A Stromateis of What?

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

A Stromateis of What?

Post by Secret Alias »

Stromateis = a patchwork.

A patchwork of writings of Clement including letters woven together to form a mosaic?
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by Secret Alias »

in plural στρωματεῖς, patchwork, as title of literary Miscellanies, Gell.Praef.7; the στρωματεῖς of Plu. is cited by Eus.PE1.7.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by Secret Alias »

The Lamprias catalogue of Plutarch's works mentions among them a book of Στρωματεῖς ἱστορικοὶ καὶ ποιητικοί (Méhat Reference Méhat1966, 104). We know little of the content of Plutarch's Stromateis beyond this title.

I think by its very nature Clement's Stromata was pseudo-Clementine or at least post-Clementine. The same with Origen's Στρωματεῖς.
mbuckley3
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 6:47 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by mbuckley3 »

Secret Alias wrote: Mon Feb 27, 2023 1:21 pm

I think by its very nature Clement's Stromata was pseudo-Clementine or at least post-Clementine.
Stephan, as you well know there is a series of programmatic summaries scattered throughout the Stromateis. For the entertainment of others, here's the 'introduction' from the end of book 7 :

"Having completed this introduction, and given a summary outline of ethical philosophy, wherein we have scattered the sparks of the doctrines of the true knowledge dispersedly here and there, as we promised, so that it should not be easy for the uninitiated who came across them to discover the holy traditions; let us pass on to our general argument. Now it seems that what are known as Miscellanies are not to be compared to ornamental parks with rows of ordered plantations to please the eye, but rather to some thickly wooded hill, overgrown with cypresses and planes and bay-tree and ivy, and at the same time planted with appletrees and olives and figs, the cultivation of fruit-bearing and of woodland trees being intentionally mingled together, since the Scripture desires to withdraw from observation on account of those who venture secretly to steal its fruits. It is by transplanting the suckers and trees from these preserves that the gardener will furnish a beautiful park and pleasure-ground. Our Miscellanies therefore make no pretence of order or of choice diction, seeing that in this kind of composition the Greeks purposely object to over-sweetness of style, and sow their doctrines secretly and not in a plain, unmistakeable manner, seeking to exercise the diligence and ingenuity of the readers, if there should be such." (7.18.110-111, tr. Hort/Mayor)

What you are suggesting, in effect, is that this is a post-Clementine editor speaking, not Clement. While logically possible, it should not be necessary to make this big call simply in order to 'rescue' ps-Basil ep.366 as a genuine letter of Clement, repurposed; (IIUC, this is the point of your proposal). Let's get back to the letter.

Nathan Porter at least made a case for (the main body of) the letter being a source for Strom.3.7.59, rather than vice versa. His (non-Valentinian) arguments are useable.

Andrew allows that you have made a strong case for the amount of Clementina in the letter.

Andrew's specific objection that the theology (Christology) of the letter is Valentinian not Clementine needs to be addressed. ( I am working on compiling a catena of passages which, while not decisive, should enable this assertion to be questioned).

As for the history of the attribution /incipit, happy hunting !
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by Secret Alias »

Remember two things:

1. Clement cites verbatim and as authoritative Irenaeus's Valentinian heretic Mark
2. Clement cites verbatim (as part of his liturgy) what Irenaeus's Valentinian heretic Mark

From Letter 366 it is clear that ordinary human beings are transformed by “charis” into “encratic” angelic beings. Χάρις ἐστὶν Θεοῦ ἐγκράτεια is the most explicit formulation here. In Irenaeus’s formulation of the Marcosian sect it is spelled out a little more fully. The heretic exclaims:

"I am eager to make thee a partaker of my grace, since the Father of all doth continually behold thy angel before His face. Now the place of thy angel is among us: it behoves us to become one. Receive first from me and by me grace. Adorn thyself as a bride who is expecting her bridegroom, that thou mayest be what I am, and I what thou art. Establish the germ of light in thy nuptial chamber. Receive from me a spouse, and become receptive of him, while thou art received by him. Behold grace has descended upon thee; open thy mouth and prophesy." [Against Heresies 1.13.3]

The idea here clearly is the same as in Letter 366, namely divine grace has the capability of transforming human beings into angels.

