Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Discussion about the New Testament, apocrypha, gnostics, church fathers, Christian origins, historical Jesus or otherwise, etc.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

I think there is a stronger argument that the letter is by Clement than Valentinus.

I think Porter was too influenced by Goodacre, who, let's face it, consciously or unconsciously would not like the consequences of a letter of Clement surviving from antiquity and transmitted through the monasteries (and at Mar Saba as a stand alone letter independent of a collection of Basil - Tselikas is getting me a scan of the letter from the Greek Patriarchate in Jerusalem as I write).

If a letter of Clement of Alexandria survived from antiquity it means (a) Clement wrote letters which were preserved in monasteries and (b) were added to the ends of collections of other Patristic writers.

Clement beginning his letter with Καλῶς would have been unknowable to Morton Smith (unless of course he received this information from his Lord Satan during a seance).

The letter also explains who the Karpocratians are. It was a name clearly given to Alexandrian monks who practiced or sought the fruits of "encratism." There was no "Carpocrates." Just early monks in Alexandria who were likely aligned with the Church there in some way.

Checkmate I think.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

It's odd that Porter wouldn't have traced the history of the letter in his article. I am sorry but that other stupid article which criticizes Smith for his "short comings." Yeah compared to whom? God? Yeah Smith is short of God. He's not perfect. But look at this article. Nothing about the history or transmission of the manuscript. You'd think that might be important in determining whether or not the letter is by Basil, Clement or Valentinus. I always find that a lot - but not all - humanities paper writing is really about the author wanting us to hear "his ideas." Like people at this forum. You know it's ego. I don't want to hear what most people have to say unless he's earned the right to have an opinion. I am interested in facts rather than opinion (what the German consulate official told me when I was being naturalized).

It would have been interesting to see, now that I have Pinakes, the diffusion of the letter as a "stand alone" document. It seems, like always, that the scholar only chose to focus on the arguments which help make his case, which help his thesis that it is a letter of Valentinus. It seems a fucking stretch that Basil would have taken over a letter of Valentinus. I am sorry call me conservative. But a letter of Clement which borrowed ideas from Valentinus not so fucking crazy ...
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

See German.

W. VÖLKER , Basilius , Ep . 366 und Clemens Alexandrinus : VC 7 ( 1953 ) 23-26 ( Ep . 366 not authentic , contains excerpts of Stromateis )

What tells me this isn't going to be as limited intellectually as an American paper. I wish someone could print this off for me or send a link. I don't have a lot of spare time to go to the library.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

I managed to get the first pages of the Volker:
Im dritten Bande der Nova Patrum Bibliotheca p. 450 ver6ffentlichte Kardinal Angelo Mai im Jahre 1845 aus einem alten venetianischen Codex LXI f. 324 einen Brief, der an den Mönch Urbicius gerichtet war und den Namen des grossen Basilius als Absender trug. Mai trat fiir die Echtheit ein und urteilte: neque vero scriptum hoc Basilianum diutius ego celandum arbitror. Die Ausgabe von Migne riickte dieses Schreiben als ep. 366 in die Sammlung der Basilius-Briefe ein (MSG 32, 1109 C-1112 D), und auch Forscher wie Bardenhewer erhoben dagegen keine Bedenken (Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur III, S. 158). Der Brief enthalt eine kleine Lobrede auf die Tugend der eyxearcia, die der Vollkommene, der nach der strebt, in Nachahmung Gottes und Christi gewinnen mfsse. Nun fb.Ut es einem aufmerksamen Leser auf, dass der Autor sich bei der Beschreibung von Christi ?yx?oazeca eines Valentin-Fragmentes bedient, das uns Clemens Alexandrinus in Strom. III 59, 3 uberliefert hat. Wahrend dieser aber noch den Namen des Gnostikers erwahnt, verschweigt ihn bezeichnenderweise unser Schriftstfck. Forscht man, hierdurch stutzig gemacht, weiter, so entdeckt man, dass es weithin nur ein Mo,saik von ausgeschriebenen Clemens-Stellen ist. Um eine Vbersicht iiber das Ausmass der Entlehnungen zu gewinnen, stelle ich die parallel laufenden Abschnitte in Form einer Tabelle zusammen (die rechte Spalte bringt die Clemens-Satze mit Angabe von Seite und Zeile der Ausgabe Stahlins, Band II). Wie man aus umstehender Aufstellung ersieht, sind vor allem zwei Abschnitte aus den Stromata (S. 197, 3-9 und 223, 5-16) ineinander gearbeitet, wobei die Reihenfolge der Clementinischen Satze im allgemeinen ebenso beibehalten wird wie der Wortlaut. An zwei Stellen (1112 B-C) kann man sogar die Vorlage fur die Textkritik

