A Stromateis of What?

[Secret Alias]

Here's the best summary of the argument for Letter 8.

About sixty - seven letters of Evagrius are extant in Syriac and have been published by W. Frankenberg in his Evagrius Pontikus , Berlin , 1912 , an edition embracing the Syriac text along with Frankenberg's own retranslations back into Greek. We are concerned here with only one of the letters : the only one extant also in what is presumably the original Greek . As early as 1909 J. Schäfer chose to regard letter no . 8 in the corpus of the letters of St. Basil as unauthentic. In 1922 J. Bessières showed that the letter did not pertain to the general tradition of Basil's letters ; and in 1923 W. Bousset ( Apophthegmata , Tübingen , 1923 , pp . 335–336 ) and R. Melcher ( in his article " Der achte Brief des Basilius , ein Werk des Evagrius Pontikus , " in the Münsterische Beiträge zur Theologie , No. 1 , 1923 ) showed independently of each other that the reputed letter 8 of Basil , bearing the heading " An Apology to the People of Caesarea for His Withdrawal , and a Defense of the Faith , " is in fact a letter of Evagrius Ponticus to some monks near Caesarea . The Maurist editors had already perceived the unlikelihood of the heading and had judged that it was addressed to a monastery . It is all a little embarrassing in regard to Basil , since this letter no .8 has so often formed the core , as Quasten notes ( Patrology , Vol . 3 , p . 224 ) , of studies on the theology of Basil .

[Secret Alias]

Another Pseudo-Basil letter https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3202042.htm

[andrewcriddle]

Another Pseudo-Basil letter https://www.newadvent.org/fathers/3202042.htm

According to https://www.google.co.uk/books/edition/ ... frontcover the letter was attributed by some to St Nilus. Various works of Evagrius survived by being attributed to Nilus.

Andrew Criddle

[Secret Alias]

So here is my question. What is the standard of proof for attributing a letter to Clement? I realize this is a separate question from the Letter to Theodore but it covers that also. It's like asking "does my wife love me?" When I was 16 I thought the Prince line "I would die for you" was the standard of love. But when you grow up you realize that just hanging around someone is the real standard. In the same way I think there is this question "whether or not a work is a forgery" or "whether or not interpolation has taken place (according to the Marcionites virtually every text was interpolated) and then there is "who wrote the text." If we put the question of modern forgery out of the way, does the resemblance of the Letter to Theodore to the style of Clement make it a letter of Clement? What about Letter 366? Is Letter 366 more like Clement than Letter 8 is letter of Evagrius? I think so. The difficulty is perhaps that it appears to be a letter with "woven together" lines of Clement. I think the fact that the "Stromateis" means something "woven together" is a big part of the solution. I realize that there are other issues. But surely it is Clementine in some form or other. Either Clementine or Deutero-Clementine. The business about Valentinus is outlandish and unlikely. Yet it is important to note that Letter 8 as a letter of Evagrius is assumed to be "decided" when it is just an argument, the same kind of argument that is made about letter 366. The Clementine nature of 366 is more obvious and less circumstantial than 8 is to Evagrius.

[andrewcriddle]

So here is my question. What is the standard of proof for attributing a letter to Clement? I realize this is a separate question from the Letter to Theodore but it covers that also. It's like asking "does my wife love me?" When I was 16 I thought the Prince line "I would die for you" was the standard of love. But when you grow up you realize that just hanging around someone is the real standard. In the same way I think there is this question "whether or not a work is a forgery" or "whether or not interpolation has taken place (according to the Marcionites virtually every text was interpolated) and then there is "who wrote the text." If we put the question of modern forgery out of the way, does the resemblance of the Letter to Theodore to the style of Clement make it a letter of Clement? What about Letter 366? Is Letter 366 more like Clement than Letter 8 is letter of Evagrius? I think so. The difficulty is perhaps that it appears to be a letter with "woven together" lines of Clement. I think the fact that the "Stromateis" means something "woven together" is a big part of the solution. I realize that there are other issues. But surely it is Clementine in some form or other. Either Clementine or Deutero-Clementine. The business about Valentinus is outlandish and unlikely. Yet it is important to note that Letter 8 as a letter of Evagrius is assumed to be "decided" when it is just an argument, the same kind of argument that is made about letter 366. The Clementine nature of 366 is more obvious and less circumstantial than 8 is to Evagrius.

The letter 366 is (wrongly) attributed to Basil. Evagrius was officially condemned in 553 works of Evagrius survived in Greek by being attributed to other people. IF this was originally a letter attributed to Clement it would be less likely to be attributed to Basil in the manuscript tradition.

You have argued that the letter is a rehash of Clementine material and I think you are probably right. I am dubious as to whether the letter was ever attributed to Clement, if it had been it would be less likely to be re-attributed to Basil than if it was originally attributed to Evagrius.

I also feel that the letter probably comes from a monastic background. If so it is probably 4th century or later.

Andrew Criddle

[Secret Alias]

I can't fault you for being totally unreasonable

[andrewcriddle]

I've collected some references to where Evagrius rehashes Clement.

a/ Asceticism and Exegesis
alternatively
Exegesis and Psalmody

b/ Antique Letters

c/ Evagrius on Exegesis

Evagrius

According to Moses, philosophy is divided into four [parts]: [first,] into the historical; and [second,] that properly called the legislative, [“instructive”] (cf. Ex.24:12), which may be [concerned] with its own ethical matters; the third is the liturgical, which is the contemplation of nature; and the fourth is [concerned] with the whole expression of theologike.
We are then to take the law in a certain fourfold sense: [1] as a type of something evident; [2] or as a revealed [visible] sign [3] or as a commandment instituted for proper living; [4] or fortelling, like a prophecy. By this system, then, did Moses and Aaron lead the people, the people journeying from vice to virtue.

compared to Clement

The Mosaic philosophy is accordingly divided into four parts, -- into the historic, and that which is specially called the legislative, which two properly belong to an ethical treatise; and the third, that which, relates to sacrifice, which belongs to physical science; and the fourth, above all, the department of theology, "vision," which Plato predicates of the truly great mysteries.
........................................................................
The sense of the law is to be taken in three ways, -- either as exhibiting a symbol, or laying down a precept for right conduct, or as uttering a prophecy.

Andrew Criddle

[Secret Alias]

Are you sure this material doesn't go back to Life of Moses in Philo? https://brill.com/display/book/edcoll/9 ... 000015.xml

[Secret Alias]

On the use of περὶ in Book Three of the Stromateis (this will have relevance to the construction of the Stromateis from Letter 366 as I will demonstrate in a few days).

But those who have made themselves eunuchs for the sake of the eternal kingdom are making a choice of reasoned principle in their view because of the incidentals of married life; they are afraid of the amount of time spent on the provision of necessities.