Clement of Alexandria interestingly cites the Valentinian Mark in his Exhortation to the Pagans when speaking of the transformational power of the eucharist:

This Jesus, who is eternal, the one great High Priest of the one God, and of His Father, prays for and exhorts men. "Hear, ye myriad tribes, rather whoever among men are endowed with reason, both barbarians and Greeks. I call on the whole race of men, whose Creator I am, by the will of the Father. Come to Me, that you may be put in your due rank under the one God and the one Word of God; and do not only have the advantage of the irrational creatures in the possession of reason; for to you of all mortals I grant the enjoyment of immortality. For I want, I want to impart to you this grace, bestowing on you the perfect boon of immortality; and I confer on you both the Word and the knowledge of God, My complete self. This am I, this God wills, this is symphony, this the harmony of the Father, this is the Son, this is Christ, this the Word of God, the arm of the Lord, the power of the universe, the will of the Father; of which things there were images of old, but not all adequate. I desire to restore you according to the original model, that ye may become also like Me. I anoint you with the ungent of faith, by which you throw off corruption, and show you the naked form of righteousness by which you ascend to God. Come to Me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you rest. Take My yoke upon you, and learn of Me; for I am meek and lowly in heart: and ye shall find rest to your souls. For My yoke is easy, and My burden light." Let us haste, let us run, my fellowmen--us, who are God-loving and God-like images of the Word. Let us haste, let us run, let us take His yoke, let us receive, to conduct us to immortality, the good charioteer of men. Let us love Christ. He led the colt with its parent; and having yoked the team of humanity to God, directs His chariot to immortality, hastening clearly to fulfil, by driving now into heaven, what He shadowed forth before by riding into Jerusalem. A spectacle most beautiful to the Father is the eternal Son crowned with victory. Let us aspire, then, after what is good; let us become God-loving men, and obtain the greatest of all things which are incapable of being harmed--God and life. [Exhort. 12]
It is difficult to argue against Clement’s use of Mark’s mystical practices the wording is almost identical:


Clement: I want to impart to you this grace,
ἐθέλω καὶ ταύτης ὑμῖν μεταδοῦναι τῆς χάριτος

valentinian Mark: I am eager to make thee a partaker of my grace
μεταδοῦναί σοι θέλω τῆς ἐμῆς χάριτος


3. Photius says the Outlines have heretical ideas.
andrewcriddle
Posts: 2817
Joined: Sat Oct 05, 2013 12:36 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by andrewcriddle »

On Clement as a miscellanist Clement of Alexandria ...: Miscellany and the Transformation of Greco-Roman Writing by Heath may be of interest.

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

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by Secret Alias »

Thank you. Looks interesting.

The situation reminds me of growing up listening to "albums" made by musical groups. You always got the "Greatest Hits" package put out by the record label. That was most people's launching point to move on to buy the original albums where a lot of "lesser known" (usually not as good) stuff was found. By that point you had developed some intimacy with the artist(s) so you were more interested in "where they were at" when they made those songs you liked from their greatest hits package.

I know we take for granted that Clement was "the Stromatist." I just can't get over the idea that someone literally spent the time "anthologizing" his previous works. Do musical artists create their own "greatest hits packages"? No that was done by executives at the "label."

The idea that Clement took the time to build a "patchwork" or a quilt of his own material seems incredible. All of which leads to the natural question about when Clement actually lived and who constructed the Stromateis. My guess for the latter is Julius Africanus. The chronography at the beginning of Book One seems to use at least two previous works. "Josephus the Jew" who brought events down to the 1000th anniversary of the city of Rome "the tenth year of Antoninus" from what I remember and another which took events down to the end of the reign of Commodus.

The fact that Origen and Clement never meet is very odd too. The disappearance of Ammonius Saccas is another difficulty. I've always wondered if "Clement" was invented to repackage the writings of Ammonius after he apostatized from Christianity.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by Secret Alias »

Self references in Stromata. Book 1:
Now the Scripture kindles the living spark of the soul, and directs the eye suitably for contemplation; perchance inserting something, as the husbandman when he ingrafts, but, according to the opinion of the divine apostle, exciting what is in the soul. "For there are certainly among us many weak and sickly, and many sleep. But if we judge ourselves, we shall not be judged." Now this work of mine in writing is not artfully constructed for display; but my memoranda are stored up against old age, as a remedy against forgetfulness, truly an image and outline of those vigorous and animated discourses which I was privileged to hear, and of blessed and truly remarkable men.

