Demolishing the Central Objection to Theodore - Clement of Alexandria DID INDEED Identify the Carpocratians as Homosexuals

As my readers are well aware, I have been going through Strom 7.16 word by word, line by line for two weeks now because I have noticed a number of uncanny parallels between its phraseology and to Theodore. Just today I uncovered an undeniable reference to homosexuality thus ending another objection to the authenticity of Morton Smith's discovery. It is usually claimed that the 'homosexuality' of the Carpocratians wasn't known to Clement. It first appears in Epiphanius's Panarion which appeared over a century after Clement so - it is argued - Morton Smith 'slipped up' and introduced something into this purported text of Clement which Clement couldn't have known.

Of course Lawlor has already demonstrated that Epiphanius reference is actually a verbatim citation of Hegesippus's Hypomnema (so the reference is actually older than Clement) but let's leave that aside. Arguments like that will never convince anyone because they are too subtle. Let's bring forward my discovery from the writings of Clement. The reference reads:

Not laying as foundations the necessary first principles of things (ἀρχὰς πραγμάτων); and influenced by human opinions (καταβαλλόμενοι δόξαις τε ἀνθρωπίναις κεκινημένοι), by compulsion then, following (ἀκολουθοῦν) the end (τέλος) which suits them; on account of being confuted, they spar with those who are engaged in the prosecution of the true philosophy (τοὺς τὴν ἀληθῆ φιλοσοφίαν), and undergo everything, and, as they say, ply every oar, even going the length of impiety (ἀσεβεῖν) by disbelieving the Scriptures (τὸ ἀπιστεῖν ταῖς γραφαῖς μέλλωσιν) rather than give up the reputation they have in their sect and the boasted first seat (πρωτοκαθεδρίας) in their churches; on account of which also they eagerly embrace that convivial (συμποτικὴν) couch of honour in the falsely so called Agape (ψευδωνύμου ἀγάπης πρωτοκλισίαν ἀσπάζονται).[cf. Matt 23:1 - 8]

The knowledge of the truth (τῆς ἀληθείας ἐπίγνωσις) among us from what is already believed, produces faith in what is not yet believed ( τῶν ἤδη πιστῶν τοῖς οὔπω πιστοῖς ἐκπορίζεται τὴν πίστιν); which faith is, so to speak, the essence of demonstration (εἰπεῖν ἀποδείξεως καθίσταται). But, as appears, no heresy has at all ears to hear what is harmonious (τὸ σύμφορον), but opened (ἀρχὴν) only to what leads to pleasure (ἡδονὴν). Since also, if one of them would be persuaded (πείθεσθαι), he would only obey the truth (τῇ ἀληθείᾳ μόνον ἠβουλήθη).

Now the cure of self-conceit (as of every ailment) is threefold: the ascertaining of the cause, and the mode of its removal; and thirdly, the training of the soul, and the accustoming it to assume a right attitude to the judgments come to. For, just like a disordered eye, so also the soul that has been darkened by unnatural dogmas (τοῖς παρὰ φύσιν θολωθεῖσα δόγμασιν) cannot perceive distinctly the light of truth, but even overlooks what is before it.

The first emboldened text confirms that the unnamed sect is the Carpocratians. Why so? Because as Andrew McGowan (“Naming the Feast: The Agape and the Diversity of Early Christian Meals,” StPatr 30 (1997): 314–8) notes:

the only agape-participants Clement ever identifies are Carpocratians, to whom he attributes a meal so-named in Book 3 of the Stromateis

The second emboldened text makes clear that these Carpocratians are identified as engaging in παρὰ φύσιν. As any knowledgeable person will immediately recognize, παρὰ φύσιν

For this cause God gave them up unto vile affections: for even their women did change the natural use into that which is παρα φυσιν. In the same way the men also abandoned natural relations with women and were inflamed with lust for one another. Men committed shameful acts with other men, and received in themselves the due penalty for their error. (Rom 1.26,27)

Most of us are familiar with this passage because it is used by the same people who claim that the Letter to Theodore is a forgery to condemn homosexuality. Now of course when cornered with this argument - what are they going to say?

That "unnatural relations" (παρὰ φύσιν, para phusin) carries the sense of something contrary to the order of nature is evinced by its usage again in the analogy of the olive tree in Romans 11. There Paul writes that Gentiles "were cut off from their natural stock (κατὰ φύσιν , kata phusin) of the wild olive tree and ingrafted into the unnatural (παρὰ φύσιν, para phusin) cultured olive tree" (Rom. 11:24). Not surprisingly, παρὰ φύσιν (para phusin) becomes used for homosexuality in several subsequent Greek writers (see Athenagoras [13]; Philo [On Abraham 135-136, On Special Laws 3.39 preserves a stinging rebuke of pederasty as the "pursuit of unnatural pleasure,” thn para phusin hdonhn diwkei]; Plutarch [Dialogue on Love 751-752]; Dio Chrysostom [Discourse 7.135, 151-152]; Josephus [Against Apion 2.199, 273, 275]; and the Testament of Naphtali [3:3-4]).

One by one these idiotic claims about Morton Smith forging the Letter to Theodore to 'promote' an acceptance of homosexuality in Christianity (or to get 'revenge' on the Church) are all coming crumbling down. Yet almost no one has tackled the only question that matters in all of this - is Clement of Alexandria the original author of the document? I have been developing a massive demonstration from the beginning and end of the Stromateis that the Letter to Theodore not only 'fits' the patterns in Clement's writing that it is integrally connected to the development of the Stromateis itself.

One day scholarship will look back and laugh at all this 'debate' about the letter. It offended the vanity of a lot of people who wanted the beginnings of Christianity to be otherwise. Of course that will be when someone other than white people are running the study of the white man's religion. We should all pray for the coming of the Chinese. Maybe they can finally set things right in the world. Let's only hope they can help improve the Chinese restaurant situation in Seattle ...