3.1.1.4 οἱ τοίνυν κατὰ ἀνάγκην οὐ κατὰ λόγον εὐνοῦχοι γίνονται. οἱ δὲ ἕνεκα τῆς αἰωνίου βασιλείας εὐνουχίσαντες ἑαυτοὺς διὰ τὰ ἐκ τοῦ γάμου, φασί, συμβαίνοντα τὸν ἐπιλογισμὸν τοῦτον λαμβάνουσι, τὴν περὶ τὸν πορισμὸν τῶν ἐπιτηδείων ἀσχολίαν δεδιότες

Self-discipline means disdain of the body, following obedience 10 to God. Self-discipline applies, not just to sexual matters, but to everything else for which the soul lusts improperly, because it is not satisfied with the bare necessities. (2) Self-discipline applies to speech, possessions and their use, desire generally. 11 It is not just that it teaches us self-control. It offers us the gift of self-control, a divine power and grace of God. 12 (3) I must tell you our people’s view of the matter. We bless abstention from sexual intercourse and those to whom it comes as a gift of God. We admire monogamy and respect for one marriage and one only. We say that we ought to share in suffering and “bear one another’s burdens,” 13 for fear that anyone who thinks he is standing firmly should in fact fall. It is about second marriages that the Apostle says, “If you are on fire, get married.”

3.1.4.1 ἐγκράτεια τοίνυν σώματος ὑπεροψία κατὰ τὴν πρὸς θεὸν ὁμολογίαν. οὐ μόνον γὰρ περὶ τὰ ἀφροδίσια, ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ τὰ ἄλλα, ἃ ἐπιθυμεῖ ἡ ψυχὴ κακῶς οὐκ ἀρκουμένη τοῖς 3.1.4.2 ἀναγκαίοις, ἡ ἐγκράτεια ἀναστρέφεται. ἔστι δὲ καὶ περὶ τὴν γλῶσσαν καὶ περὶ τὴν κτῆσιν καὶ περὶ τὴν χρῆσιν καὶ περὶ τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν ἐγκράτεια. οὐ διδάσκει δ' αὕτη σωφρονεῖν μόνον, ἥ γε παρέχει σω3.1.4.3 φροσύνην ἡμῖν, δύναμις οὖσα καὶ θεία χάρις. τίνα οὖν τοῖς ἡμετέροις δοκεῖ περὶ τοῦ προκειμένου, λεκτέον· ἡμεῖς εὐνουχίαν μὲν καὶ οἷς τοῦτο δεδώρηται ὑπὸ θεοῦ μακαρίζομεν, μονογαμίαν δὲ καὶ τὴν περὶ τὸν ἕνα γάμον σεμνότητα θαυμάζομεν, συμπάσχειν δὲ δεῖν λέγοντες καὶ ἀλλήλων τὰ βάρη βαστάζειν, μή ποτέ τις δοκῶν καλῶς ἑστάναι καὶ αὐτὸς πέσῃ. περὶ δὲ τοῦ δευτέρου γάμου εἰ πυροῖ φησὶν ὁ ἀπόστολος, γάμησον.

In his work On Righteousness 19 he says, “God’s righteousness is a kind of social equity."

3.2.6.1 λέγει τοίνυν οὗτος ἐν τῷ Περὶ δικαιοσύνης τὴν δικαιοσύνην τοῦ θεοῦ κοινωνίαν τινὰ εἶναι μετ' ἰσότητος

If the adulteress and her paramour are both punished with death, it is surely clear that the commandment “You shall not lust for your neighbor’s wife” applies to the gentiles, so that anyone who follows the Law in keeping his hands off his neighbor’s wife and his sister may hear directly from the Lord: “But I say to you, you shall not lust.” The addition of the pronoun “I” shows that the application of the commandment is more rigidly binding, (2) and that Carpocrates and Epiphanes are battling against God. Epiphanes 36 in that notorious book, I mean 37 On Righteousness, goes on like this, and I quote: (3) “So you must hear the words ‘You shall not lust’ as a joke of the Lawgiver, to which he added the even more ludicrous words ‘for your neighbor’s property.’ The very one who endows human beings with desire to sustain the processes of birth gives orders that it is to be suppressed, though he suppresses it in no other living creature! The words ‘for your neighbor’s wife’ are even more ridiculous since he is forcing public property to become private property.”

3.2.9.1 εἰ δὲ ἡ μοιχευθεῖσα καὶ ὁ εἰς αὐτὴν πορνεύσας θανάτῳ κολάζεται, δῆλον δήπου τὴν ἐντολὴν τὴν λέγουσαν οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις τὴν γυναῖκα τοῦ πλησίον περὶ τῶν ἐθνῶν διαγορεύειν, ἵνα τις κατὰ νόμον καὶ τῆς τοῦ πλησίον καὶ τῆς ἀδελφῆς ἀποσχόμενος ἄντικρυς ἀκούσῃ παρὰ τοῦ κυρίου· ἐγὼ δὲ λέγω, οὐκ ἐπιθυμήσεις· ἡ δὲ τοῦ ἐγὼ μορίου προσθήκη προσεχεστέραν δείκνυσι 3.2.9.2 τῆς ἐντολῆς τὴν ἐνέργειαν, καὶ ὅτι θεομαχεῖ ὅ τε Καρποκράτης ὅ τ' Ἐπιφάνης, <ὃς> ἐν αὐτῷ τῷ πολυθρυλήτῳ βιβλίῳ, τῷ Περὶ δικαιοσύνης λέγω, ὧδέ πως ἐπιφέρει κατὰ λέξιν·

But in their irreverent war with God they stand apart from natural reason. They despise God’s generous goodness. Even if they choose not to marry, they still use the food he has produced, they still breathe the creator’s air. They are themselves his works and live in his world. They say that they have received the gospel of an alien knowledge. In one respect they ought to recognize the grace of the Lord of the cosmos; it is here on earth that they have received the gospel. We shall present precise arguments against these people when we treat the doctrine of first principles.

3.3.13.1 ἀλλὰ πρὸς μὲν τούτους, ὁπόταν τὸν περὶ ἀρχῶν διαλαμβάνωμεν λόγον, ἀκριβέστατα διαλεξόμεθα· (The preceding statement is made against Celsus's charges which the Stromateis takes to be directed against the Marcionites).

This doctrine does not belong to Marcion’s followers, but to those who hold that souls are placed in bodies, change their integument 47 and transmigrate. There will be another opportunity to respond to them when we discourse on the soul.

