Valentinian Things Said By Clement of Alexandria

[Secret Alias]

Marcosian:

God, then, being not a subject for demonstration, cannot be the object of science.

4.25.156.1 ὁ μὲν οὖν θεὸς ἀναπόδεικτος ὢν οὐκ ἔστιν ἐπιστημονικός,

But the Son is wisdom, and knowledge, and truth, and all else that has affinity thereto.

ὁ δὲ υἱὸς σοφία τέ ἐστι καὶ ἐπιστήμη καὶ ἀλήθεια καὶ ὅσα ἄλλα τούτῳ συγγενῆ,

He is also susceptible of demonstration and of description.

καὶ δὴ καὶ ἀπόδειξιν ἔχει καὶ διέξοδον.

And all the powers of the Spirit, becoming collectively one thing, terminate in the same point -- that is, in the Son.

πᾶσαι δὲ αἱ δυνάμεις τοῦ πνεύματος συλλήβδην μὲν ἕν τι πρᾶγμα γενόμεναι συντελοῦσιν εἰς τὸ αὐτό, τὸν υἱόν,

But He is incapable of being declared, in respect of the idea of each one of His powers.

ἀπαρέμφατος δέ ἐστι τῆς περὶ ἑκάστης αὐτοῦ τῶν 4.25.156.2 δυνάμεων ἐννοίας.

And the Son is neither simply one thing as one thing, nor many things as parts, but one thing as all things; whence also He is all things.

καὶ δὴ οὐ γίνεται ἀτεχνῶς ἓν ὡς ἕν, οὐδὲ πολλὰ ὡς μέρη ὁ υἱός, ἀλλ' ὡς πάντα ἕν. ἔνθεν καὶ πάντα·

For He is the circle of all powers rolled and united into one unity.

κύκλος γὰρ ὁ αὐτὸς πασῶν τῶν δυνάμεων εἰς ἓν εἰλουμένων καὶ ἑνουμένων.

Wherefore the Word is called the Alpha and the Omega, of whom alone the end becomes beginning, and ends again at the original beginning without any break.

4.25.157.1 διὰ τοῦτο ἄλφα καὶ ὦ ὁ λόγος εἴρηται, οὗ μόνου τὸ τέλος ἀρχὴ γίνεται καὶ τελευτᾷ πάλιν ἐπὶ τὴν ἄνωθεν ἀρχήν, οὐδαμοῦ διάστασιν 4.25.157.2 λαβών.

Wherefore also to believe in Him, and by Him, is to become a unit, being indissolubly united in Him; and to disbelieve is to be separated, disjoined, divided.

διὸ δὴ καὶ τὸ εἰς αὐτὸν καὶ τὸ δι' αὐτοῦ πιστεῦσαι μονα4.25.157.2 δικόν ἐστι γενέσθαι, ἀπερισπάστως ἑνούμενον ἐν αὐτῷ, τὸ δὲ ἀπι4.25.157.3 στῆσαι διστάσαι ἐστὶ καὶ διαστῆναι καὶ μερισθῆναι.

I will say to the end of time that Clement is a Marcosian, a follower of Mark, if not "Mark" himself. There is a paradoxical nature to the argument that the Stromateis "is" Clement of Alexandria. Clement of Alexandria was whoever Clement of Alexandria was. He lived, ate, shat, died and then a collection of writings associated with his name came down to us. The first thing that is obvious that if Clement did anything wrong however defined the authorities who passed his writings on to us would either need to purge that from the record or correct the record. It wasn't like the Church Fathers were "mere archivists." If a controversy arose and it was sustained throughout the ages, like that associated with Origen, they would purge the historical record of "sin" as much as possible or make him a heretic as we see with Paul of Samosata. Clement comes to us with this Stromateis and a few other works all purged in some form. The Valentinian character of Clement seems to match what is said of Origen's patron Ambrose. He was a former Valentinian or a Marcion. But this statement where the Son is identified as a collection of aeonic powers is so obvious it is irrefutable. Of course it can be ignored as most do.

