| Clement passage | Greek cited / alluded to | Synoptic locus | Markan corridor location | Gospel profile | Effect on Secret Mark / Canon thesis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strom. 22.1–22.2 | ὃς ἂν ἀφῇ τὰ ἴδια … ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ καὶ ἕνεκεν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, ἀπολήψεται ἑκατονταπλασίονα | Mark 10:29–30 (cf. Matt 19:29; Luke 18:29–30) | Inside corridor (Mark 10) | Distinctively Markan formulation | Strongly supportive (explicit Markan diction + sequence) |
In Stromateis 22.1–22.2 Clement explicitly cites Jesus’ response that follows Peter’s declaration of total renunciation. The wording is decisively Markan, most notably in the double causal phrase ἕνεκεν ἐμοῦ καὶ ἕνεκεν τοῦ εὐαγγελίου, which is characteristic of Mark 10:29 and absent in Matthew and Luke, who omit “and for the sake of the gospel.” This phrase anchors the saying firmly within Mark’s theological idiom, where allegiance to Jesus is inseparable from allegiance to the gospel proclamation itself.
The saying occupies a precise position within the Markan discipleship corridor: it is the direct continuation of Peter’s claim (“ἴδε ἡμεῖς ἀφήκαμεν πάντα”) and precedes the warning about persecutions and eschatological reversal. Clement preserves this logic. He does not abstract the saying into a generalized promise of reward, nor does he relocate it into a Matthean framework of merit or a Lukan framework of social reversal. Instead, renunciation is framed as a consequence of following Jesus and the gospel, exactly as in Mark.
Clement’s form of the saying also reflects Mark’s concrete realism. The list of renounced items—household, kinship, possessions—is not spiritualized at the level of citation itself. Any allegorical or ascetical deepening occurs elsewhere in Clement’s exposition, not by altering the dominical logion. This restraint is significant: Clement allows the Markan saying to stand in its narrative force before interpreting its deeper implications.
From the perspective of the Secret Mark / Canon thesis, this passage is highly probative. It demonstrates that Clement is not merely aware of a shared synoptic tradition but is drawing on a form of the saying that aligns most closely with Mark’s redactional profile. The preservation of Mark’s distinctive phraseology, coupled with its correct placement in the discipleship sequence, reinforces the conclusion that Clement is working within a Mark-shaped gospel continuum.
Accordingly, Stromateis 22.1–22.2 strengthens the argument that Clement’s gospel usage—at least in this section—is governed by Mark rather than by Matthew or Luke. It provides another clear data point showing that Clement’s Markan material is not incidental or hypothetical but structurally and verbally integrated, fully compatible with the hypothesis that Clement possessed and utilized a Mark-based gospel tradition that later informed Eusebius’s canonical synthesis.