Of these the one, in Greece, an Ionic; the other in Magna Graecia: the first of these from Coele-Syria, the second from Egypt, and others in the East. The one was born in the land of Assyria, and the other a Hebrew in Palestine.

When I came upon the last (he was the first in power), having tracked him out concealed in Egypt, I found rest. He, the true, the Sicilian bee, gathering the spoil of the flowers of the prophetic and apostolic meadow, engendered in the souls of his hearers a deathless element of knowledge.

Well, they preserving the tradition of the blessed doctrine derived directly from the holy apostles, Peter, James, John, and Paul, the sons receiving it from the father (but few were like the fathers), came by God's will to us also to deposit those ancestral and apostolic seeds. And well I know that they will exult; I do not mean delighted with this tribute, but solely on account of the preservation of the truth, according as they delivered it. For such a sketch as this, will, I think, be agreeable to a soul desirous of preserving from escape the blessed tradition.

"In a man who loves wisdom the father will be glad." Wells, when pumped out, yield purer water; and that of which no one partakes, turns to putrefaction. Use keeps steel brighter, but disuse produces rust in it. For, in a word, exercise produces a healthy condition both in souls and bodies. "No one lighteth a candle, and putteth it under a bushel, but upon a candlestick, that it may give light to those who are regarded worthy of the feast." For what is the use of wisdom, if it makes not him who can hear it wise? For still the Saviour saves, "and always works, as He sees the Father." For by teaching, one learns more; and in speaking, one is often a hearer along with his audience. For the teacher of him who speaks and of him who hears is one -- who waters both the mind and the word. Thus the Lord did not hinder from doing good while keeping the Sabbath; but allowed us to communicate of those divine mysteries, and of that holy light, to those who are able to receive them. He did not certainly disclose to the many what did not belong to the many; but to the few to whom He knew that they belonged, who were capable of receiving and being moulded according to them. But secret things are entrusted to speech, not to writing, as is the case with God.

And if one say that it is written, "There is nothing secret which shall not be revealed, nor hidden which shall not be disclosed," let him also hear from us, that to him who hears secretly, even what is secret shall be manifested. This is what was predicted by this oracle. And to him who is able secretly to observe what is delivered to him. that which is veiled shall be disclosed as truth; and what is hidden to the many, shall appear manifest to the few. For why do not all know the truth? why is not righteousness loved, if righteousness belongs to all? But the mysteries are delivered mystically, that what is spoken may be in the mouth of the speaker; rather not in his voice, but in his understanding. "God gave to the Church, some apostles, and some prophets, and some evangelists, and some pastors and teachers, for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ."

The writing of these memoranda of mine, I well know, is weak when compared with that spirit, full of grace, which I was privileged to hear. But it will be an image to recall the archetype to him who was struck with the thyrsus. For "speak," it is said, "to a wise man, and he will grow wiser; and to him that hath, and there shall be added to him." And we profess not to explain secret things sufficiently -- far from it -- but only to recall them to memory, whether we have forgot aught, or whether for the purpose of not forgetting. Many things, I well know, have escaped us, through length of time, that have dropped away unwritten. Whence, to aid the weakness of my memory, and provide for myself a salutary help to my recollection in a systematic arrangement of chapters, I necessarily make use of this form. There are then some things of which we have no recollection; for the power that was in the blessed men was great. There are also some things which remained unnoted long, which have now escaped; and others which are effaced, having faded away in the mind itself, since such a task is not easy to those not experienced; these I revive in my commentaries. Some things I purposely omit, in the exercise of a wise selection, afraid to write what I guarded against speaking: not grudging -- for that were wrong -- but fearing for my readers, lest they should stumble by taking them in a wrong sense; and, as the proverb says, we should be found "reaching a sword to a child." For it is impossible that what has been written should not escape, although remaining unpublished by me.
For I do not imagine that any composition can be so fortunate as that no one will speak against it. But that is to be regarded as in accordance with reason, which nobody speaks against, with reason. And that course of action and choice is to be approved, not which is faultless, but which no one rationally finds fault with. For it does not follow, that if a man accomplishes anything not purposely, he does it through force of circumstances. But he will do it, managing it by wisdom divinely given, and in accommodation to circumstances. For it is not he who has virtue that needs the way to virtue, any more than he, that is strong, needs recovery. For, like farmers who irrigate the land beforehand, so we also water with the liquid stream of Greek learning what in it is earthy; so that it may receive the spiritual seed cast into it, and may be capable of easily nourishing it. The Stromata will contain the truth mixed up in the dogmas of philosophy, or rather covered over and hidden, as the edible part of the nut in the shell. For, in my opinion, it is fitting that the seeds of truth be kept for the husbandmen of faith, and no others. I am not oblivious of what is babbled by some, who in their ignorance are frightened at every noise, and say that we ought to occupy ourselves with what is most necessary, and which contains the faith; and that we should pass over what is beyond and superfluous, which wears out and detains us to no purpose, in things which conduce nothing to the great end. Others think that philosophy was introduced into life by an evil influence, for the ruin of men, by an evil inventor. But I shall show, throughout the whole of these Stromata, that evil has an evil nature, and can never turn out the producer of aught that is good; indicating that philosophy is in a sense a work of Divine Providence.