3.3.13.3 κἄστιν τὸ δόγμα τοῦτο οὐ τοῖς ἀπὸ Μαρκίωνος ἔτι, τοῖς δὲ ἐνσωματοῦσθαι καὶ μετενδεῖσθαι καὶ μεταγγίζεσθαι τὰς ψυχὰς ἀξιοῦσιν
οἰκεῖον, πρὸς οὓς ἄλλος ἂν εἴη καιρὸς λέγειν, ὁπηνίκα ἂν περὶ ψυχῆς διαλαμβάνωμεν

Herodotus is obviously making Solon say the same as this: “Croesus, every human being is a disaster.” 56 His story about Cleobis and Biton has the clear purpose of attacking birth and praising death. 57 The generation of men is like that of leaves, says Homer. Plato in the Cratylus attributes to Orpheus the doctrine that the soul is in the body as a punishment. Here are his words: “Some people say that it is the burial place of the soul, which is at the present time entombed in it.

3.3.16.1 ὦ Κροῖσε, πᾶς ἄνθρωπός ἐστι συμφορή. καὶ ὁ μῦθος δὲ αὐτῷ σαφῶς ὁ περὶ τοῦ Κλεόβιδος καὶ Βίτωνος οὐκ ἄλλο τι βούλεται ἀλλ' ἢ ψέγειν μὲν τὴν γένεσιν, τὸν θάνατον δὲ ἐπαινεῖν. 3.3.16.2 οἵη περ φύλλων γενεή, τοίη δὲ καὶ ἀνδρῶν 3.3.16.3 Ὅμηρος λέγει3.3.16.3 Πλάτων δὲ ἐν Κρατύλῳ Ὀρφεῖ τὸν λόγον ἀνατίθησι τὸν περὶ τοῦ κολάζεσθαι τὴν ψυχὴν ἐν τῷ σώματι, λέγει δὲ ὧδε· καὶ γὰρ σῆμά τινές φασιν αὐτὸ εἶναι τῆς ψυχῆς, ὡς τεθαμμένης

Pindar, speaking of the Eleusinian mysteries, adds, Blessed is the man who has seen these things before passing beneath the hollow earth.
He knows the end of life as he knows the beginning granted by God.

3.3.17.2 ἀλλὰ καὶ Πίνδαρος περὶ τῶν ἐν Ἐλευσῖνι μυστηρίων λέγων ἐπιφέρει.

Long before Marcion, Plato, in the first book of the Republic, clearly saw sexual intercourse as the origin of birth and rejected it accordingly. (4) In the course of his praise of old age he adds, “I would have you know that as the other pleasures, the physical ones, die down, my delight and pleasure in conversation correspondingly increases.” (5) He remarks on the practice of sex: “Hush, my dear fellow. I took the greatest pleasure in escaping from it, as in escaping from a crazy fierce dictator.” 19(1) Again in the Phaedo he writes disparagingly of birth: “The secret teaching on this matter is that human beings are in a kind of prison.”

ἐπαινῶν γὰρ τὸ γῆρας ἐπιφέρει ὅτι εὖ ἴσθι ὅτι ἔμοιγε, ὅσον αἱ ἄλλαι αἱ κατὰ τὸ σῶμα ἡδοναὶ ἀπομαραίνονται, τοσοῦτον αὔξονται αἱ περὶ 3.3.18.5 τοὺς λόγους ἐπιθυμίαι τε καὶ ἡδοναί· τῆς τε τῶν ἀφροδισίων χρήσεως ἐπιμνησθείς· εὐφήμει, ἄνθρωπε, ἀσμενέστατα μέντοι αὐτὸ ἀπέφυγον, ὥσπερ λυττῶντά τινα καὶ ἄγριον δεσπότην ἀποφυγών. 3.3.19.1 πάλιν δ' ἐν τῷ Φαίδωνι τὴν γένεσιν κακίζων γράφει· ὁ μὲν οὖν ἐν ἀπορρήτοις λεγόμενος περὶ αὐτῶν λόγος, ὡς ἔν τινι φρουρᾷ ἐσμεν 3.3.19.2 οἱ ἄνθρωποι.

To sum up, he does not offer Marcion grounds for thinking 68 matter evil, when he himself speaks reverently about the world: (5) “All that is good is got from the supreme disposer. From its previous state all that is chaotic or corrupt in the sky comes into being; from that state the world has the same qualities and produces them in living things.”

καὶ συνελόντι εἰπεῖν <τοῦ> κακὴν λογίζεσθαι τὴν ὕλην ἀφορμὴν οὐ παρέσχεν τῷ Μαρκίωνι, εὐσεβῶς 3.3.19.5 αὐτὸς εἰπὼν περὶ τοῦ κόσμου τάδε· παρὰ μὲν γὰρ τοῦ συνθέντος πάντα τὰ καλὰ κέκτηται· παρὰ δὲ τῆς ἔμπροσθεν ἕξεως ὅσα χαλεπὰ καὶ ἄδικα ἐν οὐρανῷ γίνεται, ταῦτα ἐξ ἐκείνης αὐτός τε ἔχει καὶ τοῖς 3.3.20.1 ζῴοις ἐναπεργάζεται

When we discourse about first principles we will consider the contradictions between the obscure sayings of the philosophers and the dogmatic assertions of Marcion’s followers. Except that I think I have shown clearly enough that Marcion took the impulse for his “strange” doctrines from Plato without acknowledgment or understanding. To proceed with our account of self-control. We were maintaining that the Greeks were highly critical of childbirth, looking askance at its inconveniences, and that Marcion’s followers understand this in a godless sense and show no gratitude to the creator.

3.3.21.2 Ἀλλὰ τούτων μὲν ἅλις· ἐπειδὰν δὲ περὶ τῶν ἀρχῶν διαλαμβάνωμεν, τότε καὶ τὰς ἐναντιότητας ταύτας ἃς οἵ τε φιλόσοφοι αἰνίσσονται οἵ τε περὶ Μαρκίωνα δογματίζουσιν, ἐπισκεψόμεθα· πλὴν οὐκ ἀσαφῶς δεδεῖχθαι ἡμῖν νομίζω τὰς ἀφορμὰς τῶν ξένων δογμάτων τὸν Μαρκίωνα παρὰ Πλάτωνος ἀχαρίστως τε καὶ ἀμαθῶς εἰληφέναι. 3.3.22.1 Ὁ δὲ περὶ ἐγκρατείας ἡμῖν προβαινέτω λόγος. ἐφάσκομεν δὲ τὴν δυσχρηστίαν ὑφορωμένους Ἕλληνας πολλὰ εἰς τὴν γένεσιν τῶν παίδων ἀποφθέγξασθαι, ἀθέως δὲ ἐκδεξαμένους ταῦτα τοὺς περὶ Μαρκίωνα ἀχαριστεῖν τῷ δημιουργῷ.

