I would like to bring forward another section of the Stromateis - this time Strom. 6.15 - to demonstrated Clement's coded manner of speech. I will argue that the material is a continuation of his earlier discussion of the Pythagorean 'harmony' between the two gospels of the Alexandrian canon. Yet in order for everyone to see this they will have to understand the underlying context of each passage in the narrative. Let's start with the beginning:
The liars, then, in reality are not those who for the sake of the dispensation of salvation conform (δι´ οἰκονομίαν σωτηρίας), nor those who err in minute points, but those who are wrong in essentials, and reject the Lord and as far as in them lies deprive the Lord of the true teaching (τὴν ἀληθῆ διδασκαλίαν); who explain and deliver the Scriptures in a manner unworthy of God and of the Lord (οἱ μὴ κατ´ ἀξίαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ κυρίου τὰς γραφὰς λαλοῦντές τε καὶ παραδιδόντες); for the deposit (παραθήκη) rendered to God according to the teaching of the Lord (τοῦ κυρίου διδασκαλίαν) by His apostles, is the understanding and the practice of the godly tradition.
"And what ye hear in the ear " -- that is, in a hidden manner, and in a mystery (for such things are figuratively said to be spoken in the ear) -- "proclaim," He says, "on the housetops," understanding them sublimely, and delivering them in a lofty strain, and according to the canon of the truth explaining the Scriptures (τῆς ἀληθείας κανόνα διασαφοῦντες τὰς γραφάς); for neither prophecy nor the Saviour Himself announced the divine mysteries simply so as to be easily apprehended by all and sundry, but express them in parables. The apostles accordingly say of the Lord, that "He spake all things in parables, and without a parable spake He nothing unto them;" and if "all things were made by Him, and without Him was not anything made that was made," consequently also prophecy and the law were by Him, and were spoken by Him in parables. "But all things are right," says the Scripture, "before those who understand," that is, those who receive and observe, according to the ecclesiastical rule, the exposition of the Scriptures explained by Him; and the ecclesiastical rule is the concord and harmony of the law and the prophets in the covenant delivered at the coming of the Lord. Knowledge is then followed by practical wisdom, and practical wisdom by self-control: for it may be said that practical wisdom is divine knowledge, and exists in those who are deified; but that self-control is mortal, and subsists in those who philosophize, and are not yet wise. But if virtue is divine, so is also the knowledge of it; while self-control is a sort of imperfect wisdom which aspires after wisdom, and exerts itself laboriously, and is not contemplative. As certainly righteousness, being human, is, as being a common thing, subordinate to holiness, which subsists through the divine righteousness; for the righteousness of the perfect man does not rest on civil contracts, or on the prohibition of law, but flows from his own spontaneous action and his love to God.
For many reasons, then, the Scriptures hide the sense. First, that we may become inquisitive, and be ever on the watch for the discovery of the words of salvation. Then it was not suitable for all to understand, so that they might not receive harm in consequence of taking in another sense the things declared for salvation by the Holy Spirit. Wherefore the holy mysteries of the prophecies are veiled in the parables -- preserved for chosen men, selected to knowledge in consequence of their faith; for the style of the Scriptures is parabolic. Wherefore also the Lord, who was not of the world, came as one who was of the world to men. For He was clothed with all virtue; and it was His aim to lead man, the foster-child of the world, up to the objects of intellect, and to the most essential truths by knowledge, from one world to another.
Wherefore also He employed metaphorical description; for such is the parable, -- a narration based on some subject which is not the principal subject, but similar to the principal subject, and leading him who understands to what is the true and principal thing; or, as some say, a mode of speech presenting with vigour, by means of other circumstances, what is the principal subject.
And now also the whole economy which prophesied of the Lord appears indeed a parable to those who know not the truth, when one speaks and the rest hear that the Son of God -- of Him who made the universe -- assumed flesh, and was conceived in the virgin's womb (as His material body was produced), and subsequently, as was the case, suffered and rose again, being "to the Jews a stumbling-block, and to the Greeks foolishness," as the apostle says.
