Caius of Rome and the Alogi

CAIUS OF ROME AND THE ALOGI. - In the library of Jerusalem Eusebius found the works of Berillus of Bostra, of Hippolytus (without geographical indication) and of C. All three authors are described as learned men (λόγιοι) and men of the church (ἐκκλησιαστικοί: v. Hist. eccl., VI, 20, 1. Of C. Eusebius knew a dialogue, written or held, under Pope Zephyrinus in Rome against the Montanist Proclus: op. cit., VI, 20, 3). From the citations: II, 25, 6; III, 28, 1; III, 31, 4; VI, 20, 3 of Eusebius we see that C. polemicized against the new writings of the Montanists, that he combated their millenarianism, that he rejected the Apocalypse of St. John and that the Epistle to the Hebrews was not to be found in his canon of the Pauline Epistles. From Eusebius (Hist. eccl., III, 28, 4 and VII, 25, 1) one can deduce that Dionysius of Alexandria knew the dialogue of C. It seems that for C. the Apocalypse of St. John was the work of Cerinthus (Eusebius, op. cit., III, 28, 1, 2). Against the Montanists who boasted of the tombs of Philip and of his prophetic daughters C. emphasizes the possession of the tombs of Peter in the Vatican and of Paul on the Ostian Way (Eusebius, op. cit., II, 25, 7). The polemic of C. against the Apocalypse thus resembles the polemic of the so-called alogi: a great many scholars have denied the existence of a distinct sect of alogi, declaring that they were in reality only C. The name "alogi" is an invention of Epiphanius, who in Panar. haeret., 51 (CB, 31, p. 248 ff.), treats at length of this polemic against the writings of John, describing the adversaries as "alogoi," because they denied the Logos in the Johannine writings. On the criticism of the "alogoi" Ed. Schwartz has treated in the best way, Der Iod der Söhne Zebedaei (Abhandlungen der Götting. Ges. der Wissensch. Phil. Hist. Kl., new series, 7, v [Berlin 1904], p. 30 ff.), but this scholar has also felt the difficulties that stand in the way of identifying the alogi with C. (op. cit., p. 41 f.), because in this case Irenaeus would already have polemicized (Adv. Haer., III, 11, 9; ed. A. Stieren, I, Leipzig 1848, p. 473), against C. and the date of Eusebius for the dialogue (around 200) would be impossible and moreover it seems hardly probable that Eusebius, who read the dialogue, would not have denounced the heretical character of an author who denied the authenticity of the gospel of St. John. Even the possibility discussed by Schwartz (op. cit., p. 42), of supposing that the dialogue was anonymous and C. the name of one of the participants in the dialogue seems untenable in the face of the words of Eusebius. On the other hand one cannot say that C. had accepted only a part of the criticism of the alogi, namely that which concerned the Apocalypse, because from the fragments of a work of Hippolytus against C., preserved in Dionysius bar Salibi (Commentar. in Apocalypsim: Corp. Scr. Chr. Or., 2nd series, t. 161, p. 4, 4 f.; 11, 16 f.; 12, 24 f.; 13, 17 f.; 14, 10 f.; 25, 3 f.; CB, 1, p. 241 ff. and Commentary on the IV Gospel) it emerges that C. had also denied the authenticity of the Gospel of John. It is by now evident that the chapter of Epiphanius on the alogi depends in large part on Hippolytus. According to Ebedjesu (d. 1318) Hippolytus would have written Capita advenus Caium et Apologium pro Apocalypsi et Evangelio Iohannis apostoli et evangelistae (J. S. Assemani, Bibl. orientalis Clementino-Vaticana, III, 1, Rome 1725, p. 15). It is debated whether this is one or two works of Hippolytus. In any case the second title is also found in the list of the works of Hippolytus on his statue. From these observations it emerges that both the question of the date of the dialogue and that of the favorable judgment of Eusebius on C. have remained unusual. C., the adversary of Hippolytus, has in tradition become a substitute for Hippolytus (cf. Ed. Schwartz, Zwei Predigten Hippolyt, in Sitzungsberichte der Bayr. Akademie, Philos. histor. Abt., Munich 1936, fasc. III, p. 36 f.); the reasons for this substitution remain equally unknown to us.

Erik Peterson