2. Sapiential and Jewish-Christian Narratives and Clement's Understanding of the Origin of the Logos
clement of alexandria on trial
Logos-theology. These issues needed to be addressed in a new Christian way and Clement did his best as a theologian and exegete to respond to the questions raised. When Philo seemed not to provide sufficient guidance, the Sapiential literature and other documents offered another significant stimulus to Clement.
2. Sapiential and Jewish-Christian Narratives and Clement's Understanding of the Origin of the Logos
In order to illuminate the full extent of the background of Clement's Logos-theology, we have to turn to the Jewish Sapiential literature where we find the representation of the divine Wisdom as 'the first creation'. Then, I will highlight some alternative theories of the Logos which were available to Clement. This idea had an important role in Clement's theology of the divine Logos. On two occasions, Clement of Alexandria identified the Logos with divine Wisdom (σοφία), which was, according to the Jewish didactic literature of the later Hellenistic period, 'the first creation' (κτίσις/ )קִנְיָןGod's companion in the work of creation: "The Lord made me the beginning of his ways for his works. He established me before time was in the beginning."18
In the book of Proverbs, Wisdom (σοφία) is endowed with female characteristics and is understood to have been brought forth by God.
As created, she is prior to all creation and accompanies God in the task of calling the universe into being.19 Clement was familiar with this
Sapiential motif and, in his assimilation of it, he was not distracted by the female features of divine Wisdom. Admiring the divine Wisdom and Providence that sustained everything, he took another, very natural step, and identified the divine Logos with σοφία. To some extent he had a precursor in Philo of Alexandria20 and felt reassured that the Logos could be identified with the first-created/generated σοφία: "The power of God is his Son [1 Cor. 1:24], as he is the original Logos of the 18 Prov. 8:22-23: κύριος ἔκτισέν με ἀρχὴν ὁδῶν αὐτοῦ εἰς ἔργα αὐτοῦ, πρὸ τοῦ αἰῶνος ἐθεμελίωσέν με ἐν ἀρχῇ (see also Sir. 24 and Wis. 6–9). See the discussion of the first passage in B. Vawter, "Proverbs 8:22 Wisdom and Creation", Journal of Biblical Literature 99 (1980): 205–16.
19 The origin of the idea and imagery is discussed by B. Lang, Frau Weisheit: Deutung einer biblischen Gestalt (Düsseldorf: Patmos, 1975), 147–76; see also G. von Rad,
Wisdom in Israel, trans. J.M. Martin (London: SCM Press, 1972), 153–4.
20 See Philo, Leg. 1.65; Lilla, Clement of Alexandria, 209. According to Lilla, Justin
Martyr also identified the divine Logos with Wisdom, see Justin Martyr, Dial. 61.
the assumption that the son of god is a creature
Father before creation of all. Therefore he correctly may be called the Wisdom of God [1 Cor. 1:24]."21 In his polemic against the Stoics, who in his view misunderstood the Hebrew Scriptures (again, Clement repeated his axiom of the dependence of some elements of the Greek philosophy on the Hebrew Scriptures) he stated that of divine Wisdom/
Logos: "They did not understand that this [passage] is about the Wisdom created by God as the first."22
Like Philo before him, Clement applied Scriptural terminology to his interpretation of the origin of Wisdom/Logos. While this application was acceptable in catechesis before the so-called 'Arian' crisis, the same expression of 'created Wisdom' presented a serious problem to a post-Nicene reader such as Photios.23 For instance, as noted by Rowan Williams, Origen also seemed to apply the term κτίσμα to the divine Son.24 Again, Photios found this notion controversial, suspicious and irreconcilable with orthodox doctrine.25 Nonetheless neither
21 Clement, Strom. 7.7.4: "δύναμις" γὰρ τοῦ "θεοῦ" ὁ υἱός, ἅτε πρὸ πάντων τῶν γενομέ νων ἀρχικώτατος λόγος τοῦ πατρός καὶ "σοφία" αὐτοῦ.
22 Ibid. 5.89.4: ἐπεὶ μὴ συνῆκαν λέγεσθαι ταῦτα ἐπὶ τῆς σοφίας τῆς πρωτοκτίστου τῷ θεῷ (see Sir. 1:4; Wis. 7:24). It is yet another example of Clement's assimilation of the divine Logos with Wisdom, which leads him to a dangerous (from a later postand pro-Nicene point of view) conclusion about the origin of the Logos.