But on the Scriptures being opened up, and declaring the truth to those who have ears, they proclaim the very suffering endured by the flesh, which the Lord assumed, to be "the power and wisdom of God." And finally, the parabolic style of Scripture being of the greatest antiquity, as we have shown, abounded most, as was to be expected, in the prophets, in order that the Holy Spirit might show that the philosophers among the Greeks, and the wise men among the Barbarians besides, were ignorant of the future coming of the Lord, and of the mystic teaching that was to be delivered by Him. Rightly then, prophecy, in proclaiming the Lord, in order not to seem to some to blaspheme while speaking what was beyond the ideas of the multitude embodied its declarations in expressions capable of leading to other conceptions. Now all the prophets who foretold the Lord's coming, and the holy mysteries accompanying it, were persecuted and killed. As also the Lord Himself, in explaining the Scriptures to them, and His disciples who preached the word like Him, and subsequently to His life, used parables. Whence also Peter, in his Preaching, speaking of the apostles, says: "But we, unrolling the books of the prophets which we possess, who name Jesus Christ, partly in parables, partly in enigmas, partly expressly and in so many words, find His coming and death, and cross, and all the rest of the tortures which the Jews inflicted on Him, and His resurrection and assumption to heaven previous to the capture of Jerusalem. As it is written, These things are all that He behoves to suffer, and what should be after Him. Recognising them, therefore, we have believed in God in consequence of what is written respecting Him."
And after a little again he draws the inference that the Scriptures owed their origin to the divine providence, asserting as follows: "For we know that God enjoined these things, and we say nothing apart from the Scriptures."
Now the Hebrew dialect, like all the rest, has certain properties, consisting in a mode of speech which exhibits the national character. Dialect is accordingly defined as a style of speech produced by the national character. But prophecy is not marked by those dialects. For in the Hellenic writings, what are called changes of figures purposely produce onscurations, deduced after the style of our prophecies. But this is effected through the voluntary departure from direct speech which takes place in metrical or offhand diction. A figure, then, is a form of speech transferred from what is literal to what is not literal, for the sake of the composition, and on account of a diction useful in speech.
But prophecy does not employ figurative forms in the expressions for the sake of beauty of diction. But from the fact that truth appertains not to all, it is veiled in manifold ways, causing the light to arise only on those who are initiated into knowledge, who seek the truth through love. The proverb, according to the Barbarian philosophy, is called a mode of prophecy, and the parable is so called, and the enigma in addition. Further also, they are called "wisdom;" and again, as something different from it, "instruction and words of prudence," and "turnings of words," and "true righteousness and again, "teaching to direct judgment," and "subtlety to the simple," which is the result of training, "and perception and thought," with which the young catechumen is imbued. "He who bears these prophets, being wise, will be wiser. And the intelligent man will acquire rule, and will understand a parable and a dark saying, the words and enigmas of the wise."
And if it was the case that the Hellenic dialects received their appellation from Hellen, the son of Zeus, surnamed Deucalion, from the chronology which we have already exhibited, it is comparatively easy to perceive by how many generations the dialects that obtained among the Greeks are posterior to the language of the Hebrews.
But as the work advances, we shall in each section, noting the figures of speech mentioned above by the prophet, exhibit the gnostic mode of life, showing it systematically according to the rule of the truth.
Did not the Power also, that appeared to Hermas in the Vision, in the form of the Church, give for transcription the book which she wished to be made known to the elect? And this, he says, he transcribed to the letter, without finding how to complete the syllables. And this signified that the Scripture is clear to all, when taken according to the bare reading; and that this is the faith which occupies the place of the rudiments. Wherefore also the figurative expression is employed, "reading according to the letter;" while we understand that the gnostic unfolding of the Scriptures, when faith has already reached an advanced state, is likened to reading according to the syllables.
