Οὐδέπω ὅμως αὐτὰ τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα ἐξωρχήσατο, οὐδὲ κατέγραψε τὴν ἱεροφαντικὴν διδασκαλίαν τοῦ Κυρίου, ἀλλὰ ταῖς προγεγραμμέναις πράξεσιν ἐπιθεὶς καὶ ἄλλας. Ἔτι προσεπήγαγε λόγιά τινα ὧν ἠπίστατο τὴν ἐξήγησιν μυσταγωγήσειν τοὺς ἀκροατὰς εἰς τὸ ἄδυτον τῆς ἑπτάκις κεκαλυμμένης ἀληθείας. (Clement, To Theodore 23 - 26)
He had not yet, however, set forth the secret things themselves, nor written down the hierophantic teaching of the Lord; rather, to the deeds previously recorded he added still others. He also further appended certain sayings, the interpretation of which he knew would initiate the hearers into the inner sanctuary of the truth that is veiled sevenfold.
It is almost insane to suggest that beneath the successful imitation of 18th century monastic handwriting written into a damaged copy of a 17th century printed book, "smuggling" said book into a guarded monastic library in 1958, Morton Smith, an assistant professor from Columbia, managed to compose something "as if" by Clement which not only perfectly approximates the Alexandrian's writing style but which also fits his conceptual understanding so well. An authority on Clement might have been able to pull that off. But Smith wasn't an authority on Clement.
Let's look at some key phrases from the cited passage above with regards to how they "fit" with the Stromateis, a work Clement wrote at the end of the second century. Here's what Smith wrote in 1966 and published in 1973 regarding this section:
Besides indicating this terminus ante quem for the secret Gospel, the letter gives us some notion of what this Gospel was like. First, it was a Gospel “according to Mark” — this was the claim of both the Carpocratians (I.1ff) and of Clement (I.2ff). It certainly included at least parts of the present canonical Gospel according to Mark: to such parts Clement gives precise references (II.21–22; III.11, 14). It probably contained all of canonical Mark — Clement says it was composed by additions to the canonical Gospel, but says nothing of omissions (I.20f, 24ff). The additions, Clement says, were made by Mark himself, of material from his “notes” (ὑπομνήματα, I.19f) and those of Peter. The new material did not exhaust these notes, but was chosen from them. It consisted of “things suitable to those studies which make for progress toward knowledge” (τὰ τοῖς προκόπτουσι περὶ τὴν γνώσιν κατάλληλα, I.20f), both of stories (πράξεις, I.24) like those in the canonical Gospel and sayings (λόγια τινά, I.25) of which the exegesis would lead the hearers to the hidden truth (I.26). It did not contain τὰ ἀπόρρητα (I.22f), nor “the hierophantic teaching of the Lord” (I.23–24, probably identical with τὰ ἀπόρρητα). The expanded text constituted a “more spiritual Gospel” (πνευματικώτερον εὐαγγέλιον, I.21f), which was intended to be useful to those who were being “perfected” or “initiated” (τελειούμενοι, I.22). This text was kept secret by Clement’s church in Alexandria and read only “to those being initiated (μυούμενοι) into the great mysteries” (II.2). It was in the custody of the presbyters of the church, or they had had access to it, so that one of them had been able to secure an inferior (?) copy (ἀπόγραφον) for Carpocrates (II.5–6). Clement himself either had a copy or knew the text by heart or had access to it; he could quote it verbatim to Theodore.
That's pretty good. But that barely scratches the surface. Let's see how five core concepts in the section "fit" with parallel passages in the Stromateis:
τὰ ἀπόῤῥητα
ἡ ἱεροφαντικὴ διδασκαλία τοῦ Κυρίου
πράξεσιν / πράξεσιν ἐπιθεὶς
ἡ ἐξήγησις μυσταγωγήσειν
τὸ ἄδυτον τῆς ἑπτάκις κεκαλυμμένης ἀληθείας
Secret Teachings Not Written Down (τὰ ἀπόρρητα)
Clement of Alexandria held that certain higher truths of the faith were “secret” or unspeakable (τὰ ἀπόρρητα) and were not meant for casual disclosure. In his Stromateis (Miscellanies), Clement emphasizes an unwritten esoteric tradition handed down from the apostles. He says that Jesus “did not certainly disclose to the many what did not belong to the many; but to the few to whom He knew that they belonged… And, secret things are entrusted to speech, not to writing, as is the case with God”. In the same context, Clement argues that even if Scripture says “nothing is hidden that shall not be revealed,” it means that secret teachings will be revealed “to him who hears [them] secretly” – i.e. to worthy initiates, not to everyone. This demonstrates Clement’s practice of holding back the deepest doctrines (the “aporrheta”) from written texts, reserving them for oral instruction of a select few. Indeed, he admits “Some things I purposely omit, in the exercise of a wise selection, afraid to write what I guarded against even speaking…lest we should be found ‘reaching a sword to a child.’”. Such statements show that Clement consciously kept the highest teachings esoteric, very much in line with the idea of τὰ ἀπόρρητα (“things not to be uttered to all”) referenced in the passage.