[Secret Alias]

Against the Valentinians says there was an "orgy" in heaven among the aeons. Later Clement writes:

Basilides however, supposes that Righteousness and her daughter Peace dwell stationed in the eighth sphere.

But we must pass from physics to ethics, which are clearer; for the discourse concerning these will follow after the treatise in hand. The Saviour Himself, then, plainly initiates us into the mysteries, according to the words of the tragedy: - "Seeing those who see, he also gives the orgies."

And if you ask, "These orgies, what is their nature?"

You will hear again: "It is forbidden to mortals uninitiated in the Bacchic rites to know."

And if any one will inquire curiously what they are, let him hear: "It is not lawful for thee to hear, but they are worth knowing; The rites of the God detest him who practises impiety."

Now God, who is without beginning, is the perfect beginning of the universe, and the producer of the beginning. As, then, He is being, He is the first principle of the department of action, as He is good, of morals; as He is mind, on the other hand, He is the first principle of reasoning and of judgment. Whence also He alone is Teacher, who is the only Son of the Most High Father, the Instructor of men.

[mlinssen]

This is so hardcore gnostic that I've almost passed out.
Just a touch of religion perhaps, or not even that

[Peter Kirby]

Book 3 of Clement's Stromata describes Carpocratian orgies and fornication:

... Carpocrates fights against God, and Epiphanes likewise. The latter in the same notorious book, I mean Concerning Righteousness, writes in one passage as follows: "Consequently one must understand the saying 'Thou shalt not covet' as if the lawgiver was making a jest, to which he added the even more comic words 'thy neighbour's goods'. For he himself who gave the desire to sustain the race orders that it is to be suppressed, though he removes it from no other animals. And by the words 'thy neighbour's wife' he says something even more ludicrous, since he forces what should be common property to be treated as a private possession."

These then are the doctrines of the excellent Carpocratians. These, so they say, and certain other enthusiasts for the same wickednesses, gather together for feasts (I would not call their meeting an Agape), men and women together. After they have sated their appetites ("on repletion Cypris, the goddess of love, enters," as it is said), then they overturn the lamps and so extinguish the light that the shame of their adulterous "righteousness" is hidden, and they have intercourse where they will and with whom they will. After they have practiced community of use in this love-feast, they demand by daylight of whatever women they wish that they will be obedient to the law of Carpocrates-it would not be right to say the law of God. Such, I think, is the law that Carpocrates must have given for the copulations of dogs and pigs and goats. He seems to me to have misunderstood the saying of Plato in the Republic that the women of all are to be common.

[mbuckley3]

On another thread we discussed Clement's use of the term Αντιτακται/Resisters to cover a range of unnamed sects/individuals, connected only by libertine tendencies. It's an invented category.

Similarly, I don't think describing Clement as a Valentinian gets us very far. Tertullian, your old sparring partner, is pretty clear that 'Valentinian' was an invented term of abuse, no-one likely self-described as such, and that it is only the heresiologist who links otherwise unconnected individuals/doctrines. Adv. Val. 4 :

"I affirm that we know quite well their origins and we also know why we call them Valentinians even though they seem not to be; for they have left their founder's path. Still their original teachings have not been at all forgotten, even if they have been changed somewhat : this very change bears witness to their former teachings [ ! ]....As you see, Valentinus has disappeared, yet these are Valentinians who derive from Valentinus. At Antioch alone to this day Axionicus consoles the memory of Valentinus by a full obedience of his rules. The other heretics allow themselves to change their teachings with the same frequency a prostitute changes her makeup - and why not ? - since each of them discovers that well-known spiritual seed in himself : if they invent anything new, they immediately call it a revelation; they call their audacity a spiritual gift. They do not claim their sect is united, but admit it is diverse; consequently whenever they abandon their usual equivocation, we see that most of them are at odds about the meaning of certain dogmas, some saying in good faith 'this is not so'; others, 'I take this in a different sense'; others, 'I don't admit that'. As we see, their list of rules has been painted over by their innovations and looks as if it had been scribbled on by an ignoramus."
(tr. M.T. Riley)

■■■■■

As regards censorship, it can't have been too thorough in Clement's case. Clement's 'system', the fantastical accounts of activity within the celestial hierarchy, is worthy of inclusion in any Adversus Haereses, once you put it together. And in plain sight is a passage such as this :

"The unspeakable part of Him is Father, and the part that has sympathy with us is Mother. By loving, the Father became female, and a great proof of this is he, whom he bore from himself."