Anyway, Theophrastus in the fifth book of his Causes of Plants 84 records that bean-pods set around the roots of young trees cause the shoots to dry up, and that if birds that haunt houses eat bean-pods for any length of time they become infertile.

3.3.24.3 Θεόφραστος γοῦν ἐν τῷ πέμπτῳ τῶν Φυτικῶν αἰτίων τὰ κελύφη τῶν κυάμων περὶ τὰς ῥίζας τῶν νεοφύτων δένδρων περιτιθέμενα ξηραίνειν τὰ φυόμενα ἱστορεῖ, καὶ αἱ κατοικίδιοι δὲ ὄρνιθες συνεχῶς ταῦτα σιτούμεναι ἄτοκοι γίνονται.

We have spoken of the lawless communism in women held by Carpocrates. But when we mentioned Nicolaus’ remark we omitted one point. 3.4.25.6 ἐπεμνήσθημεν δὲ καὶ τῆς κατὰ Καρποκράτην ἀθέσμου γυναικῶν κοινωνίας, περὶ δὲ τῆς Νικολάου ῥήσεως διαλεχθέντες ἐκεῖνο παρελίπομεν. They say that he had a pretty wife. After the Savior’s resurrection he was accused of jealousy by the apostles. He brought his wife out into their midst and offered her to anyone who wanted her in marriage. (7) They say that his action was consistent with the saying “The flesh is to be treated with contempt.” 88 Those who are members of his sect follow his word and act simply and uncritically, and indulge in unrestrained licence.

27(1) Those who call Licentious Aphrodite a mystical communion insult the latter name. 92 (2) It is called an action alike whether you do something wrong or right. In the same way communion is a good thing 93 when it involves a sharing of money, food, or clothing. But they use the word irreligiously in applying it to any kind of sexual intercourse. (3) Anyway, there is a story that one of them encountered one of our beautiful virgins and said, “It is written, ‘Give yourself to anyone who asks.’” 94 She did not understand the fellow’s impudence and replied with the height of propriety, “If the subject is marriage, speak to my mother.”

3.4.27.4 ἀλλὰ περὶ γάμου τῇ μητρὶ διαλέγου.

What godlessness! These communists in sexual freedom, these brothers in lustfulness, actually pervert the Savior’s words. They are a disgrace not just to philosophy but to the whole of human life. They deface the truth, or rather raze it to the ground insofar as they can.

(3) It really is as the Lord said: “If your righteousness does not exceed the righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees, you will not enter the kingdom of God.” 109 (4) Scripture shows in Daniel the principle of abstinence in food. 110 To sum up, David in the Psalms speaks about obedience: “How shall a young man keep his path straight?” The answer comes immediately: “By keeping your Word with his whole heart.” 111 (5) Jeremiah says, “These are the Lord’s words: do not follow the paths of the gentiles.” 112

3.4.33.3 ὄντως γὰρ ὡς ὁ κύριος ἔφη, ἐὰν μὴ περισσεύσῃ ἡ δικαιοσύνη ὑμῶν πλείω τῶν γραμματέων καὶ Φα3.4.33.4 ρισαίων, οὐκ εἰσελεύσεσθε εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. περὶ δὲ τῆς τῶν βρωμάτων ἐγκρατείας δείκνυται ἐν τῷ ∆ανιήλ. συνελόντι δ' εἰπεῖν, περὶ ὑπακοῆς ὁ ∆αβὶδ ψάλλων λέγει· ἐν
τίνι κατορθώσει νεώτερος τὴν ὁδὸν αὐτοῦ

There is another group whom we call the Opponents. They affirm that the God of the universe is our father by nature, and everything that he has made is good. But one of those who came into being from him sowed weeds, 117 and brought into being the growth of evil things. He has surrounded us all with these evils and so set us in opposition to the Father. (4) For this reason we set ourselves to vindicate the Father in opposition to him, counteracting the will of this second being. So, since it is the latter who said,

ὄντως γὰρ ὡς ὁ κύριος ἔφη, ἐὰν μὴ περισσεύσῃ ἡ δικαιοσύνη ὑμῶν πλείω τῶν γραμματέων καὶ Φα3.4.33.4 ρισαίων, οὐκ εἰσελεύσεσθε εἰς τὴν βασιλείαν τοῦ θεοῦ. περὶ δὲ τῆς τῶν βρωμάτων ἐγκρατείας δείκνυται ἐν τῷ ∆ανιήλ. συνελόντι δ' εἰπεῖν, περὶ ὑπακοῆς ὁ ∆αβὶδ ψάλλων λέγει

35(1) To these people we would say that we have been taught to recognize false prophets and those who merely make a pretense of the truth by their actions. 120 Your actions are evidence against you. How can you say that you still adhere to the truth? (2) Either there is no such thing as evil, in which case the one you charge with opposition to God does not merit reproof, and has never created anything evil (the tree and the fruit are eliminated together), or else, if evil really does exist, they must tell us what is their view of the commandments ordained about righteousness, self-control, patience, forbearance and so on: are they bad or good?

ὑπάρξει, εἰπάτωσαν ἡμῖν, τί λέγουσιν εἶναι τὰς δοθείσας ἐντολὰς περὶ δικαιοσύνης, περὶ ἐγκρατείας, περὶ ὑπομονῆς, περὶ ἀνεξικακίας καὶ τῶν τούτοις ὁμοίων, φαύλας ἢ ἀστείας

40(1) We have no intention of making a closer examination of this topic or mentioning more implausible heresies. We have no intention of being forced to an individual discussion of each of them in all their scandalous nature or prolonging these notes to a vast length. Let us answer them by dividing all the heresies into two groups. 141 (2) Either they teach a way of life which makes no distinction between right and wrong or their hymn is too highly strung 142 and they acclaim asceticism out of a spirit of irreligious quarrelsomeness. (3) I must first expound the former division.

3.5.40.3 πρότερον δὲ περὶ τοῦ προτέρου διαληπτέον τμήματος.

If it is legitimate to choose any way of life, then clearly it is legitimate to choose the way that involves asceticism. If there is no way of life which carries danger for the elect, then clearly this is particularly true of the life 143 of virtuous self-discipline.