Hierophantic Teaching of the Lord (ἱεροφαντικὴ διδασκαλία τοῦ Κυρίου)
Clement often describes Christian doctrine using the language of the mystery cults, portraying Christ and other holy teachers as hierophants (initiators into sacred mysteries). In the Protrepticus (Exhortation), he pointedly calls Moses “the hierophant of truth” for Israel. More significantly, Clement presents Christ Himself as the ultimate Hierophant who initiates believers into the divine mysteries. “O truly sacred mysteries! ... The Lord is the hierophant , and seals while illuminating him who is initiated, and presents to the Father him who believes, to be kept safe forever.”. Here Clement depicts Jesus as fulfilling the role of a mystagogue or hierophant, leading the “initiated” into saving knowledge. This shows that speaking of “the hierophantic teaching of the Lord” (ἱεροφαντικὴ διδασκαλία τοῦ Κυρίου) is consistent with Clement’s style. He freely uses hierophantic imagery for the gospel: the truth of Christ is a holy mystery into which the Lord (as High Priest and Teacher) initiates the worthy. In short, Clement’s Christianity has a strong mystagogical character, so referring to the Lord’s teaching as hierophantic accurately reflects his approach of likening Christian instruction to a sacred initiation.
“Acts” and Adding Further Narratives (πράξεις … ἐπιθεὶς)
The Greek term πράξεις (“acts” or “deeds”) in the passage alludes to narrative accounts of Jesus’s works – and Clement does use this term in reference to scripture. For example, he explicitly cites the biblical Acts of the Apostles (in Greek, Πράξεις τῶν Ἀποστόλων) as an authoritative text. In Stromateis I, he writes: “as it is written in the Acts of the Apostles, ‘...Rise, Peter; kill and eat…’”, and elsewhere he notes “in the Acts of the Apostles you will find this, word for word, ‘Those then who received his word were baptized…’”. This shows Clement was familiar with “Acts” as a genre of sacred narrative.
As for the phrase “adding other deeds” (πράξεσιν ἐπιθεὶς καὶ ἄλλας), Clement’s extant writings acknowledge that Mark and the other evangelists compiled accounts of the Lord’s deeds, though they do not use these exact words. Notably, Clement describes the composition of Mark’s Gospel in a way that resonates with the idea of adding more narratives. According to Eusebius (who quotes Clement’s Hypotyposeis), after Peter’s preaching in Rome the people “besought Mark, who had followed [Peter]… to leave them a written monument of the doctrine which had been orally communicated. …Thus Mark composed the Gospel, and gave it to those who had requested it” Clement further relates that “when Peter learned of this, he neither forbade it nor encouraged it”. Moreover, Clement knew Mark was associated with Alexandria – “they say that this Mark was the first that was sent to Egypt…and first established churches in Alexandria.”. While Clement’s surviving works do not explicitly say Mark “added” additional stories later, his testimony (preserved by Eusebius) acknowledges two stages of Mark’s work: an initial Gospel written in Rome for new converts, and the tradition that Mark brought his gospel to Alexandria, the very scenario in which the passage implies Mark appended further secret narratives for the mature. Thus, Clement’s writings show familiarity with the idea of Gospel narratives (praxeis) and even a distinction between basic written accounts and deeper teachings. This lends context to the passage’s statement that Mark, “to the previously written acts, added still others”, even if Clement’s extant text stops short of using the exact phrasing πράξεσιν ἐπιθεὶς. The concept of supplementing the Gospel with further deeds for those “advancing in knowledge” is in harmony with Clement’s view that the faith has both elementary teachings and more advanced, hidden teachings for those capable – a point he makes by noting that Mark’s listeners in Rome were “not content with the unwritten teaching” and demanded a written Gospel.