Και το μεν αρρητον αυτου πατηρ, το δε εις ημας συμπαθες γεγονε μητηρ. Αγαπησας ο πατηρ εθηλυνθη, και τουτου μεγα σημειον ον αυτος εγεννησεν εξ αυτου (QDS 37)

[Secret Alias]

Book 3 of Clement's Stromata describes Carpocratian orgies and fornication:

He also has a gospel which reads like it was the source of the Carpocratian exegesis.

μή ποτε παραδῷ σε τῷ κριτῇ, ὁ κριτὴς δὲ τῷ ὑπηρέτῃ τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ διαβόλου (Lest he deliver thee to the judge, and the judge deliver thee to the officers of Satan's kingdom). Strom. 4.14.95.3

This is obviously Secret Mark. Like what the fuck. The Carpocratians and Clement shared a gospel. Or, as Andrew would have it, shared exegesis. I don't think so. In case people aren't familiar with Irenaeus on the Carpocratians:

They affirm that for this reason Jesus spoke the following parable:--"Whilst thou art with thine adversary in the way, give all diligence, that thou mayest be delivered from him, lest he give thee up to the judge, and the judge surrender thee to the officer, and he cast thee into prison. Verily, I say unto thee, thou shalt not go out thence until thou pay the very last farthing."(5) They also declare the "adversary" is one of those angels who are in the world, whom they call the Devil, maintaining that he was formed for this purpose, that he might lead those souls which have perished from the world to the Supreme Ruler. They describe him also as being chief among the makers of the world, and maintain that he delivers such souls [as have been mentioned] to another angel, who ministers to him, that he may shut them up in other bodies; for they declare that the body is "the prison." Again, they interpret these expressions, "Thou shalt not go out thence until thou pay the very last farthing," as meaning that no one can escape from the power of those angels who made the world, but that he must pass from body to body, until he has experience of every kind of action which can be practised in this world, and when nothing is longer wanting to him, then his liberated soul should soar upwards to that God who is above the angels, the makers of the world. In this way also all souls are saved, whether their own which, guarding against all delay, participate in all sorts of actions during one incarnation, or those, again, who, by passing from body to body, are set free, on fulfilling and accomplishing what is requisite in every form of life into which they are sent, so that at length they shall no longer be [shut in the body.

τῆς ἀρχῆς τοῦ διαβόλου = the angels who made the world, cf. "whom they call the Devil, maintaining that he was formed for this purpose, that he might lead those souls which have perished from the world to the Supreme Ruler. They describe him also as being chief among the makers of the world"

[Secret Alias]

The only-begotten God, who is in the bosom of the Father, He hath declared Him," -- calling invisibility and ineffableness the bosom of God. Hence some have called it the Depth, as containing and embosoming all things, inaccessible and boundless.

5.12.81.3 ὁ μονογενὴς θεός, ὁ ὢν εἰς τὸν κόλπον τοῦ πατρός, ἐκεῖνος ἐξηγήσατο, τὸ ἀόρατον καὶ ἄρρητον κόλπον ὀνομάσας θεοῦ· βυθὸν <δ'> αὐτὸν κεκλήκασιν ἐντεῦθεν τινὲς ὡς ἂν περιειληφότα καὶ ἐγκολπι5.12.81.4 σάμενον τὰ πάντα ἀνέφικτόν τε καὶ ἀπέραντον.

At least we can see "tolerance" on the part of Clement with respect to Valentinian terminology. Compare this to Irenaeus's approach.