CHAPTER II -- OBJECTION TO THE NUMBER OF EXTRACTS FROM PHILOSOPHICAL WRITINGS IN THESE BOOKS ANTICIPATED AND ANSWERED.

In reference to these commentaries, which contain as the exigencies of the case demand, the Hellenic opinions, I say thus much to those who are fond of finding fault. First, even if philosophy were useless, if the demonstration of its uselessness does good, it is yet useful. Then those cannot condemn the Greeks, who have only a mere hearsay knowledge of their opinions, and have not entered into a minute investigation in each department, in order to acquaintance with them. For the refutation, which is based on experience, is entirely trustworthy. For the knowledge of what is condemned is found the most complete demonstration. Many things, then, though not contributing to the final result, equip the artist. And otherwise erudition commends him, who sets forth the most essential doctrines so as to produce persuasion in his hearers, engendering admiration in those who are taught, and leads them to the truth. And such persuasion is convincing, by which those that love learning admit the truth; so that philosophy does not ruin life by being the originator of false practices and base deeds, although some have calumniated it, though it be the clear image of truth, a divine gift to the Greeks; nor does it drag us away from the faith, as if we were bewitched by some delusive art, but rather, so to speak, by the use of an ampler circuit, obtains a common exercise demonstrative of the faith. Further, the juxtaposition of doctrines, by comparison, saves the truth, from which follows knowledge.

Philosophy came into existence, not on its own account, but for the advantages reaped by us from knowledge, we receiving a firm persuasion of true perception, through the knowledge of things comprehended by the mind. For I do not mention that the Stromata, forming a body of varied erudition, wish artfully to conceal the seeds of knowledge. As, then, he who is fond of hunting captures the game after seeking, tracking, scenting, hunting it down with dogs; so truth, when sought and got with toil, appears a delicious thing. Why, then, you will ask, did you think it fit that such an arrangement should be adopted in your memoranda? Because there is great danger in divulging the secret of the true philosophy to those, whose delight it is unsparingly to speak against everything, not justly; and who shout forth all kinds of names and words indecorously, deceiving themselves and beguiling those who adhere to them. "For the Hebrews seek signs," as the apostle says, "and the Greeks seek after wisdom."
And philosophy -- I do not mean the Stoic, or the Platonic, or the Epicurean, or the Aristotelian, but whatever has been well said by each of those sects, which teach righteousness along with a science pervaded by piety, -- this eclectic whole I call philosophy. But such conclusions of human reasonings, as men have cut away and falsified, I would never call divine.
Secret Alias
Posts: 18362
Joined: Sun Apr 19, 2015 8:47 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by Secret Alias »

I found both Mbuckley's and Andrew's comments very encouraging. I took Buckley's advice regarding the structure of the argument. Helped me out immensely. Thank you. I may have still written a stinker. But it would have been a massive stinker had I not taken your advice.
mbuckley3
Posts: 151
Joined: Sat Oct 28, 2017 6:47 am

Re: A Stromateis of What?

