| Clement passage | Greek cited / alluded to | Synoptic locus | Markan corridor location | Gospel profile | Effect on Secret Mark / Canon thesis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Strom. 5.10.63.7–64.1 | μυστήριον ἐμὸν ἐμοὶ καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς τοῦ οἴκου μου; εἷς ἀγαθός, ὁ πατήρ | Mark 4:11; Matt 13:11; Mark 10:18 | Matt 19:17 | Outside corridor (parable discourse) |
In Stromateis 5.10.63.7–64.1 Clement reflects on the restricted disclosure of dominical mysteries, explicitly invoking a saying attributed to “a gospel” in which the Lord declares, “μυστήριον ἐμὸν ἐμοὶ καὶ τοῖς υἱοῖς τοῦ οἴκου μου.” This formulation is not a verbatim citation of any single canonical text but clearly echoes the parable discourse tradition found in Mark 4:11 (“ὑμῖν τὸ μυστήριον δέδοται τῆς βασιλείας τοῦ θεοῦ”) and its Matthean parallel in Matthew 13:11. The emphasis on selective disclosure, λίγοι χωροῦντες, and divine intentionality aligns most naturally with the Markan form of the saying, where the distinction between insiders and outsiders is sharpest.
Clement then connects this logic of revelation to the affirmation “εἷς ἀγαθός, ὁ πατήρ,” a saying shared between Mark 10:18 and Matthew 19:17. Once again, Clement does not reproduce either evangelist’s wording exactly. Instead, he extracts the theological core—exclusive divine goodness—and integrates it into an Alexandrian epistemological framework in which ignorance of God is equated with death, while knowledge constitutes participation in incorruptible life.
Crucially, Clement does not embed these logia within their narrative contexts. The parable saying is detached from the Galilean teaching sequence of Mark 4, and the “one is good” saying is removed from the rich man pericope of Mark 10. As a result, the passage does not exhibit Markan narrative sequencing or corridor logic. Nevertheless, the conceptual pairing of mystery-revelation and restricted discipleship resonates strongly with Mark’s theological profile, especially as opposed to Matthew’s more didactic and ecclesial framing.
From the standpoint of the Secret Mark and Eusebian Canon thesis, this passage is mildly supportive but non-advancing. It shows Clement operating comfortably with Markan-style logia—particularly the insider/outsider mystery language—while treating them as free-standing theological axioms rather than as components of a continuous gospel narrative. The usage is compatible with the existence of a Mark-shaped gospel tradition familiar to Clement, but it does not supply structural evidence for a Markan narrative axis of the sort demonstrable in Quis Dives Salvetur.
Accordingly, Stromateis 5.10.63.7–64.1 should be classified as thematically Markan but structurally neutral. It supports compatibility with Mark’s theological vocabulary and emphasis on mystery, without materially advancing the claim that Clement is here drawing upon, or presupposing, a continuous Markan (or “Secret Mark”) gospel framework underlying the Stromateis.
