Tuesday, November 3, 2009
The Sixth Proof that Clement of the Alexandrian See of St. Mark Was a Prominent Leader of the Tradition Irenaeus Identifies as 'Marcosian'
Irenaeus writes of the Marcosians that this Mark then, declaring that ... he was Monogenes [and] has brought to the birth in some such way as follows that which was committed to him of the Enthymesis (inner thought). He declares that the infinitely exalted Tetrad descended upon him from the invisible and indescribable places in the form of a woman (for the world could not have borne it coming in its male form), and expounded to him alone its own nature, and the origin of all things, which it had never before revealed to any one either of gods or men.
This was done in the following terms: When first the unoriginated, inconceivable Father, who is without material substance, and is neither male nor female, willed to bring forth that which is ineffable to Him, and to endow with form that which is invisible, He opened His mouth, and sent forth the Word similar to Himself, who, standing near, showed him what He Himself was, inasmuch as He had been manifested in the form of that which was invisible. [AH i.14.1]
Let's start by noting that Irenaeus adds the word 'defective' in front of Enthymesis which I have removed owing to the fact that it only makes sense that it is an editorial addition on Irenaeus' part (Mark would not have argued that his transformation arose from a 'defective' reflection on his part). When you actually look at what is written in Stromata vi Chapter 12 it is virtually identical with this description save for two important distinctions (a) Clement does not reference 'Mark' and instead develops the gnosis as a personal appeal to the reader and (b) this 'gnostis' is systematically justified through a consistent appeal to Scripture.
Clement of Alexandria writes "therefore, regarding life in this world as necessary for the increase of science (ἐπιστήμη) and the acquisition of knowledge (γνῶσις), he will value highest, not living, but living well. He will therefore prefer neither children, nor marriage, nor parents, to love for God, and righteousness in life. To such an one, his wife, after conception, is as a sister, and is judged as if of the same father; then only recollecting her husband, when she looks on the children; as being destined to become a sister in reality after putting off the flesh, which separates and limits the knowledge of those who are spiritual by the peculiar characteristics of the sexes. For souls, themselves by themselves, are equal. Souls are neither male nor female, when they no longer marry nor are given in marriage (i.e. they are made angelic cf. Mark 12:24,25). And is not woman translated into man, when she is become equally unfeminine, and manly, and perfect? Such, then, was the laughter of Sarah when she received the good news of the birth of a son; not, in my opinion, that she disbelieved the angel, but that she felt ashamed of the intercourse by means of which she was destined to become the mother of a son.
And did not Abraham, when he was in danger on account of Sarah’s beauty, with the king of Egypt, properly call her sister, being of the same father, but not of the same mother?
To those, then, who have repented and not firmly believed, God grants their requests through their supplications. But to those who live sinlessly and gnostically, He gives, when they have but merely entertained the thought (notice the gnostic idea of 'creative thought' here). For example, to Anna, on her merely conceiving the thought, conception was vouchsafed of the child Samuel. “Ask,” says the Scripture, “and I will do. Think, and I will give.” For we have heard that God knows the heart, not judging the soul from [external] movement, as we men; nor yet from the event. For it is ridiculous to think so. Nor was it as the architect praises the work when accomplished that God, on making the light and then seeing it, called it good. But He, knowing before He made it what it would be, praised that which was made, He having potentially made good, from the first by His purpose that had no beginning, what was destined to be good actually. Now that which has future He already said beforehand was good, the phrase concealing the truth by hyperbaton.
Therefore the Gnostic prays in thought during every hour, being by love allied to God. And first he will ask forgiveness of sins; and after, that he may sin no more; and further, the power of well-doing and of comprehending the whole creation and administration by the Lord, that, becoming pure in heart through the knowledge, which is by the Son of God, he may be initiated into the beatific vision face to face, having heard the Scripture which says, “Fasting with prayer is a good thing.”