Post by mbuckley3 »

Andrew (25 Feb. 2023) : "Porter argues in detail that the letter is theologically more Valentinian than is the teaching of Clement."

Nathan Porter uses an eclectic grab-bag of sources to interpret Ep.366 as Valentinian, which is sadly reminiscent of the way the 'Gnostic' template, a construct, used to be applied to texts. The worst example : Irenaeus, Epiphanius, and the Tripartite Tractate are used to translate χαρις/gift in the letter as a Valentinian Aeon, possibly God's consort. Porter is honest enough to admit that this is clearly not Clement's meaning in the Stromateis, "but this could be a result of a misunderstanding of Valentinus in this passage (as we have seen Clement do on several occasions)".

To recapitulate where we are : 'if' Porter has made good arguments for the letter being the source for Strom.3.7.59, and not vice versa; 'if' the evidence adduced by Stephan is sufficient to show that the language is thoroughly Clementine; then the main barrier to it possibly being written by Clement is its notion of the spiritual body and its relation to εγκρατεια/self-mastery. If I can demonstrate that the theology is perfectly congruent with Clement's discussion of these topics, that barrier is removed, and there is no need to go hiking in the Valentinian badlands.

■■■■■

First, some peliminaries.

(1) For Clement, the soul, 'sent from heaven' (Strom.4.26.167), is part of a divine chain of being.

"Rightly then Moses says, that the body which Plato calls 'the earthly tabernacle' was formed of the ground, but that the rational soul was breathed by God from above into man's face..Wherefore also man is said 'to have been made in His image and likeness.' For the image of God is the divine [θειος] and royal Logos, the impassible man; and the image of the image is the human mind." (Strom.5.14.94)

"For it is his nature, as man, to be akin to God [πεφυκε γαρ ως ανθρωπος οικειως εχειν προς θεον]...we call upon man, who was made for the contemplation of heaven, and is in truth a heavenly plant [φυτον ουρανιον], to come to the knowledge of God." (Protrep.10.100.2-3)

(2) Εγκρατεια is one of Clement's key themes. At Paid.2.10.94, he claims to have written a treatise Περι Εγκρατειας, (the same title as the surscript to Ep.366). It is listed (Strom. 1.24.159, 2.18.78) as one of the cardinal virtues. Importantly, this list is interconnected :

"There is no εγκρατη without temperance [σωφροσυνης]. And these virtues follow one another [αντακολουθουσι]; and with whom are the sequences [ακολουθιαι] of the virtues, with him is also salvation..Rightly, therefore, in treating of these virtues, we shall inquire into them all; for he that has one virtue gnostically, by reason of their accompanying each other [ δια την αντακολουθιαν], has them all. Thus εγκρατεια is..." (Strom.2.18.80)

The sequence is a connective chain between God and human. Εγκρατεια is both an attribute of God and a gift :

"Εγκράτεια is an ignoring of the body in accordance with the confession of faith in God...It does not only teach us to exercise temperance [σωφρονειν]; it is rather that temperance is granted to us, since it is a divine power and grace [δυναμις ουσα και θεια χαρις]." (Strom.3.1.4)

But this inherent connection depends on an act of human choice, and the maintenance of progressive discipline :

"And each one of us is a partaker of His beneficence, as far as He wills. For the difference of the elect is made by the intervention of a choice [αιρεσις] worthy of the soul, and by exercise [συνασκησις]." (Strom.5.14.141)

(3) What is Clement doing quoting Valentinus in the Stromateis ? He can be neutral, as when reporting Valentinian claims of Pauline pedigree (Strom.3.17.106). He can be hostile, as when precisely [κατα λεξιν] quoting from a Valentinus homily to register fundamental disagreememt (Strom.4.13.89). But he can be positive, quoting Valentinus' Περι Φιλων to advance his argument for general intimations of Christian truth (Strom.6.6.52). On this last passage, the Sources Chrétiennes editor remarks : "Clément..n'hésite pas à citer, à l'appui de sa thèse, le témoignage de deux hétérodoxes dont il a par ailleurs critiqué les positions." So Valentinus fits into the same category as the plethora of pagan authors cited by Clement, most obviously Plato; they have had an inkling of the truth, to quote them is not to give a full imprimatur; rather, the quotation is justified by its immediate utility to Clement's argument.