Interpretation as Mystagogy (τὴν ἐξήγησιν μυσταγωγήσειν)
Clement consistently portrays biblical interpretation (ἐξήγησις) and teaching as a process of mystical initiation (μυσταγωγία). In the quoted passage, the phrase “the interpretation of which will mystagogically lead the hearers…” corresponds exactly to Clement’s pedagogical method. He asserts that the deeper meaning of Scripture is deliberately veiled in symbols and enigmas so that only a trained mind can discern it. “The mysteries are delivered mystically,” he writes, “that what is spoken may be… not on the tongue but in the understanding [of the listener]”. Only the one with the right disposition will grasp the hidden truth: “to him who hears secretly, even what is secret shall be manifested… what is hidden to the many shall appear manifest to the few.”. This is essentially mystagogical language – Clement describes the teacher as leading the student into a sacred inner meaning, much as a mystagogue leads initiates into the inner sanctuary. Indeed, Clement sees the Christian gnostic teacher as an initiator: “Thus the Lord did not hinder us from doing good on the Sabbath, but allowed us to communicate of those divine mysteries to those capable of receiving them”. And as shown above, he even calls Christ “the hierophant” who “illuminates the one being initiated”. We can say, then, that Clement’s concept of exegesis is inherently mystagogical. He uses allegorical interpretation to unveil spiritual truths layer by layer, initiating the faithful into higher knowledge. This directly parallels the passage’s idea that Mark included certain λόγια (sayings) whose proper interpretation would “lead the hearers as a mystagogue” into the deepest truth. In Clement’s own practice, scriptural exegesis serves to usher believers from the outer literal level into the inner secrets of faith, just as a mystagogue leads initiates from the outer court into the inner shrine.
The “Adyton” and the Sevenfold-Veiled Truth (τὸ ἄδυτον τῆς ἑπτάκις κεκαλυμμένης ἀληθείας)
Perhaps most striking is Clement’s use of temple imagery and multiple veils to describe the concealment of divine truth – imagery that closely matches “the adyton of the truth hidden by sevenfold covering.” In Stromateis V, Clement gives a detailed allegorical interpretation of the Jewish tabernacle/temple, emphasizing how it exemplifies layered secrecy. He notes for instance: “Now concealment is evidenced by the reference to the seven circuits around the temple, spoken of among the Hebrews; and the covering and the veil were variegated…suggesting that the nature of the elements contained the revelation of God.”. Here Clement draws attention to sevenfold enclosures (often understood as seven walls or perhaps the sevenfold veil of the tabernacle) that separate the profane outside from the holy inner sanctum. He goes on to describe the divisions of the sanctuary: there was an outer court open to all Israelites, an inner Holy Place accessible only to priests, and beyond the inner veil lay “the Adyton (ἄδυτον),” the Holy of Holies, entered only by the high priest on appointed days. He even remarks that the mystic four-lettered Name of God was known only to those admitted to the adytum. This language directly parallels the passage’s phrase “the adyton of the truth hidden by sevenfold-veiled truth.” Clement clearly envisions ultimate truth as an inner holy place – “the sanctuary of knowledge”, as he elsewhere calls it – screened by multiple veils that only the spiritually advanced can penetrate. The “seven times covered” truth in the letter evokes the same concept as Clement’s “seven circuits” and veils that envelop the sacred mysteries.
It is worth noting that Clement connects this “sevenfold veil” motif with the idea that spiritual truths are protected from the uninitiated. Just as a physical veil guarded the holy inner room, the literal narratives and symbols guard the deeper gospel truth. Only through successive unveilings – analogous to passing through multiple curtains or precincts – does one reach “the secret place” of truth (τὸ ἄδυτον τῆς ἀληθείας). In Clement’s own words, “the things recorded of the sacred Ark signify the properties of the world of thought, which is hidden and closed to the many”. Ultimately, the goal is to arrive where, as he says, “within the veil…the sacerdotal service is concealed”, far from the gaze of the uninitiated crowd.
In sum, Clement’s extant writings abundantly attest to all the key concepts found in the Greek passage: the notion of secret teachings (τὰ ἀπόρρητα) reserved for a spiritual elite; the portrayal of Christ’s gospel as a mysterial or hierophantic teaching; the use of the term praxeis for recorded acts and an understanding that Mark’s Gospel had both public and secret components; the idea that proper exegesis serves to mystagogically lead believers into the hidden core of truth; and the vivid image of ultimate truth as an inner sanctuary veiled seven-fold from the profane, into which the initiated alone may enter. All these themes are integral to Clement of Alexandria’s theological vocabulary and imagery, showing a remarkable consistency between his acknowledged works and the concepts expressed in the questioned passage. The correspondence of these ideas in Clement’s Greek writings underlines how authentically “Clementine” the passage’s language and mystagogical themes are.
Sources: Clement of Alexandria, Exhortation to the Greeks (Protrepticus) and Stromateis (Miscellanies) in ANF vol.2; Stromateis V.4–VI.** (on the tabernacle symbolism); Eusebius, Ecclesiastical History II.15–16 (citing Clement’s Hypotyposeis on Mark’s Gospel); etc.