Further, Esaias the prophet is ordered to take "a new book, and write in it" certain things: the Spirit prophesying that through the exposition of the Scriptures there would come afterwards the sacred knowledge, which at that period was still unwritten, because not yet known. For it was spoken from the beginning to those only who understand. Now that the Saviour has taught the apostles, the unwritten rendering' of the written [Scripture] has been handed down also to us, inscribed by the power of God on hearts new, according to the renovation of the book. Thus those of highest repute among the Greeks, dedicate the fruit of the pomegranate to Hermes, who they say is speech, on account of its interpretation. For speech conceals much. Rightly, therefore, Jesus the son of Nave saw Moses, when taken up [to heaven], double, -- one Moses with the angels, and one on the mountains, honoured with burial in their ravines. And Jesus saw this spectacle below, being elevated by the Spirit, along also with Caleb. But both do not see similarly But the one descended with greater speed, as if the weight he carried was great; while the other, on descending after him, subsequently related the glory which he beheld, being able to perceive more than the other as having grown purer; the narrative, in my opinion, showing that knowledge is not the privilege of all. Since some look at the body of the Scriptures, the expressions and the names as to the body of Moses; while others see through to the thoughts and what it is signified by the names, seeking the Moses that is with the angels.
Many also of those who called to the Lord said, "Son of David, have mercy on me." A few, too, knew Him as the Son of God; as Peter, whom also He pronounced blessed, "for flesh and blood revealed not the truth to him, but His Father in heaven," -- showing that the Gnostic recognises the Son of the Omnipotent, not by His flesh conceived in the womb, but by the Father's own power. That it is therefore not only to those who read simply that the acquisition of the truth is so difficult, but that not even to those whose prerogative the knowledge of the truth is, is the contemplation of it vouch-safed all at once, the history of Moses teaches, until, accustomed to gaze, at the Hebrews on the glory of Moses, and the prophets of Israel on the visions of angels, so we also become able to look the splendours of truth in the face.
Let's start by going back to the section just before this narrative began. Clement has been talking about:
the heresies of the Barbarian philosophy (τὴν βάρβαρον φιλοσοφίαν αἱρέσεις), [who] although they speak of one God (κἂν θεὸν λέγωσιν ἕνα) and sing hymns to Christ (κἂν Χριστὸν ὑμνῶσι), speak without accuracy, not in accordance with truth (ἀλήθειαν); for they seem to find (παρευρίσκουσι) another God, and receive Christ not as the prophecies deliver. But their false dogmas, while they oppose the true way of life (τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἀγωγῇ), are against us.
While this certainly sounds like the 'gnostic' sects which Irenaeus opposed, it has to be remembered that Clement on countless occassions identifies himself as a 'gnostic' and acts, walks and behaves like the very heretics opposed by the Catholic Church. What gives here? The example which follows quickly clarifies the real situation.
Clement strangely argues that the 'true path' is to seem to go along with the prevailing orthodoxy while holding heretical opinions. So Clement immediately follows this last citation with the example of Paul and Timothy:
For instance, Paul circumcised Timothy because of the Jews who believed, in order that the catechumen of the law (οἱ ἐκ νόμου κατηχούμενοι) those of the faith who were from Judaism might not apostasize (ἀποστῶσι) because the carnal interpretation of the Law which was coming to an end, knowing right well that circumcision does not justify; for he professed that "all things were for all" by common consent (ὡμολόγει), preserving those of the dogmas that were essential (τὰ κύρια τῶν δογμάτων), "that he might gain all."(1 Cor 9.19) And Daniel, under the king of the Persians, wore "the chain," though he despised not the afflictions of the people.
It is utterly amazing to me that people can cite all that follows without referencing this critical introduction. It is utterly essential for making sense of everything.
Clement is aware of an obvious contradiction in the Catholic New Testament. If Paul warned the Galatians not to have themselves circumcised in order to please Jews (Gal 6:12), why did he have Timothy circumcised for seemingly the same reason? The Marcionites knew the right answer - the Acts of the Apostles is a worthless historical document forged to obscure the truth about Christianity. Nevertheless Clement clearly pushes these 'heresies of barbarian philosophy' (τὴν βάρβαρον φιλοσοφίαν αἱρέσεις) to the side turning around the offensive passage from Acts as a kind of warning for those living in the contemporary age.