(4) Clement is erratic in the naming of his sources; the omission of a name is not evidence of suppression.

(5) The initial suspect in any case of alleged 'recycling' of Clementine material should be Clement himself. It is part of his method, and changes in meaning and context are a consequence. To take a trite but telling example : 'I think I see two suns', a line from Euripides' Bacchae, is used at Paed.2.2.24 as a symptom of drunkenness; at Protrep.12.118, the usage is metaphorical, the manic Pentheus being 'intoxicated with ignorance'.

■■■■■

Of bodies and εγκρατεια.

"What shall we say is the peculiar function of man ? He is like, it appears to me, the Centaur, a Thessalian figment, compounded of a rational and irrational part, of soul and body. Well, the body tills the ground, and hastes to it; but the soul is raised to God : trained in the true philosophy, it speeds to its kindred [συγγενεις] above.." (Strom.4.3.9)

The 'kindred' are the angels, that part of the cosmic hierarchy attained by εγκρατεια. The divestment of materiality is an essential process.

"Now, of what I may call the passionlessness which we attribute to the gnostic, in which the perfection of the believer, 'advancing by love, comes to a perfect man, to the measure of full stature', by being assimilated to God [εξομοιουμενη θεω], and by becoming truly angelic [ισαγγελος αληθως γενομενη].." (Strom.7.14.84)

"Especially does fasting empty the soul of matter and make it - along with the body - pure and light [κουφην] for the divine words." (Ecl.Proph.14)

Porter entirely misses the dynamic character of εγκρατεια when insisting that the 'continent' Jesus of Ep.366 is not meant as a figure to be imitated, due to his 'divine inability' to process food. Rather, as the primal example and (as Logos) source of εγκρατεια, he represents the final state to which the gnostic progresses. Apart from Paul, the only named γνωστικος in Clement is Moses (Strom.5.11.74). Thus :

"Our aim is not that while a man feels desire he should get the better of it, but that he should be continent [ εγκρατευηται] even respecting desire itself. This chastity [εγκρατειαν] cannot be attained in any other way except by God's grace [χαριτι]. That was why he said 'Ask and it shall be given you.' This grace [χαριν] was received even by Moses, though clothed in his needy body, so that for forty days he felt neither thirst nor hunger." (Strom.3.7.57)

Moses, on earth, managed to maintain for a period that 'divine inability.'

Forty days might be a bit extreme, but bodily lightness is correlated by Clement to anticipatory signs of the angelic body in the here and now. 'Realized eschatology', in the NT argot.

It starts with the regimen of an ascetic diet, producing a 'lightness of body'/του σωματος την κουφοτητα (Paed.2.1.2). More than minimal food is a physical impediment to divine operation :

"And they say that the bodies of children, when shooting up to their height, are made to grow right by deficiency in nourishment. For then the Spirit, which pervades the body in order to its growth, is not checked by abundance of food obstructing the freedom of its course." (Paed.2.1.17)

The results of this discipline are outward, visible signs of the ongoing transformation of the human soul into its proper form, an angelic body (τη οικεια του σωματος αγγελοθεσια - Ecl.Proph.57) :

"Stretching upwards in soul, loosened from the world and our sins, touching the earth on tiptoe [ολιγω ποδι εφαπτομενοι της γης] so as to appear to be in the world, we pursue holy wisdom." (Paed.1.5.16)

"So also we raise the head and lift the hands to heaven, and stand on tiptoe [τους δε ποδας επεγειρομεν]..endeavouring to abstract the body from the earth..raising the soul aloft..we compel it to advance to the region of holiness, nobly despising the chain of the flesh." (Strom.7.7.40)

"Ye who, while still in the body, like the just men of old, enjoy impassibility and immutability of soul." (Strom.4.7.55)

"And, perchance, such an one has already attained the condition of being 'equal to the angels'."
(Strom.7.10.57)

"'But ye are sanctified.' For he who has come to this state is in a condition to be holy, falling into none of the passions in any way, but as it were already disembodied [οιον ασαρκω ηδη] and already grown holy above this earth." (Strom.7.14.86)

"The gnostic is consequently divine [θειος], and already holy, God-bearing and God-borne [θεοφορων και θεοφορουμενος]." (Strom.7.13.82)