In the third volume of the Nova Patrum Bibliotheca p. 450 Cardinal Angelo Mai published in 1845 a letter from an old Venetian codex LXI f. 324, which was addressed to the monk Urbicius and bore the name of the great Basilius as the sender. Mai stood up for the authenticity and judged: neque vero scriptum hoc Basilianum diutius ego celandum arbitror. Migne's edition published this letter as ep. 366 in the collection of Basilius letters (MSG 32, 1109 C-1112 D), and researchers such as Bardenhewer raised no objections to this (History of Early Church Literature III, p. 158). The letter contains a little paean to the virtue of eyxearcia, which the perfect who strives for it must acquire in imitation of God and Christ. Well fb.Ut it is apparent to an attentive reader that the author uses a Valentin fragment in the description of Christ's ?yx?oazeca, which Clemens Alexandrinus gives us in Strom. III 59, 3 handed down. But while he still mentions the name of the Gnostic, our document is characteristically silent. If one continues to research, made perplexed by this, one discovers that it is largely just a patchwork of advertised Clemens positions. In order to gain an overview of the extent of the borrowings, I have compiled the parallel sections in the form of a table (the right-hand column contains the Clemens sentences with the page and line of Stahlin's edition, Volume II). As can be seen from the list below, two sections from the Stromata (pp. 197, 3-9 and 223, 5-16) are worked into one another, whereby the order of the Clementine sentences is generally retained, as is the wording. In two places (1112 B-C) one can even see the template for the textual criticism
Did I hear "patchwork"? Hmmm.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

I had the first two pages for free. I went to Brill and paid 34.75 for the remaining one and a half pages to the article. Wow.

Im dritten Bande der Nova Patrum Bibliotheca p. 450 ver6ffentlichte Kardinal Angelo Mai im Jahre 1845 aus einem alten venetianischen Codex LXI f. 324 einen Brief, der an den Mönch Urbicius gerichtet war und den Namen des grossen Basilius als Absender trug. Mai trat fiir die Echtheit ein und urteilte: neque vero scriptum hoc Basilianum diutius ego celandum arbitror. Die Ausgabe von Migne riickte dieses Schreiben als ep. 366 in die Sammlung der Basilius-Briefe ein (MSG 32, 1109 C-1112 D), und auch Forscher wie Bardenhewer erhoben dagegen keine Bedenken (Geschichte der altkirchlichen Literatur III, S. 158). Der Brief enthalt eine kleine Lobrede auf die Tugend der eyxearcia, die der Vollkommene, der nach der strebt, in Nachahmung Gottes und Christi gewinnen mfsse. Nun fb.Ut es einem aufmerksamen Leser auf, dass der Autor sich bei der Beschreibung von Christi ?yx?oazeca eines Valentin-Fragmentes bedient, das uns Clemens Alexandrinus in Strom. III 59, 3 uberliefert hat. Wahrend dieser aber noch den Namen des Gnostikers erwahnt, verschweigt ihn bezeichnenderweise unser Schriftstfck. Forscht man, hierdurch stutzig gemacht, weiter, so entdeckt man, dass es weithin nur ein Mo,saik von ausgeschriebenen Clemens-Stellen ist. Um eine Vbersicht iiber das Ausmass der Entlehnungen zu gewinnen, stelle ich die parallel laufenden Abschnitte in Form einer Tabelle zusammen (die rechte Spalte bringt die Clemens-Satze mit Angabe von Seite und Zeile der Ausgabe Stahlins, Band II). Wie man aus umstehender Aufstellung ersieht, sind vor allem zwei Abschnitte aus den Stromata (S. 197, 3-9 und 223, 5-16) ineinander gearbeitet, wobei die Reihenfolge der Clementinischen Satze im allgemeinen ebenso beibehalten wird wie der Wortlaut. An zwei Stellen (1112 B-C) kann man sogar die Vorlage fur die Textkritik des Brief heranziehen ()

