| Clement passage | Greek cited / alluded to | Synoptic locus | Markan corridor location | Gospel profile | Effect on Secret Mark / Canon thesis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strom. 23.2–23.5 | μὴ κάλει σεαυτῷ πατέρα ἐπὶ γῆς · οἱ νεκροὶ τοὺς νεκροὺς θαπτέτωσαν, σὺ δέ μοι ἀκολούθει | Matt 23:9; Matt 8:22 // Luke 9:60; Mark 1:17; Mark 8:34 (conceptual) | Inside corridor by theme (call/renunciation), not by citation | Strongly harmonized, composite logion | Supportive in trajectory, not in wording |
In Stromateis 23.2–23.5 Clement constructs a composite dominical speech, placing on the lips of Jesus a sustained first-person address that weaves together multiple gospel sayings: the prohibition of earthly paternity (“μὴ κάλει σεαυτῷ πατέρα ἐπὶ γῆς”), the radical summons to discipleship (“οἱ νεκροὶ τοὺς νεκροὺς θαπτέτωσαν, σὺ δέ μοι ἀκολούθει”), and promises of eternal life and revelation. No single canonical gospel preserves this discourse in this form. It is therefore not a verbatim reproduction of Matthew, Mark, or Luke, but a deliberate harmonization.
Nevertheless, the dominant narrative logic is Markan. The center of gravity is not ecclesial authority (as in Matthew 23) nor social obligation (as in Luke 9), but existential rupture and immediate following—the Markan pattern of abandoning kinship, burial, and inherited identity in response to the call. The imperative “σὺ δέ μοι ἀκολούθει” functions here exactly as it does in Mark: as an absolute demand that severs the disciple from natural, familial, and even religious continuities.
Crucially, Clement intensifies the Markan discipleship logic by embedding it within a soteriological monologue: rebirth, liberation, healing, redemption, victory over death, and participation in divine nourishment (“ἄρτον ἐμαυτὸν διδούς”). This expansion is not synoptic redaction but Alexandrian theological amplification. Clement is not careless with his sources; he is intentionally fusing dominical sayings into a single revelatory voice that expresses what Mark’s corridor implies rather than states explicitly.
From the standpoint of the Secret Mark / Canon thesis, this passage is methodologically important. It shows that Clement is willing to recompose dominical material while preserving Mark’s discipular trajectory. The absence of strict Matthean form does not count against Markan priority here; on the contrary, it demonstrates that Clement is not governed by Matthew’s wording or narrative order. Instead, he treats individual sayings as modular units that can be reassembled so long as the Markan logic of renunciation, following, death-to-life, and revelation remains intact.
Accordingly, Stromateis 23.2–23.5 should be classified as indirectly supportive of the Secret Mark hypothesis. It does not supply verbatim Markan diction, but it presupposes a Mark-shaped understanding of discipleship so deeply that even harmonized material is bent into the corridor’s gravitational field. This is precisely the kind of evidence one would expect if Clement knew and used a Mark-based gospel tradition that extended beyond the limits of later canonical redaction.