"He then, who has first moderated his passions and trained himself for impassibility, and developed to the beneficence of gnostic perfection, is here equal to the angels [ ισαγγελος]. Luminous already..he speeds by righteous knowledge through the love of God to the sacred abode, like as the apostles." (Strom.6.13.105)

The correlation between lack of physical weight and increased celestial connection while still in the body informs this OT example : "Rightly, therefore, Joshua the son of Nave saw Moses, when taken up, double, - one Moses with the angels, and one on the mountains, honoured with burial in their ravines. And Joshua saw this spectacle below, being elevated by the Spirit, along also with Caleb. But both do not see similarly. But the one descended with greater speed, as if the weight he carried was great; while the other, on descending after him, subsequently related the glory which he beheld, being able to perceive more than the other as having grown purer." (Strom.6.15.132)

■■■■■

So what are the properties of the angelic body which the gnostic is being transformed into ?

"And the angels are bodies [και οι αγγελοι σωματα εισιν]; at any rate they are seen. Why even the soul is a body [αλλα και η ψυχη σωμα], for as the Apostle says, 'It is sown a body of soul, it is raised a body of spirit,'...But, from the story of Lazarus and Dives, the soul is directly shown by its possession of bodily limbs to be a body." (Excerp. ex Theod.14)

"For, in general. that which has come into being is not insubstantial, but they have form and body, though unlike the bodies in this world." (Excerp. ex Theod.10)

"And how could there be a face of a shapeless being ? Indeed the Apostle knows heavenly, beautiful and intellectual bodies. How could different names be given them, if they were not determined by their shapes, form and body ? There is one glory of the heavenly, another of the earthly, another of angels, another of archangels, because in comparison with bodies here, like the stars, they are incorporeal and formless, as in comparison with the Son, they are dimensional and sensible bodies; so also is the Son, if compared with the Father..." (Excerp. ex Theod.11)

Crucially, the angelic body does not have internal organs :

"Nor yet any of the angels : for in the way that angels, in virtue of being angels, speak, men do not hear; nor, as we have ears, have they a tongue to correspond; nor would anyone attribute to the angels organs of speech, lips I mean, and the parts contiguous, throat, and windpipe, and chest, breath and air to vibrate." (Strom.6.7.57)

■■■■■

The body of the gnostic, the body of Jesus.

"The gnostic is such, that he is subject only to the impulses [παθεσι] that exist for the maintenance of the body, such as hunger, thirst, and the like. But in the case of the Saviour, it were ludicrous {to suppose} that the body, as a body, demanded the necessary aids in order to its duration. For he ate, not for the sake of the body, which was kept together by a holy power [δυναμει αγια], but in order that it might not enter into the minds of those who were with him to entertain a different opinion of him..But he was entirely impassible [απαθης], inaccessible to any movement of feeling [κινημα παθητικον] - either pleasure or pain." (Strom.6.9.71)

Jesus' divine/super-angelic inner body is at the apex of the celestial hierarchy which the gnostic participates in. The 'divine inability' to process food is what the gnostic aims for. Thus Clement is quite happy to use Valentinus on Jesus not excreting at Strom.3.7.59, as it tallies with this passage. The 'holy power' here corresponds to Valentinus' description of εγκρατεια as a δυναμις, which Clement himself also does (Strom.3.1.4, quoted above).

The conception of the celestial hierarchy as a dynamic continuum allows graded comparisons between Jesus and the gnostic :

"So he who listens to the Lord, and follows the prophecy given by him, will be formed perfectly in the likeness of the teacher - made a god going about in flesh [εν σαρκι περιπολων θεος]." (Strom.7.16.101)

"{Jesus}..might appear to be (a) god in a sliver of flesh [θεος εν σαρκιω], by displaying his power, being numbered indeed as a man, but being concealed as to who he was." (Strom.6.16.140)

Thus also, as illustrated above, the gnostic strains after being physically light [κουφος], as he 'tiptoes on the earth.'

This compares exactly to the 'levitating' Jesus of Ep.366 : thanks to the perfect εγκρατεια of his inner body, his outer body is physically light [κουφος], so that his feet, quite literally, do not touch the ground.

It would be hard to find a conceit more thoroughly Clementine....
Post Reply