Loa'Teta).
Es ist mir dagegen nicht gelungen, die Quellen fur die iibrigen
Abschnitte des Schreibens nachzuweisen. Auffallend ist der Satz in
1112 B : Ir¡aovç ?yx?Oaisca lggdvi7xai yfi xai #aaa*acrn xoigggogy?wd,u?vos, yap aurdy c?6TS aa,a,' ioQnE?O17rdT?7acy ?d??aQUav otIT(t)g Q ? v yijv. Da dieser Gedanke in unmittelbarer Nahe des Valentin-Fragmentes steht, so ist man unwillkurlich versucht, ihn diesem zuzuweisen, zumal er sich ganz vortreflhch in dessen Atmosphare einffgt. So verlockend freilich die Aussicht an sich ware, unser Wissen um Valentin etwas zu erweitem, so glaube ich doch nicht, dass der Schreiber des Briefes iiber eine selbstandige Valentin-Kenntnis verfiigt hat. Sein Gewahrsmann ist hier Clemens, was allein schon daraus bewiesen wird, dass er auch die dem Zitat bei Clemens voraufgehenden Satze angenihrt hat. Eine gedankliche Parallele findet sich in den Johannes-Akten, cap. 93: ??ov?o,u?v 7roAAa'xtg JOV avai;? ?a81 ?cov I'xv(,; aVTov E'7rt' cijg et'4pai'VeTat - avtov z?s y?s E'aVT6VE?cal?OOVia'xai ow8??ozE EZBov(S. 197, 4 ff. Lipsius-Bonnet). Sodann ist mir der Satz in 1112 C aufgefallen, wo es von der Enthaltsamkeit heisst, dass ihre Freunde lieben aicvvaw T<5yavcoTELoa)v, und dass man diese dann auch dort finde : 6nov To'v vovy. Dies erinnert an Thalassius, der die Enthaltsamkeit zusammen mit 7,7,avxt,a,7rLooaevX?7',dya*7ri7mit einem Viergespann vergleicht: Sig dva"yov -co'vvofyv (Centuriae I 24, MSG 91, 1429 C). Die Wendung: xai yap AgyeTat vovs o?oa mat' voog axovEC ( 1112 C), macht es deutlich, dass der Autor darum weiss, hier eine gangbare Mfnze weiter zu geben. So lesen wir bei Gregor von Nyssa : rov vozrv elvai To'v xai vo?iv To'v Weovo'VTa (de anima, MSG 46, 32 A), wozu man de opificio 6 (MSG 44, 140 A) zur Erklarung hinzuziehen muss: CZT09OECOL081bid Tc5y Die stoische Grundlage ist unverkennbar, cf. St V F II 857: xata plv yap rdy Ao'yovxai ???cECV a6TO'TO'OTO(scil. To''r?g ipvx?g ?yE,uovcx6v) xat'a'mov'etv
6t' ,uEV 8c' ('O'rCOV6' a'xov'8tv. Liest man den Brief im Zusammenhang, so beobachtet man eine doppelte Tendenz. Wesen und Wirkung der Enthaltsamkeit soll beschrieben werden. Dies geschieht in einem unverkennbaren Streben nach Systematisierung: Gott, Christus und der Vollkommene werden als Besitzer dieser Tugend geschildert, wobei diese je nach dem Trager auch verschieden erscheint. Femer tritt uns die Neigung zu kurzen, formelhaft wirkenden und einprag samen Wendungen entgegen: ?nc?v,uia vdaos latt' vycela 69 lymea'r6ta (1112 A, cf. St V F I 207, III 425 ff.), sowie eine Vorliebe fiir Definitionen. Dies alles sind deutliche Anzeichen fiir eine spate Abfassungszeit, die das reife Erbe einer grossen
Vergangenheit nach bestimmten Gesichtspunkten exzerpiert und in Sammelwerken zusammenfasst. Mit Basilius hat dieser Brief nichts zu tun, er geh6rt vielmehr in die Welt der Florilegien hinein.
Mainz, Johannes Gutenberg-Universität

In the third volume of the Nova Patrum Bibliotheca p. 450 Cardinal Angelo Mai published in 1845 a letter from an old Venetian codex LXI f. 324, which was addressed to the monk Urbicius and bore the name of the great Basilius as the sender. Mai stood up for the authenticity and judged: neque vero scriptum hoc Basilianum diutius ego celandum arbitror. Migne's edition published this letter as ep. 366 in the collection of Basilius letters (MSG 32, 1109 C-1112 D), and researchers such as Bardenhewer raised no objections to this (History of Early Church Literature III, p. 158). The letter contains a little paean to the virtue of eyxearcia, which the perfect who strives for it must acquire in imitation of God and Christ. Well fb.Ut it is apparent to an attentive reader that the author uses a Valentin fragment in the description of Christ's ?yx?oazeca, which Clemens Alexandrinus gives us in Strom. III 59, 3 handed down. But while he still mentions the name of the Gnostic, our document is characteristically silent. If one continues to research, made perplexed by this, one discovers that it is largely just a patchwork of advertised Clemens positions. In order to gain an overview of the extent of the borrowings, I have compiled the parallel sections in the form of a table (the right-hand column contains the Clemens sentences with the page and line of Stahlin's edition, Volume II). As can be seen from the list below, two sections from the Stromata (pp. 197, 3-9 and 223, 5-16) are worked into one another, whereby the order of the Clementine sentences is generally retained, as is the wording. In two places (1112 B-C) one can even use the template for the textual criticism of the letter ()