Clement leaves the issue of whether or not the apostle actually circumcised Timothy and effectively argues that contradicting oneself and the established rules of practice are often necessarily for the greater good. Paul's actions might seem to be hypocritical or contradictory but the reality was that there were two messages in the Church - one for those on the outside and one for those on the inside. The same applies with regards to the example of Daniel who accepted a ruling position within an evil government (cf. Daniel 5:29, think Vichy, France). The bottom line again for Clement is that hypocrisy is often necessary for the sake of the common good.
With this understanding that Clement and his Alexandrian tradition of St. Mark were necessarily forced into sanctioning hypocritical actions (cf. 'swearing false oaths' of the Letter to Theodore) we move on to his next point which is:
The liars (Ψεῦσται), then, in reality are not those who for the sake of the dispensation of salvation conform (δι´ οἰκονομίαν σωτηρίας), nor those who err in minute points, but those who are wrong in essentials (ἀλλ´ οἱ εἰς τὰ κυριώτατα παραπίπτοντες), and reject the Lord and as far as in them lies despoil the Lord of the true teaching (ἀποστεροῦντες δὲ τοῦ κυρίου τὴν ἀληθῆ διδασκαλίαν) who explain and deliver the Scriptures in a manner unworthy of God and of the Lord (οἱ μὴ κατ´ ἀξίαν τοῦ θεοῦ καὶ τοῦ κυρίου τὰς γραφὰς λαλοῦντές τε καὶ παραδιδόντες); for the deposit (παραθήκη) rendered to God according to the teaching of the Lord (τοῦ κυρίου διδασκαλίαν) by His apostles, is the understanding and the training in the godly tradition (τῆς θεοσεβοῦς παραδόσεως σύνεσίς τε καὶ συνάσκησις)
As the reader can see this section of text immediately follows what we read earlier with regards to the curious teaching about the virtues of hypocrisy. Now Clement is essentially saying that while his tradition can be accused of contradictions, he points his finger at others who not only 'steal' scriptures and teach them incorrectly but - more importantly - have 'lost' the original deposit of the Lord.
I think everyone can see the similarities in the material from the first part of this section with what appears in the Letter to Theodore. In other words, Carpocrates is accused of plundering the Secret Gospel of Mark and teaching a 'mixed' bag of truth and his own invention. Yet the second part is far more interesting in that it clearly connects the reader with a story about an apostle - the apostle John - presumably from the Acts which were written in his name and cited at the end of Quis Dives Salvetur:
And that you may be still more confident, that repenting thus truly there remains for you a sure hope of salvation, listen to a tale, which is not a tale but a narrative handed down and committed to the custody of memory, about the Apostle John. For when, on the tyrant’s death, he returned to Ephesus from the isle of Patmos, he went away, being invited, to the contiguous territories of the nations, here to appoint bishops, there to set in order whole Churches, there to ordain such as were marked out by the Spirit.
Having come to one of the cities not far off, and having put the brethren to rest in other matters, at last, looking to the bishop appointed, and seeing a youth, powerful in body, comely in appearance, and ardent, said, “This (youth) I commit to you in all earnestness, in the presence of the Church, and with Christ as witness.” And on his accepting and promising all, he gave the same injunction and testimony. And he set out for Ephesus. And the presbyter taking home the youth committed to him, reared, kept, cherished, and finally baptized him. After this he relaxed his stricter care and guardianship, under the idea that the seal of the Lord he had set on him was a complete protection to him. But on his obtaining premature freedom, some youths of his age, idle, dissolute, and adepts in evil courses, corrupt him. First they entice him by many costly entertainments; then afterwards by night issuing forth for highway robbery, they take him along with them. Then they dared to execute together something greater. And he by degrees got accustomed; and from greatness of nature, when he had gone aside from the right path, and like a hard-mouthed and powerful horse, had taken the bit between his teeth, rushed with all the more force down into the depths. And having entirely despaired of salvation in God, he no longer meditated what was insignificant, but having perpetrated some great exploit, now that he was once lost, he made up his mind to a like fate with the rest. Taking them and forming a band of robbers, he was the prompt captain of the bandits, the fiercest, the bloodiest, the cruelest.