What was it that the Lord said to those who questioned him about divorce, asking whether it was permissible to get rid of one’s wife on the authority of Moses? He said, “Moses wrote this with an eye to your hardheartedness. But have you not read what God said to the first-formed male: ‘You two shall come into one single flesh’? So, anyone who disposes of his wife except by reason of sexual immorality is making an adulteress of her.” 171

3.6.47.2 τί δέ ἐστιν ὅπερ ὁ κύριος εἶπεν πρὸς τοὺς περὶ τοῦ ἀποστασίου πυνθανομένους, εἰ ἔξεστιν ἀπολῦσαι γυναῖκα Μωυσέως ἐπιτρέψαντος; πρὸς τὴν σκληροκαρδίαν ὑμῶν, φησίν, ὁ Μωυσῆς ταῦτα ἔγραψεν· ὑμεῖς δὲ οὐκ ἀνέγνωτε ὅτι τῷ πρωτοπλάστῳ ὁ θεὸς εἶπενBut “after the resurrection,” he says, “they do not marry and are not given in marriage.” 172 Yes, and this is what is said about the stomach and food: “Food is for the stomach and the stomach for food, and God will put an end to both.”

ἔσεσθε οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν; ὥστε ὁ ἀπολύων τὴν 3.6.47.3 γυναῖκα χωρὶς λόγου πορνείας ποιεῖ αὐτὴν μοιχευθῆναι. ἀλλὰ μετὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν, φησίν, οὔτε γαμοῦσιν οὔτε γαμίζονται. καὶ γὰρ περὶ τῆς κοιλίας καὶ τῶν βρωμάτων εἴρηται·

51(1) He promised the courtesan on oath that he would take her back to his homeland, if she helped him against his antagonists in some matter. She did so, and he fulfilled his oath in an amusing way. He painted the closest possible likeness of her and set it up in Cyrene – the account will be found in the Character of Sports by Istrus. 189 It follows that celibacy is not particularly praiseworthy unless it arises through love of God. The blessed Paul says of those who show a distaste for marriage: “In the last times people will abandon the faith, attaching themselves to deceitful spirits and the teachings of daemonic powers that they should abstain from food, at the same time forbidding marriage.”

3.6.51.1 ὀμωμοκὼς οὖν τῇ ἑταίρᾳ ἦ μὴν ἀπάξειν αὐτὴν εἰς τὴν πατρίδα, εἰ συμπράξειεν αὐτῷ τινα πρὸς τοὺς ἀνταγωνιστάς, ἐπειδὴ διεπράξατο,
χαριέντως ἐκτελῶν τὸν ὅρκον, γραψάμενος αὐτῆς ὡς ὅτι μάλιστα ὁμοιοτάτην εἰκόνα, ἀνέστησεν εἰς Κυρήνην, ὡς ἱστορεῖ Ἴστρος ἐν τῷ Περὶ ἰδιότητος ἄθλων. ὥστ' οὐδ' ἡ εὐνουχία ἐνάρετον, εἰ μὴ δι' ἀγάπην γίνοιτο τὴν πρὸς τὸν θεόν. 33.6.51.2 Αὐτίκα περὶ τῶν βδελυσσομένων τὸν γάμον Παῦλος ὁ μακάριος λέγει· ἐν ὑστέροις καιροῖς ἀποστήσονταί τινες τῆς πίστεως, προσέχοντες πνεύμασι πλάνοις καὶ διδασκαλίαις δαιμονίων, κωλυόντων 3.6.51.3 γαμεῖν, ἀπέχεσθαι βρωμάτων

Furthermore, the Lord says of himself, “John came abstaining from food and drink, and they say, ‘He is possessed.’ The Son of Man came eating and drinking, and they say, ‘Look at him, a greedy drunkard, a friend of tax officers, a sinner!’” 197 Are they not criticizing the apostles? Peter and Philip produced children, and Philip gave his daughters away in marriages. 198

3.6.52.4 ἀλλὰ καὶ ὁ κύριος περὶ ἑαυτοῦ λέγων ἦλθεν φησὶν Ἰωάννης μήτε ἐσθίων μήτε πίνων, καὶ λέγουσι·

(4) We know the dispositions made over women deacons by the admirable Paul in his second letter to Timothy. 201 Furthermore, this same writer said strongly that “the kingdom of God is not a matter of eating and drinking” – or abstinence from wine or meat – “but of righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Spirit.” 202 (5) Which of them goes around like Elijah wearing sheepskin and a leather belt? Which of them wears no shoes and nothing but a piece of sackcloth like Isaiah? Or with nothing on but a linen apron, like Jeremiah? 203 Which of them will imitate John’s Gnostic way of life? 204 The blessed prophets lived like that and still gave thanks to the creator.

3.6.53.4 διδασκαλία. ἴσμεν γὰρ καὶ ὅσα περὶ διακόνων γυναικῶν ἐν τῇ ἑτέρᾳ πρὸς Τιμόθεον ἐπιστολῇ ὁ γενναῖος διατάσσεται Παῦλος. ἀλλὰ μὴν ὁ αὐτὸς οὗτος κέκραγεν ὡς οὐκ ἔστιν ἡ βασιλεία τοῦ θεοῦ βρῶσις καὶ πόσις, οὐδὲ μὴν ἀποχὴ οἴνου καὶ κρεῶν, ἀλλὰ δικαιοσύνη καὶ 3.6.53.5 εἰρήνη καὶ χαρὰ ἐν πνεύματι ἁγίῳ.

56(1) So he has not stopped the proper acquisition of wealth but its unjust and insatiable acquisition. For “possession illegally promoted is reduced.” 212 For “there are some who sow more and reap more, and some who find their resources reduced by hoarding.” 213 About these it is written, “He made distributions and gave to the poor: his righteousness endures to eternity.” 214 (2) The one who “sows and gathers in more” is the one who, by sharing his earthly, temporal property, gains an eternal reward in heaven; the other is the one who refuses to share with anyone but vainly “lays up treasure on earth, where moth and rust eat it away.” 215 It is written about such a person as this: “In collecting his money he put it into a purse with a hole in it.” 216 (3) This is the man of whose land the Lord says in the gospel that it prospered, and when next he wanted to store the harvest, he proposed to build larger barns and said to himself in the words of the story, “You have many good things in store for you for many years. Eat, drink, enjoy yourself.”