Now fastings signify abstinence from all evils whatsoever, both in action and in word, and in thought itself. As appears, then, righteousness is quadrangular, (compare this with Irenaeus' report of the Markan community's interest in 'the tetrad') on all sides equal and like in word, in deed, in abstinence from evils, in beneficence, in gnostic perfection; nowhere, and in no respect halting, so that he does not appear unjust and unequal. As one, then, is righteous, so certainly is he a believer. But as he is a believer, he is not yet also righteous—I mean according the righteousness of progress and perfection, according to which the Gnostic is called righteous.
For instance, on Abraham becoming a believer, it was reckoned to him for righteousness, he having advanced to the greater and more perfect degree of faith. For he who merely abstains from evil conduct is not just, unless he also attain besides beneficence and knowledge; and for this reason some things are to be abstained from, others are to be done. “By the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,” the apostle says, the righteous man is sent on to the inheritance above,—by some [arms] defended, by others putting forth his might. For the defence of his panoply alone, and abstinence from sins, are not sufficient for perfection, unless he assume in addition the work of righteousness—activity in doing good.
Then our dexterous man and Gnostic is revealed in righteousness already even here, as Moses, glorified in the face of the soul, as we have formerly said, the body bears the stamp of the righteous soul. For as the mordant of the dyeing process, remaining in the wool, produces in it a certain quality and diversity from other wool; so also in the soul the pain is gone, but the good remains; and the sweet is left, but the base is wiped away. For these are two qualities characteristic of each soul, by which is known that which is glorified, and that which is condemned.
And as in the case of Moses, from his righteous conduct, and from his uninterrupted intercourse with God, who spoke to him, a kind of glorified hue settled on his face; so also a divine power of goodness clinging to the righteous soul in contemplation and in prophecy, and in the exercise of the function of governing, impresses on it something, as it were, of intellectual radiance, like the solar ray, as a visible sign of righteousness, uniting the soul with light, through unbroken love, which is God-bearing and God-borne. Thence assimilation to God the Saviour arises to the Gnostic, as far as permitted to human nature, he being made perfect “as the Father who is in heaven (notice the image of the Father is 'seen' by the initiate as with Mark).” [Stromata vi.12]
If you want to know the Jewish messianic truths behind Christianity buy my book, the Real Messiah here
This was done in the following terms: When first the unoriginated, inconceivable Father, who is without material substance, and is neither male nor female, willed to bring forth that which is ineffable to Him, and to endow with form that which is invisible, He opened His mouth, and sent forth the Word similar to Himself, who, standing near, showed him what He Himself was, inasmuch as He had been manifested in the form of that which was invisible. [AH i.14.1]
Let's start by noting that Irenaeus adds the word 'defective' in front of Enthymesis which I have removed owing to the fact that it only makes sense that it is an editorial addition on Irenaeus' part (Mark would not have argued that his transformation arose from a 'defective' reflection on his part). When you actually look at what is written in Stromata vi Chapter 12 it is virtually identical with this description save for two important distinctions (a) Clement does not reference 'Mark' and instead develops the gnosis as a personal appeal to the reader and (b) this 'gnostis' is systematically justified through a consistent appeal to Scripture.
Clement of Alexandria writes "therefore, regarding life in this world as necessary for the increase of science (ἐπιστήμη) and the acquisition of knowledge (γνῶσις), he will value highest, not living, but living well. He will therefore prefer neither children, nor marriage, nor parents, to love for God, and righteousness in life. To such an one, his wife, after conception, is as a sister, and is judged as if of the same father; then only recollecting her husband, when she looks on the children; as being destined to become a sister in reality after putting off the flesh, which separates and limits the knowledge of those who are spiritual by the peculiar characteristics of the sexes. For souls, themselves by themselves, are equal. Souls are neither male nor female, when they no longer marry nor are given in marriage (i.e. they are made angelic cf. Mark 12:24,25). And is not woman translated into man, when she is become equally unfeminine, and manly, and perfect? Such, then, was the laughter of Sarah when she received the good news of the birth of a son; not, in my opinion, that she disbelieved the angel, but that she felt ashamed of the intercourse by means of which she was destined to become the mother of a son.