Loa'Teta).
On the other hand, I have not been able to find the sources for the others
Evidence of sections of the letter. The sentence in is striking
1112 B : Ir¡aovç ?yx?Oaisca lggdvi7xai yfi xai #aaa*acrn xoigggogy?wd,u?vos, yap aurdy c?6TS aa,a,' ioQnE?O17rdT?7acy ?d??aQUav otIT(t)g Q ? v yijv. Since this idea is very close to the Valentin fragment, one is involuntarily tempted to attribute it to it, especially since it fits perfectly into its atmosphere. As tempting as the prospect of expanding our knowledge of Valentin might be, I do not believe that the writer of the letter had independent knowledge of Valentin. His custodian here is Clemens, which is already proven by the fact that he also quoted the sentences preceding the quotation from Clemens. A conceptual parallel can be found in the Johannes-Akten, cap. 93: ??ov?o,u?v 7roAAa'xtg JOV avai;? ?a81 ?cov I'xv(,; aVTov E'7rt' cijg et'4pai'VeTat - avtov z?s y?s E'aVT6VE?cal?OOVia'xai ow8??ozE EZBov(p. 197, 4 ff. Lipsius-Bonnet) Then I noticed the sentence in 1112 C, where it says about abstinence that its friends love aicvvaw T<5yavcoTELoa)v, and that one finds this there too: 6nov To'v vovy. This is reminiscent of Thalassius, who, together with 7,7,avxt,a,7rLooaevX?7',dya*7ri7, compares continence to a four-horse chariot: Sig dva"yov -co'vvofyv (Centuriae I 24, MSG 91, 1429 C). The phrase: xai yap AgyeTat vovs o?oa mat' voog axovEC ( 1112 C), makes it clear that the author knows how to pass on a viable coin here. So we read in Gregory of Nyssa: rov vozrv elvai To' v xai vo?iv To'v Weovo'VTa (de anima, MSG 46, 32 A), for which de opificio 6 (MSG 44, 140 A) must be consulted for explanation: CZT09OECOL081bid Tc5y The stoic basis is unmistakable, cf. St V F II 857: xata plv yap rdy Ao'yovxai ???cECV a6TO'TO'OTO(scil. To''r?g ipvx?g ?yE,uovcx6v) xat'a'mov'etv
6t' ,uEV 8c' ('O'rCOV6' a'xov'8tv. If one reads the letter in context, one observes a double trend. The essence and effect of abstinence should be described. This is done in an unmistakable striving for systematization: God, Christ and the Perfect One are portrayed as possessors of this virtue, whereby it also appears differently depending on the bearer.Furthermore, we find the tendency to use short, formulaic-looking and memorable phrases: ?nc?v,uia vdaos latt' vycela 69 lymea'r6ta (1112 A, cf. St V F I 207, III 425 ff.), as well as a preference for definitions.All these are clear signs of a late period of composition, which excerpts the mature legacy of a great past from certain points of view and summarizes it in collective works This letter has nothing to do with Basilius, it rather belongs in the world of the Florilegie.
Mainz, Johannes Gutenberg University
StephenGoranson
Posts: 2308
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2015 2:10 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by StephenGoranson »

Are you saying that Clement was mistaken about Carpocrates being a person--and the father of Epiphanes?
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

I am saying that there never was a Carpocrates and Clement knew it. Just like there was never a Hebion the father of the Ebionites or Elxai the father of the Elchasites and the like. A lot of the Patristic reports on the heresies is bullshit, third or fourth hand reporting, exaggeration, innuendo, half-truth, gossip. Let's be honest. It doesn't meet any reasonable standard of credibility.

It's like the kabbalah. Some of the greatest enemies of kabbalah were kabbalists themselves. You do what you do to survive. Besides Celsus knows the Carpocratians as the Harpocratians of Salome. There was a lot of instability in the reporting. Whispers and innuendo. Kind of like the argument against Secret Mark.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

My list of manuscripts is wrong. I only count 7.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2816
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by andrewcriddle »

Porter argues in detail that the letter is theologically more Valentinian than is the teaching of Clement.

Andrew Criddle
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: Another Letter of Clement of Alexandria from the Monasteries

Post by Secret Alias »

Not what Volker concluded. Makes no sense.
Post Reply