3.6.56.1 καλῶς οὖν πλουτεῖν οὐ κεκώλυκεν, ἀλλὰ γὰρ τὸ ἀδίκως καὶ ἀπλήστως πλουτεῖν· κτῆσις γὰρ ἐπισπευδομένη μετὰ ἀνομίας ἐλάττων γίνεται. εἰσὶ γὰρ οἳ σπεί ροντες πλείονα ποιοῦσι, καὶ οἳ συνάγοντες ἐλαττοῦνται· περὶ ὧν γέγραπται· ἐσκόρπισεν, ἔδωκεν τοῖς πένησιν, ἡ δικαιοσύνη αὐτοῦ 3.6.56.2 μένει εἰς τὸν αἰῶνα·3.6.56.2 ὁ μὲν γὰρ σπείρων καὶ πλείονα συνάγων οὗτός ἐστιν ὁ διὰ τῆς ἐπιγείου καὶ προσκαίρου μεταδόσεως τὰ οὐράνια κτώμενος καὶ τὰ αἰώνια, ἕτερος δὲ ὁ μηδενὶ μεταδιδούς, κενῶς δὲ θησαυρίζων ἐπὶ τῆς γῆς ὅπου σὴς καὶ βρῶσις ἀφανίζει (περὶ οὗ γέγραπται· συνάγων τοὺς μισθοὺς συνήγαγεν εἰς δεσμὸν τετρυπη3.6.56.3 μένον), τούτου τὴν χώραν εὐφορῆσαι λέγει ἐν τῷ εὐαγγελίῳ ὁ κύριος, ἔπειτα τοὺς καρποὺς ἀποθέσθαι
βουληθέντα, οἰκοδομησόμενον ἀποθήκας μείζονας κατὰ τὴν προσωποποιίαν εἰπεῖν πρὸς ἑαυτόν·

(3) Moses, though the needs of his body were covered with clothing, received this grace and for forty days felt no hunger or thirst. 219 (4) Better to be healthy than to be ill and talk about health. Better for there to be light than to be chattering about light. Better genuine self-control than the sort taught by the philosophers. (5) Where there is light, there is no darkness. But where there is deep-seated desire, even if it is solitary, even if it is actually physically quiescent, union with the absent object takes place in memory. In general, let our affirmation about marriage, food and the rest proceed: 220 we should never act from desire; our will should be concentrated on necessities. We are children of will, not of desire. 221 (2) If a man marries in order to have children he ought to practice self-control. He ought not to have a sexual desire even for his wife, to whom he has a duty to show Christian love.

ταύτην ἔλαβεν τὴν χάριν καὶ ὁ Μωυσῆς τὸ ἐνδεὲς σῶμα περικείμενος, ἵνα 3.7.57.4 τεσσαράκοντα ἡμέρας μήτε πεινάσῃ μήτε διψήσῃ. ὡς δὲ ὑγιαίνειν ἄμεινον τοῦ νοσοῦντα περὶ ὑγείας διαλέγεσθαι, οὕτω τὸ εἶναι φῶς τοῦ περὶ φωτὸς λαλεῖν καὶ ἡ κατὰ ἀλήθειαν ἐγκράτεια τῆς ὑπὸ τῶν 3.7.57.5 φιλοσόφων διδασκομένης. οὐ γὰρ ὅπου φῶς, ἐκεῖ σκότος· ἔνθα δέ ἐστιν ἐπιθυμία ἐγκαθεζομένη, μόνη τυγχάνουσα, κἂν τῇ ἐνεργείᾳ ἡσυχάζῃ τῇ διὰ τοῦ σώματος, τῇ μνήμῃ συνουσιάζει πρὸς τὸ μὴ 3.7.58.1 παρόν. 3.7.58.1 καθόλου δὲ ἡμῖν προΐτω ὁ λόγος περί τε γάμου περί τε τροφῆς καὶ τῶν ἄλλων μηδὲν κατ' ἐπιθυμίαν ποιεῖν, θέλειν δὲ μόνα ἐκεῖνα τὰ ἀναγκαῖα. οὐ γάρ ἐσμεν ἐπιθυμίας τέκνα, ἀλλὰ θελήματος.

Further, we ought to examine not merely one single form of self-control in sexual matters, but the other objects which our soul self-indulgently desires, not content with bare necessities but making a fuss about luxury. (2) Self-control means indifference to money, comfort, and property, a mind above spectacles, control of the tongue, mastery of evil thoughts. 224 It actually happened that some angels suffered a failure of self-control, were overpowered by sexual desire, and fell from heaven to earth. Valentinus in his letter to Agathopus

3.7.59.1 ἀλλὰ γὰρ οὐ μόνον περί τι ἓν εἶδος τὴν ἐγκράτειαν συνορᾶν προσήκει, τουτέστι τὰ ἀφροδίσια, ἀλλὰ γὰρ καὶ περὶ τὰ ἄλλα ὅσα σπαταλῶσα ἐπιθυμεῖ ἡ ψυχὴ ἡμῶν, οὐκ ἀρκουμένη τοῖς ἀναγκαίοις, περιεργαζομένη δὲ τὴν χλιδήν. ἐγκράτειά ἐστιν ἀργυρίου καταφρονεῖν, τρυφῆς, κτήσεως, θέας καταμεγαλοφρονεῖν, στόματος κρατεῖν, κυριεύειν λογισμῶν τῶν πονηρῶν. ἤδη δὲ καὶ ἄγγελοί τινες ἀκρατεῖς γενόμενοι ἐπιθυμίᾳ ἁλόντες
οὐρανόθεν δεῦρο καταπεπτώκασιν

They (the Brahmin) worship Heracles and Pan as gods. The so-called Holy Men of India also live out their lives in a state of nudity. These also rigorously pursue truth and make predictions about the future. As divine beings 231 they honor a kind of pyramid under which they believe the bones of some god are resting. 232

3.7.60.3 σέβουσιν Ἡρακλέα καὶ Πᾶνα. οἱ καλούμενοι δὲ Σεμνοὶ τῶν Ἰνδῶν γυμνοὶ διαιτῶνται τὸν πάντα βίον· οὗτοι τὴν ἀλήθειαν ἀσκοῦσι καὶ περὶ τῶν μελλόντων προμηνύουσι καὶ σέβουσί τινα πυραμίδα, ὑφ' 3.7.60.4 ἣν ὀστέα τινὸς θεοῦ νομίζουσιν ἀποκεῖσθαι.

But the Lord did not speak falsely. In reality he brought to nothing the works of desire – the love of money, or winning, or glory, craziness over women, a passion for boys, gluttony, profligacy and the like. The birth of these means decay in the soul, if we become “dead in sins.” 242 This is what is meant by “female” lack of self-control. It follows, as the argument reveals, that it is in relation to the final consummation that Salome says, “How long will human beings go on dying?”

καὶ αὕτη ἡ 3.9.63.4 θήλεια ἀκρασία ἦν. γένεσιν δὲ καὶ φθορὰν τὴν ἐν κτίσει προηγου3.9.63.4 μένως γίνεσθαι ἀνάγκη μέχρι παντελοῦς διακρίσεως καὶ ἀποκαταστάσεως ἐκλογῆς, δι' ἣν καὶ αἱ τῷ κόσμῳ συμπεφυρμέναι οὐσίαι τῇ 3.9.64.1 οἰκειότητι προσνέμονται. ὅθεν εἰκότως περὶ συντελείας μηνύσαντος τοῦ λόγου ἡ Σαλώμη φησί·

67(1) So no one should ever think that marriage under the rule of the Logos 251 is a sin, if he does not find it bitter to bring up children; indeed, for many people, childlessness is the most grievous experience of all. At the same time, if he does not regard the production of children as bitter because it drags him away from the things of God, for which there is necessarily no time, but does not look favorably upon life as a bachelor, then he can look forward 252 to marriage, since there is no harm in disciplined pleasure, and each of us is in a position to make a decision over the engendering of children.