And did not Abraham, when he was in danger on account of Sarah’s beauty, with the king of Egypt, properly call her sister, being of the same father, but not of the same mother?
To those, then, who have repented and not firmly believed, God grants their requests through their supplications. But to those who live sinlessly and gnostically, He gives, when they have but merely entertained the thought (notice the gnostic idea of 'creative thought' here). For example, to Anna, on her merely conceiving the thought, conception was vouchsafed of the child Samuel. “Ask,” says the Scripture, “and I will do. Think, and I will give.” For we have heard that God knows the heart, not judging the soul from [external] movement, as we men; nor yet from the event. For it is ridiculous to think so. Nor was it as the architect praises the work when accomplished that God, on making the light and then seeing it, called it good. But He, knowing before He made it what it would be, praised that which was made, He having potentially made good, from the first by His purpose that had no beginning, what was destined to be good actually. Now that which has future He already said beforehand was good, the phrase concealing the truth by hyperbaton.
Therefore the Gnostic prays in thought during every hour, being by love allied to God. And first he will ask forgiveness of sins; and after, that he may sin no more; and further, the power of well-doing and of comprehending the whole creation and administration by the Lord, that, becoming pure in heart through the knowledge, which is by the Son of God, he may be initiated into the beatific vision face to face, having heard the Scripture which says, “Fasting with prayer is a good thing.”
Now fastings signify abstinence from all evils whatsoever, both in action and in word, and in thought itself. As appears, then, righteousness is quadrangular, (compare this with Irenaeus' report of the Markan community's interest in 'the tetrad') on all sides equal and like in word, in deed, in abstinence from evils, in beneficence, in gnostic perfection; nowhere, and in no respect halting, so that he does not appear unjust and unequal. As one, then, is righteous, so certainly is he a believer. But as he is a believer, he is not yet also righteous—I mean according the righteousness of progress and perfection, according to which the Gnostic is called righteous.
For instance, on Abraham becoming a believer, it was reckoned to him for righteousness, he having advanced to the greater and more perfect degree of faith. For he who merely abstains from evil conduct is not just, unless he also attain besides beneficence and knowledge; and for this reason some things are to be abstained from, others are to be done. “By the armour of righteousness on the right hand and on the left,” the apostle says, the righteous man is sent on to the inheritance above,—by some [arms] defended, by others putting forth his might. For the defence of his panoply alone, and abstinence from sins, are not sufficient for perfection, unless he assume in addition the work of righteousness—activity in doing good.
Then our dexterous man and Gnostic is revealed in righteousness already even here, as Moses, glorified in the face of the soul, as we have formerly said, the body bears the stamp of the righteous soul. For as the mordant of the dyeing process, remaining in the wool, produces in it a certain quality and diversity from other wool; so also in the soul the pain is gone, but the good remains; and the sweet is left, but the base is wiped away. For these are two qualities characteristic of each soul, by which is known that which is glorified, and that which is condemned.
And as in the case of Moses, from his righteous conduct, and from his uninterrupted intercourse with God, who spoke to him, a kind of glorified hue settled on his face; so also a divine power of goodness clinging to the righteous soul in contemplation and in prophecy, and in the exercise of the function of governing, impresses on it something, as it were, of intellectual radiance, like the solar ray, as a visible sign of righteousness, uniting the soul with light, through unbroken love, which is God-bearing and God-borne. Thence assimilation to God the Saviour arises to the Gnostic, as far as permitted to human nature, he being made perfect “as the Father who is in heaven (notice the image of the Father is 'seen' by the initiate as with Mark).” [Stromata vi.12]
If you want to know the Jewish messianic truths behind Christianity buy my book, the Real Messiah here
Email stephan.h.huller@gmail.com with comments or questions.