| Clement passage | Greek cited / alluded to | Synoptic / NT locus | Markan corridor location | Gospel profile | Effect on Secret Mark / Canon thesis |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Exc. Theod. 2.2 (1.2.2) | “Σώζου σὺ καὶ ἡ ψυχή σου”; σπέρμα πνευματικόν ἐντεθειμένον τῇ ψυχῇ | Mark 8:35–37 (σῶσαι τὴν ψυχήν); Matt 16:25–26; Luke 9:24–25 | Core discipleship saying (Mark 8 pivot) | Markan ψυχή-salvation logion refracted through Valentinian anthropology | Strongly supportive: Markan saying presupposed as base, allegorized rather than replaced |
In Excerpta ex Theodoto 2.2 Clement (reporting Valentinian exegesis) frames salvation around the ψυχή and its preservation, climaxing in the dominical injunction “Σώζου σὺ καὶ ἡ ψυχή σου.” Although the formulation is compressed and adapted, the controlling logion is unmistakable: the Markan saying on saving or losing one’s ψυχή (Mark 8:35–37), the exact pivot of the Markan discipleship corridor. Matthew and Luke offer parallel forms, but nothing in the passage reflects their narrative or rhetorical reshaping; the concern is solely the Markan paradox of ψυχή-salvation.
What is distinctive is the Valentinian overlay: Adam’s sleep as λήθη τῆς ψυχῆς, the implanted σπέρμα πνευματικόν, and the unifying work of the Savior binding soul and flesh. Yet this mythic anthropology does not generate the exhortation; it explains it. The command to “save the soul” is not derived from Sophia-myth but anchored in a known gospel saying, which the myth then allegorizes.
Crucially, Clement does not introduce the saying as Matthaean or Lukan, nor does he expand it with their typical recompense language (“what shall a man give in exchange”). The saying appears as a bare imperative, functioning exactly as Mark’s aphoristic, paradoxical formulation. This is consistent with Clement’s broader habit: Mark supplies the gnomic nucleus, while other traditions (here, Valentinian) supply speculative elaboration.
For the Secret Mark / Canon thesis, this passage is highly probative. It shows that even in heterodox reporting, Clement treats a Markan discipleship logion as the stable axis against which theological systems are measured and interpreted. Mark is not corrected or displaced; he is assumed. This reinforces the claim that Clement’s operative gospel base—across orthodox and heterodox materials alike—is Mark, with other voices functioning parasitically rather than governorially.