3.9.67.1 μήτ' οὖν ἁμάρτημά τις ἡγείσθω τὸν γάμον τὸν κατὰ λόγον, εἰ μὴ πικρὰν ὑπολαμβάνει παιδοτροφίαν (πολλοῖς γὰρ ἔμπαλιν ἀτεκνία λυπηρότατον), μήτ', ἂν πικρὰ ἡ παιδοποιία φαίνηταί τινι μεταπερισπῶσα τῶν θείων διὰ τὰς χρειώδεις ἀσχολίας, μὴ φέρων δ' οὗτος εὐκόλως τὸν μονήρη βίον ἐπιθυμείτω γάμου, ἐπεὶ τὸ εὐάρεστον μετὰ σωφροσύνης ἀβλαβὲς καὶ κύριος 3.9.67.2 ἕκαστος ἡμῶν τυγχάνει τῆς περὶ τέκνων γονῆς αἱρέσεως.

The Apostle says bishops should be appointed from those who have learned by practice in their own home the charge of the whole Church. 303 (7) So each person should fulfill his service by the work in which he was called, so that he may be free in Christ and receive the appropriate reward for that service. Yet again in speaking about the Law he makes use of an analogy. “The married woman,” he says, “is tied to her husband by law during his lifetime,” and so on.

αὐτίκα φησὶν ἐπισκόπους δεῖν καθίστασθαι τοὺς ἐκ τοῦ ἰδίου οἴκου καὶ τῆς 3.12.79.7 ἐκκλησίας ἁπάσης προΐστασθαι μελετήσαντας. ἕκαστος οὖν ἐν ᾧ ἐκλήθη ἔργῳ τὴν διακονίαν ἐκτελείτω, ἵνα ἐλεύθερος ἐν Χριστῷ 3.12.80.1 γένηται, τὸν οἰκεῖον τῆς διακονίας ἀπολαμβάνων μισθόν. πάλιν τε αὖ περὶ τοῦ νόμου διαλεγόμενος ἀλληγορίᾳ χρώμενος ἡ γὰρ ὕπανδρος γυνὴ φησὶ τῷ ζῶντι ἀνδρὶ δέδεται νόμῳ καὶ τὰ ἑξῆς.

81(1) The Syrian Tatian, as I see it, had the effrontery to make this sort of thing his creed. Anyway, he writes in his work On Training Following the Savior

Τατιανὸν οἶμαι τὸν Σύρον τὰ τοιαῦτα τολμᾶν δογματίζειν. γράφει γοῦν κατὰ λέξιν ἐν τῷ Περὶ τοῦ κατὰ τὸν σωτῆρα καταρτισμοῦ·

and I quote, “Agreement 313 conduces to prayer. The common experience of corruption means an end to intercourse. At any rate, his acceptance of it is so grudging that he is really saying No to it altogether. (2) He agreed to their coming together again because of Satan and because of weakness of will, but he showed that anyone who is inclined to succumb is going to be serving two masters, 314 God when there is agreement, and weakness of will, sexual immorality, and the devil when there is not.”

In general, all the Apostle’s letters teach responsible self-control. They embrace thousands of instructions about marriage, the production of children, and domestic life. Nowhere do they blackball marriage, provided that it is responsible. They preserve the connection between the Law and the gospel. They welcome the man who embarks responsibly on marriage with gratitude to God, and the man who takes celibacy as his life companion in accordance with the Lord’s will, each, as he has been called, making his choice 343 in maturity and firmness.

3.12.86.1 μετά τε ἐγκρατοῦς ἀπολαύσεως βιούτω κατὰ λόγον. καὶ καθόλου πᾶσαι αἱ ἐπιστολαὶ τοῦ ἀποστόλου σωφροσύνην καὶ ἐγκράτειαν διδάσκουσαι περί τε γάμων περί τε παιδοποιίας περί τε οἴκου διοικήσεως μυρίας ὅσας ἐντολὰς περιέχουσαι οὐδαμοῦ γάμον ἠθέτησαν τὸν σώφρονα, ἀλλά, τὴν ἀκολουθίαν σῴζουσαι τοῦ νόμου πρὸς τὸ εὐαγγέλιον, ἀποδέχονται ἑκάτερον τόν τε εὐχαρίστως τῷ θεῷ γάμῳ κεχρημένον σωφρόνως τόν τε εὐνουχίᾳ ὡς ὁ κύριος βούλεται συμβιοῦντα, καθὼς 3.12.86.2 ἐκλήθη ἕκαστος, ἑλόμενον ἀπταίστως καὶ τελείως.

We do not contradict Scripture. Our bodies are subject to decay and are naturally unstable. 348 Perhaps he might be prophesying 349 decay to his audience because they were sinners. The Savior was not speaking about having children. He was encouraging sharing of resources in those who wanted only to amass vast amounts of wealth rather than offer help to those in need. 87(1) That is why he says, “Do not work for perishable food, but for the food which lasts into eternal life.” 350 Similarly, they cite the dictum “The children of this age do not marry and are not given in marriage.” 351 (2) But if anyone ponders over this answer about the resurrection of the dead, he will find that the Lord is not rejecting marriage, but is purging the expectation of physical desire in the resurrection. (3) The words “The children of this age” were not spoken in contrast with the children of some other age. It is like saying, “Those born in this generation,” who are children by force of birth, being born and engendering themselves, since without the process of birth no one will pass into this life. But this process of birth is balanced by a process of decay, and is no longer in store for the person who has once been cut off from life here.

3.12.86.4 ἀλλ' οὐδὲ ἡμεῖς ἀντιλέγομεν τῇ γραφῇ, ὅτι φθαρτὰ ἡμῖν τὰ σώματα καὶ φύσει ῥευστά· τάχα δ' ἂν καὶ οἷς διελέγετο ὡς ἁμαρτωλοῖς προφητεύοι φθοράν. ὁ σωτὴρ δὲ οὐ περὶ τεκνοποιίας εἴρηκεν, ἀλλ' εἰς μετάδοσιν κοινωνίας προτρέπων τοὺς κτᾶσθαι μόνον τὴν τοῦ πλούτου περιουσίαν, ἐπικουρεῖν 3.12.87.1 δὲ τοῖς δεομένοις μὴ βουλομένους. διό φησιν· ἐργάζεσθε μὴ τὴν ἀπολλυμένην βρῶσιν, ἀλλὰ τὴν μένουσαν εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον. ὁμοίως δὲ κἀκεῖνο κομίζουσι τὸ ῥητόν·οἱ υἱοὶ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐκείνου οὔτε γα3.12.87.2 μοῦσιν οὔτε γαμίζονται. ἀλλὰ τὸ ἐρώτημα τοῦτο τὸ περὶ νεκρῶν ἀναστάσεως καὶ τοὺς πυνθανομένους αὐτοὺς ἐὰν ἀναπεμπάσηταί τις, οὐκ ἀποδοκιμάζοντα τὸν γάμον εὑρήσει τὸν κύριον, θεραπεύοντα δὲ 3.12.87.3 τὴν κατὰ τὴν ἀνάστασιν τῆς σαρκικῆς ἐπιθυμίας προσδοκίαν.

