding of the complexities and controversies that shaped early Christian practices and theological debates. Clement’s correspondence with Theodore, Origen’s unique baptismal practices, and the subsequent misinterpretations reveal the nuanced and often contentious development of early Christian ritual and doctrine. The Letter to Theodore thus serves as a critical piece in the puzzle of early Christian history, reflecting both the mysteries and the misunderstandings of a formative period in the Church.