I am Starting to Think There is Enough Circumstantial Evidence to At Least Suggest That 'Irenaeus' Was a Title of Eclectos, the Chamberlain of Commodus

I think we can put all the pieces together for this vision of what lay behind the genesis of the Roman Catholic Church. Almost all of the figures have long been established - Commodus (identified on countless sources as Hercules Victor), Marcia his Christian concubine, Hypatius her Christian eunuch tutor, Carpophorus the wealthy Christian banker who operated out of the Piscina Publica district of Rome.

We had two figures who could quite be placed in the emerging portrait.

Eclectos the Egyptian chamberlain and Irenaeus the man who established the orthodoxy of the Catholic Church. Eclectos never left Marcia's side just as Marcia never left Commodus' side (Herodian said Commodus ascribed all the honors of a wife to her save for carrying the sacred fire). The only way this picture can make any sense is if Eclectos was a eunuch. Once the reader comes across the idea of an 'Egytian eunuch' in antiquity there is a high probability that this individual was a Christian. The fact that Marcia had ANOTHER Christian eunuch hanging from her other arm (Hypatius), there is great certainty that Eclectus was a Christian eunuch too.

They become a matching set.

Now why is it we know so little about Eclectus? Well we certainly know of an Eclecta, the addressee of 2 John in our canon. Clement of Alexandria cryptically identifies 'Eclecta' as a prominent Roman Christian who spoke on behalf of whole church.

2 John reflects a scenario that this 'Electa' received a letter from the 'elder' reinforcing core doctrinal formulations which presumably were passed onto the rest of the Church. These teachings are eerily reminiscent of things taught by Irenaeus who is the first to cite the letter.

The most likely scenario in my mind is that Irenaeus was 'Eclecta' and the elder was Polycarp. Polycarp never cites this text but once Irenaeus witnesses its authenticity all in his circle acknowledge it too (Muratorian canon, Hippoltyus).

Why did Irenaeus need 2 John? It should be obvious to anyone who ever familiarized himself with Irenaeus' productivity. A certain Florinus also sat in the court of Commodus. Florinus not only was a Christian but a member of the sect Irenaeus identifies as 'Valentinian' who claimed further more that Irenaeus was distorting Polycarp's legacy.

A letter from 'the elder' (see Charles Hill's discussion of this title as indicating Polycarp in the writings of Irenaeus) to Irenaeus confirming that the various things he was teaching were 'orthodox' would effectively silence Florinus' objections.

But 2 John identifies itself as being from Polycarp to Eclecta.

Well, I have long suspected that 'Irenaeus' was a title rather than a name. The Alexandrian tradition seems to indicate that it was developed from Matthew 5:9,10 and used to indicate the one who 'made peace' of the four canonical gospels.

In any event by seeing the purpose behind 2 John and Irenaeus' attachment to that text it is now possible to see that 'Electa' was just the feminine name of the eunuch Eclectus, the one who officiated as Commodus chamberlain.

We have just demonstrated that the Emperor Zeno's son Hilarion was identified as 'Hilaria' within the Egyptian Church. I think we see the same thing when it is reported that the heretic 'Marcus' was surrounded by a bunch of brides that wanted to receive 'grace' from him but whom he ultimately defiled. We see time and again from Christian writings that eunuchs were identified as brides and in particular females who were also male.

Gender ambiguity (the male becoming female and vice versa) is the central teaching to the Egyptian gospel as described by Clement.

As such I am certain now that Irenaeus was a title for Eclectus the chamberlain of Commodus and beloved of Marcia. We have now at long last identified how he got the authority to completely redefine Christianity.