I wish to point out that Clement's exegesis of the Sapiential literature based on the Philonic notion of the Logos as God's facilitator in the creation of the universe, provided him with a coherent theory. However, the same theory in a different postNicene context sounded highly suspicious, if not openly erroneous.
23 For more information, see Williams, Arius, 109. However, as Lewis Ayres rightly points out in his recent book, the term 'Wisdom', as a Christological title, was understood as a synonym of the Logos who was coexistent with God by pro-Nicene theologians. This observation shows that the semantics of various Scriptural terms changed depending on which political or ecclesiastical party was using it (Ayres,
Nicaea and its Legacy, 41; see Williams, Arius, 109).
24 Origen, Princ. 4.4.1; see Williams, Arius, 140–41. I would like to thank to Mark
Edwards for his comment that the citation (Princ. 4.4.1) could be an insertion in Koetschau's edition. However as noted asserted by Widdicombe, Origin did use the term κτίσμα to denote the divine Son in the original text of De principiis, nonetheless the exact meaning remains uncertain (see P. Widdicombe, The Fatherhood of God from Origen to Athanasius [Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1994], 89).
25 See Photios, Cod. 8. Ayres comments: "It is difficult to know how we should read this. Origen says that the first act of creation, the creation of the original rational beings before the world as we know it came into being, resulted from the immediate and unimpeded expression of God's will. This primary creation he may have termed a κτίσμα as opposed to the κόσμος of our world. The Logos is the 'beginning' of this creation and the medium through which it came into being. Describing the Son as κτίσμα is very different from describing the material world as created" (Ayres, Nicaea and its Legacy, 27). I find this interpretation very insightful. I wish to point out that within the framework of early Alexandrian Logos-theology, both Clement and Origen
clement of alexandria on trial
Clement's nor Origen's ideas can be seen as the direct source of 'Arian'
Christology. If this kind of influence worried later theologians, it was only because of the simplification of the theories of both Alexandrian scholars in political and ecclesiastical conflicts in later Christianity.
After the leading role of Philo of Alexandria and Sapiential literature, the third element of Clement's background, relatively neglected by scholars, comes from Jewish-Christian literature.26 In this tradition, the origin of the divine Logos was understood to be related to the creation of the archangels. If Clement considered the possibility of calling the divine Logos 'the first-created', it was not only because of Philo's example or the authority of the Scriptural book of Wisdom, but also because some of the Christians that he respected as 'orthodox' sources, had already applied this notion to the Son of God. Daniélou noted a number of expressions in 2 Enoch 29:3 and Hermas (Vis. 3.4.1;
Sim. 5.5.3) where πρῶτοι κτισθέντες denoted 'first created'.27 However, Clement's adaptation of the Jewish motif must be seen on a larger scale than just a single reference. The idea of naming the highest rank of angels (archangels) as 'the first created' refers to a theory held only by some parts of the Hellenistic Jewish community, that among the spiritual, most perfect beings, there are different categories of angels.28 In show a degree of coherence in their theory of the generation/creation of the Logos.
Their theory did not imply what Photios' critique suggested, as he judged the terminology by post-Nicene and anti-Origenistic standards. Meyendorff notes that some
Origenistic monks of the 'New Lavra' were called 'Protoktists' (πρωτόκτιστοι, 'first created') and 'Isochrists' (ἰσόχριστοι, 'equal to Christ'), as both terms expressed the highest level of spiritual perfection (see Meyendorff, Imperial Unity and Christian
Divisions, 233 n. 57).
26 This rather broad term I understand as a description of those Jews who recognised in Jesus the Messiah, although some of them did not accept his divine origin, and were still attached to the Torah. This community produced literature and theology which reinterpreted Jewish motifs (including apocalyptic literature) with a new emphasis. As they identified the Messiah with Jesus, they were no longer part of mainstream Judaism; as they kept the Jewish Law, they were more and more on the margin of the emerging Church. Jewish Christianity, although itself a very complex phenomenon can be distinguished by its ethos from both traditions, even if its connection with both religions remained essential.