Time passed, and some necessity having emerged, they send again for John. He, when he had settled the other matters on account of which he came, said, “Come now, O bishop, restore to us the deposit which I and the Saviour committed to thee in the face of the Church over which you preside, as witness.” The other was at first confounded, thinking that it was a false charge about money which he did not get; and he could neither believe the allegation regarding what he had not, nor disbelieve John. But when he said “I demand the young man, and the soul of the brother,” the old man, groaning deeply, and bursting into tears, said, “He is dead.” “How and what kind of death?” “He is dead,” he said, “to God. For he turned wicked and abandoned, and at last a robber; and now he has taken possession of the mountain in front of the church, along with a band like him.” Rending, therefore, his clothes, and striking his head with great lamentation, the apostle said, “It was a fine guard of a brother’s soul I left! But let a horse be brought me, and let some one be my guide on the way.” He rode away, just as he was, straight from the church. On coming to the place, he is arrested by the robbers’ outpost; neither fleeing nor entreating, but crying, “It was for this I came. Lead me to your captain;” who meanwhile was waiting, all armed as he was. But when he recognized John as he advanced, he turned, ashamed, to flight. The other followed with all his might, forgetting his age, crying, “Why, my son, dost thou flee from me, thy father, unarmed, old? Son, pity me. Fear not; thou hast still hope of life. I will give account to Christ for thee. If need be, I will willingly endure thy death, as the Lord did death for us. For thee I will surrender my life. Stand, believe; Christ hath sent me.”
And he, when he heard, first stood, looking down; then threw down his arms, then trembled and wept bitterly. And on the old man approaching, he embraced him, speaking for himself with lamentations as he could, and baptized a second time with tears, concealing only his right hand. The other pledging, and assuring him on oath that he would find forgiveness for himself from the Savior, beseeching and falling on his knees, and kissing his right hand itself, as now purified by repentance, led him back to the church. Then by supplicating with copious prayers, and striving along with him in continual fastings, and subduing his mind by various utterances of words, did not depart, as they say, till he restored him to the Church, presenting in him a great example of true repentance and a great token of regeneration, a trophy of the resurrection for which we hope.
This strange story concludes Clement's Quis Dives Salvetur, a homily on Mark 10:17 - 31 where the Alexandria can be demonstrated to be continuing his original argument with the Carpocratians in Strom. Book 3 as to whether it is necessary for the rich to give up all their wealth.
Clement's underlying in Quis Dives Salvetur is rather eye opening. One can't just read Mark 10:17 - 31 on its own. Clement says that Mark 10:17 - 31 is properly completed by the story of Zaccheus which only appears in Luke in our New Testament canon yet, most remarkably, the story does complete the story of the rich youth in the Diatessaron gospel. Was Clement arguing that the faithful only became aware of a 'Diatessaron' gospel after their baptism? Yes, indeed this is the only way that Quis Dives Salvetur can make any sense. Yet we must notice again that Clement goes out of his way to cite and stress that he is originally citing from the Gospel according to Mark, so this other gospel is at once a 'secret' or hidden form of Mark.
The fact that Clement should conclude Quis Dives Salvetur with a story about 'the Apostle John' is also remarkable given the fact that Alexandrians to this very day hold that 'John' was the apostle Mark's Jewish name. The idea first becomes explicit in Severus of al'Ashmunein's Homilies on Mark and the idea seems to fit the story initial discussion of Mark's gospel at the beginning Quis Dives Salvetur. The idea that 'John' only gave the world a 'deposit' of the gospel - a gospel of faith - if you will is also a core concept in Clement's Letter to Theodore. The idea there is that Mark consented to allow a narrative of the 'acts of the Lord' to circulate publicly before introducing the catechumen to the gospel reserved for the perfect.