In such ways Julius Cassian, the founder of docetism, argues his case. Anyway, in his book On Self-Control or On Celibacy he says, and I quote, “No one should say that because we have the parts of the body that we do, with the female shaped one way and the male another, one for receiving, the other for inseminating, sexual intercourse has God’s approval.

3.13.91.1 Τοιούτοις ἐπιχειρεῖ καὶ ὁ τῆς δοκήσεως ἐξάρχων Ἰούλιος Κασσιανός. ἐν γοῦν τῷ Περὶ ἐγκρατείας ἢ περὶ εὐνουχίας κατὰ λέξιν φησίν·

That is why Cassian says, “When Salome asked when she would know the answer to her question the Lord replied, ‘When you trample underfoot the integument of shame, and when the two become one and the male is one with the female, and there is no more male and female.”

3.13.92.2 διὰ τοῦτό τοι ὁ Κασσιανός φησι· πυνθανομένης τῆς Σαλώμης πότε γνωσθήσεται τὰ περὶ ὧν ἤρετο, ἔφη ὁ κύριος· "ὅταν τὸ τῆς αἰσχύνης ἔνδυμα πατήσητε καὶ ὅταν γένηται τὰ δύο ἓν καὶ τὸ ἄρρεν μετὰ τῆς θηλείας οὔτε ἄρρεν οὔτε θῆλυ."

93(1) First then, we do not find this saying in our four traditional Gospels, but in the Gospel according to the Egyptians.


Cassian thinks the “tunics of skins” are our bodies. We shall demonstrate later that he and those who argue like him are wrong in this, when we put our hands to the exposition of the genesis of humankind after the essential prolegomena.

3.14.95.2 χιτῶνας δὲ δερματίνους ἡγεῖται ὁ Κασσιανὸς τὰ σώματα περὶ ὧν ὕστερον καὶ τοῦτον καὶ τοὺς ὁμοίως αὐτῷ δογματίζοντας πεπλανημένους ἀποδείξομεν, ὅταν περὶ τῆς ἀνθρώπου γενέσεως τὴν ἐξήγησιν ἑπομένως τοῖς προλεχθῆναι δεομένοις μεταχειριζώμεθα.

[Secret Alias]

The previous post is preparation for the understanding that Book Three itself took the name now only ascribed to Letter 366.

J. A. Fabricius, Bibliotheca Graeca Book Five (Hamburg: Liebezeit, 1720), 114 seems to have been the first to make the case for Book Three being Clement’s De Continentia mentioned in Eusebius. A. Méhat. Etude sur les « Stromates » de Clément d'Alexandrie. In: Revue de l'histoire des religions, tome 173, n°2, 1968, 250 “Faisons progresser notre section “de la continence.” cf. Jean-Paul Broudéhoux, Mariage et famille chez Clément d'Alexandrie, Théologie historique 2 (Paris: Beauchesne, 1970) 9. The general understanding is that Strom. 3.2.13.1 and 5 reference different parts of the Stromateis. 3.2.13.1 “We shall present precise arguments against these people when we treat the doctrine of first principles” (ἀλλὰ πρὸς μὲν τούτους, ὁπόταν τὸν περὶ ἀρχῶν διαλαμβάνωμεν λόγον, ἀκριβέστατα διαλεξόμεθα). No one has figured out which book of the Stromateis is called “περὶ ἀρχῶν.” After two lines it is generally agreed that he references Book Five as περὶ ψυχῆς “On the Soul” – “There will be another opportunity to respond to them when we discourse on the soul” (πρὸς οὓς ἄλλος ἂν εἴη καιρὸς λέγειν, ὁπηνίκα ἂν περὶ ψυχῆς διαλαμβάνωμεν). There follows a long section of citation of Plato and pre-Socratic Greek philosophers (3.3.14.1 - 3.3.20.3) before the aforementioned identification of Book Three as περὶ ἐγκρατεία. The previous mention of ἐγκρατεία near the beginning of the book dovetails with material found in Letter 366 “ἐγκράτεια means disdain of the body, following obedience to God. ἐγκράτεια applies, not just to sexual matters, but to everything else for which the soul lusts improperly, because it is not satisfied with the bare necessities. ἐγκράτεια applies to speech, possessions and their use, desire generally. It is not just that it teaches us self-control (σωφρονεῖν). It offers us the gift of self-control (σωφροσύνην), a divine power and grace of God.” This material is clearly a modification of Letter 366 “ἐγκράτεια τοίνυν σώματος ὑπεροψία κατὰ τὴν πρὸς θεὸν ὁμολογίαν. οὐ μόνον γὰρ περὶ τὰ ἀφροδίσια, ἀλλὰ καὶ περὶ τὰ ἄλλα, ἃ ἐπιθυμεῖ ἡ ψυχὴ κακῶς οὐκ ἀρκουμένη τοῖς ἀναγκαίοις, ἡ ἐγκράτεια ἀναστρέφεται. ἔστι δὲ καὶ περὶ τὴν γλῶσσαν καὶ περὶ τὴν κτῆσιν καὶ περὶ τὴν χρῆσιν καὶ περὶ τὴν ἐπιθυμίαν ἐγκράτεια. οὐ διδάσκει δ' αὕτη σωφρονεῖν μόνον, ἥ γε παρέχει σωφροσύνην ἡμῖν, δύναμις οὖσα καὶ θεία χάρις.” It is important to see Book Three then as a development of the letter.

I am strongly disposed toward the idea that Book Three of the Stromateis was little more than an expansion of Letter 366, Clement’s De Continentia. Whoever arranged the material here just took strands from the letter and layered on top of it basically marginalia to help deflect criticism or knowledge from the letter that Clement was a heretic. An original 22 line or so De Continentia written by Clement as a letter became massively expanded to become a hundred plus chapter which tries to make Clement's ideas about celibacy not as radical as they originally were. I suspect the same thing happened with Book Five and "On the Soul" an original letter written by Clement.