27 J. Daniélou, A History of Early Christian Doctrine Before the Council of Nicaea, vol. 1: The Theology of Jewish Christianity, trans. J. Baker (London: Darton, Longman
& Todd, 1964), 181.
28 For a very useful review of angelology in Clement's time, see R.M.M. Tuschling,
Angels and Orthodoxy: A Study in their Development in Syria and Palestine from the Qumran Texts to Ephrem the Syrian (Tübingen: Mohr, 2007), 28–80; and an earlier study which discusses Clement's angelology in relation to his Logos-theology,
C.A. Gieschen, Angelomorphic Christology: Antecedants and Early Evidence, Arbeiten
the assumption that the son of god is a creature
the book of Jubiliees, the angels were created on the first day, although they did not participate in the creation of the world.29 This JewishChristian amalgam of ideas, in the case of a particular group or sect called the Ebionites,30 even expressed the view that Christ was not begotten of his divine Father, "but was created as one of the archangels".31 Clement of Alexandria was acquainted with these and other Jewish-Christian views on the origin of the Saviour/Archangel, and his statements show some similarity in vocabulary, a fact noted by the ancient commentators and later by Photios. So Clement of Alexandria contended that the way in which the divine Logos "has appeared" alongside God was directly connected with his main functions and it could not be separated from his divine status. For Clement, the divine Logos was, like Jewish-Christian archangels, prior to all creation and his priority was both chronological and ontological as he was closest in the hierarchy of beings to the ineffable God.32 Like those archangels from Jewish theological literature, the divine Logos was
God's adviser (σύμβουλος) in the creation of the world.33 He was and is, like the archangels, the main administrator (κυβερνήτης) of the created order;34 also, as in the case of those archangels, he was and is zur Geschichte des antiken Judentums und des Urchristentums 42 (Leiden: E.J. Brill,
1998), 51–187, on Clement, see 194.
29 Jub. 2.2, 3.
30 See S. Häkkinen, "Ebionites", in A Companion to Second-Century Christian 'Heretics', 247–79.
31 Epiphanius, Pan. 30.16.4 (trans. F. Williams, in The Panarion of Epiphanius of Salamis, Book I (Sects 1–46), Nag Hammadi Studies 35 [Leiden: E.J. Brill, 1987]: ἀλλὰ ἐκτίσθαι, ὡς ἕνα τῶν ἀρχαγγέλων'), as noted in Tuschling, Angels, 55.
32 e.g. Clement, Strom. 7.7.4 (quoted above). On the angels as δύναμις of God, see 2 En. 20:1. The concept of the proximity of the angels to God finds its classical expression in calling the angels 'sons of God' ( בְּנֵי־הָֽאֱֹלהִםGen. 6:2, 4; Job 1:6; 2:1;
38:7 or 'the sons of gods, divine beings', ( בְּנֵי אֵלִיםPs. 29:1; 89:7).
33 Clement, Strom. 7.7.4. "The council of God" or "hosts of heaven" ,צְבָא הַשָּׁמַיִם who are associated with Yahweh in his rule, appear in 1 Kgs 22:19; see also Gen.
1:26; Job 1–2; Ps. 82; Isa. 6; Dan. 7:9-10; 1 En. 14.19-23; 40.1-7; 2 En. 20; 4 Ezra
8:21-22. As to the belief that some angels accompanied God when the world was created, see J.E. Fossum, The Name of God and the Angels of the Lord: Samaritan and Jewish Concepts of Intermediation and the Origin of Gnosticism, Wissenschaftliche
Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament 36 (Tübingen: Mohr, 1985), 192–213.
34 e.g., Clement, Strom. 7.9.2. The important role of the archangels, as God's agents, and as protectors and guardians of the nations is mentioned in Deut. 32:3;
Dan. 10.13 and reaffirmed in Heb. 1:14. The Jewish motif was well known to Clement
(see, e.g., Strom. 5.91.3; 6.157.5). Also, the Jewish idea of the angel as "the commander of the army of the Yahweh" ( ,שַֺר צְבָֽא יְהוָֽהJosh. 5:14) finds its adaptation in Christology as the divine Logos who is the ultimate administrator/commander and captain/navigator of the ship of salvation: Clement, Paed. 1.54.2.