The idea finds parallel in an oft quote passage from a non-canonical gospel cited by pseudo-Clement of Rome, Irenaeus and Hippolytus:
let us also, while we are in this world, repent with our whole heart of the evil deeds we have done in the flesh, that we may be saved by the Lord, while we have yet an opportunity of repentance. For after we have gone out of the world, no further power of confessing or repenting will there belong to us. Wherefore, brethren, by doing the will of the Father, and keeping the flesh holy, and observing the commandments of the Lord, we shall obtain eternal life. For the Lord saith in the Gospel, "If ye have not kept that which was small, who will commit to you the great? For I say unto you, that he that is faithful in that which is least, is faithful also in much." This, then, is what He means: "Keep the flesh holy and the seal undefiled, that ye may receive eternal life." [2 Clement 8]
And, for this reason, the Lord declared to those who showed themselves ungrateful towards Him: "If ye have not been faithful in that which is little, who will give you that which is great?" indicating that those who, in this brief temporal life, have shown themselves ungrateful to Him who bestowed it, shall justly not receive from Him length of days for ever and ever.[Irenaeus AH 2.30]
And so it was, that when the Father ordered the world to come into existence, the Logos one by one completed each object of creation, thus pleasing God. And some things which multiply by generation He formed male and female; but whatsoever beings were designed for service and ministration He made either male, or not requiring females, or neither male nor female ... [for] I am of opinion that sun and moon and stars, in like manner, are produced from fire and spirit, and are neither male nor female ... These things He created through the Logos, it not being possible for things to be generated otherwise than as they were produced. But when, according as He willed, He also formed (objects), He called them by names, and thus notified His creative effort. And making these, He formed the ruler of all, and fashioned him out of all composite substances. The Creator did not wish to make him [i.e. man] a god, and failed in His aim; nor an angel,--be not deceived,--but a man. For if He had willed to make thee a god, He could have done so. Thou hast the example of the Logos. His will, however, was, that you should be a man, and He has made thee a man. But if thou art desirous of also becoming a god, obey Him that has created thee, and resist not now, in order that, being found faithful in that which is small, you may be enabled to have entrusted to you also that which is great. [Philosophumena 10.29]
All of these witnesses to this agrapha reinforce an idea very similar to the 'deposit' of the Acts of John and the idea that Mark established a 'faith gospel' before revealing 'the gospel of perfection' to the catechumen.
Yet the idea is also utterly consistent with what is repeated in the writings of Clement of Alexandria himself. For near the end of the Stromateis, Clement again - as always - distinguishes between two parts of the gospel which are somehow held to be 'in harmony' with one another. As always 'wisdom' means some kind of hidden knowledge in written form which is kept from the masses (cf. 1 Cor 2:6,7) and 'faith' is only the starting point to the path towards this 'wisdom' - i.e. the attainment of perfect knowledge. Yet in the seventh book of the Stromateis Clement identifies 'insight' as the spark which gets people interested in going beyond mere 'faith':
For the meaning of the term wisdom is shown in the continuance of the uttered word : while the foundation of insight, on the other hand, lies in having no doubt about God, but trusting Him implicitly: and Christ is both the foundation and the superstructure Christ, through Whom are both the beginning and the ends. Now the extremes, i.e. the beginning and the end, I mean faith and love, are not matters of teaching ; but knowledge being handed down by tradition according to the grace of God, is entrusted as a deposit to those who show themselves worthy of the teaching; and from this teaching the worth of love shines forth in ever-increasing light. For it is said, to him that hath, shall be added (Mark 4.25), knowledge added to faith, and love to know ledge, and to love, the heavenly inheritance. [Stromata 7.10]
This confirmation that Clement does indeed argue on behalf of the idea of 'something more' than what is established in the canonical gospels will be the end of this first part of our examination of Strom 6.15. It is impossible to argue that the Letter to Theodore is out of step with the rest of Clement's writings with its suggestion of a 'secret gospel.' As we shall see in what follows in this passage from the Stromateis, it is implicitly confirmed once we remember that Clement ALWAYS interprets 1 Cor 2.1 - 8 as denoting two gospels - one according to 'power' and another according to a 'secret wisdom.'
Have a happy Saturday!.
