CHAPTER TWO
CHAPTER TWO
CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA
Both Gnostics and apologists appear to have been for the most part independent teachers, acting on their own responsibility. In certain cases groups of students, with formal rules, grew up around them. Out of such originally private schools grew up that Christian University of Alexandria, which later was to be so famous. The first teacher of whom we have any record is Pantaenus, who had been a philosopher before he became a Christian, then a wandering teacher, and who finally settled in Alexandria. It was there that Clement encountered him.
Clement's history and character were similar to those of his teacher.
We know extremely little of his life. He was born probably between a.p. 140 and 150, perhaps in Athens. He came to Christian faith by the same road as the apologists: he devoted himself to the study of the Platonic philosophy, and under its leading became a Christian. After his conversion he continued to lead the life of a wandering philosopher, until he arrived in Alexandria and met Pantaenus. At the beginning of his longest work, the Stromateis ("Carpet-bags"!), he writes of Those notable and life-giving teachings, those holy and truly splendid men, whom I had the privilege of hearing. One, an Ionian, I encountered in Greece; two others, a Syrian and an Egyptian, in South Italy . .
. Finally I met the last, who was in ability the first; and, when I had run him to earth in Egypt, I remained with him. He was truly the Sicilian bee, which browsed amid the flowers in the meadows of the prophets and apostles,
and imparted to the souls of his hearers the pure riches of knowledge.
With the help of God, the men who had received the true tradition of the blessed doctrine directly from the lips of Peter,
James, John and Paul, as a child receives something from a father (and few children there are who are like their fathers), had preserved that doctrine up to our time ..
. They sowed in our hearts the seed of the inheritance derived from their forerunners and the apostles.
(Stromateis 1:11. 1-3) Pantaenus died, and Clement was called to follow him in his office of teacher. His aim was the same as that of a succession of scholars in Alexandria from. Philo to Origen—on the basis of the Bible and with the help of scientific methods to erect an edifice of speculative thought which could stand up under criticism, both as interpretation of the Bible and as philosophy.
Clement was specially well qualified for this task by reason of his immense learning, in which very few of the Church
Fathers come anywhere near him. It is no exaggeration to say that Clement was the first who, in reality and not only in intention, brought philosophy and theology into close relationship to one another. Preparatory sciences, philosophy, the divine wisdom of the Christian faith—these are the three stages of education. By these three steps man rises to the highest pinnacle of knowledge.
Alexandria was the central citadel of Gnosticism. Anyone who, without himself being a Gnostic, set before himself such a purpose as Clement's, and made plain what his intention was, was making for himself claims which he would find very hard to justify. For he had to show that the common faith of the Christian Church could lead men to that same pinnacle of understanding on which the Gnostics, who were justifiably proud of their learning, claimed to stand. In point of fact Clement had to fight on two fronts at once. For the effect of Gnosticism had been to make simple Christians
suspicious of every kind of theological learning. It was, then, the business of Clement to make it plain to loyal
Christians and to Gnostics alike that devotion to learning and faithfulness to the doctrines of the Church are both essential characteristics of the Christian life. With a certain conscious dependence on the Stoic picture of the ideal wise man, Clement draws the picture of the true Gnostic—and by that he means the loyal Christian, who allows Christ
Himself to lead him ever deeper into the secrets of the divine wisdom.
Clement was a hard-working and productive writer. More than half of what he wrote is lost; but what remains, consisting mainly of three writings, is imposing enough:
1. The Protreptikos (a propaganda work intended to promote the conversion of the Greeks). Here Clement follows closely the lines of those propagandist writings of which we have already made mention. The aim is to turn the reader from one set of convictions to another; the natural approach, therefore, is to set before him the drawbacks of his present situation and the advantages of that which is offered to him.
So Clement depicts first the pagan religions, the mystery cults and the philosophic doctrines of God, with their lack of moral purity and rational understanding, and contrasts them with the purity of Christian doctrine. Then at the end comes an urgent appeal:
And now I think we have had enough of words. Or perhaps out of sheer friendliness I have already gone on at too great length, giving out all that I have received from God, holding nothing back, in order to lead you on in the search for the greatest of all blessings, salvation. For, as it appears, the words that are to serve as an introduction to that life which can never in any circumstances come to an end have a tendency not to come to an end either. So now only one thing, the last, remains for you
—to choose what shall be of the greatest benefit to you. Which
shall it be—grace or judgment? In mfiy opinion, no one can have a moment's doubt as to which is the better of the two; for it can hardly be right even to compare life with destruction.
2. This work is immediately followed by "The Educator"
(Paidagogos). Clement assumes that the reader has been led, by his study of the Protreptikos, to a change of basic conviction; the next thing that he needs is moral instruction, in order that he may learn to order his life in the new way.
In the first three books, Clement draws a general picture of Christ, the divine Word, as educator, in whom kindness and sternness are found in combination. The remaining two books present us with twelve groups of rules for daily life, which combine biblical and Stoic precepts in happy harmony, and show us Clement's moderation in that which he forbids and that which he permits. The work ends with a hymn to Christ as the Teacher: .
. .
King of Saints, Thou all-subduing Word of the highest Father, Prince of wisdom, strengthener in toil, full of everlasting joy,
Saviour of the race of mortals, Jesus, Shepherd, Ploughman, Tiller, Bridle, Heavenly wing of the all-holy flock, Fisher of the men who are being saved From the sea of iniquity, Alluring the holy fish out of the hostile waves by the delightful promise of life.
Let us with one another sing Pure praise, unfailing hymns, To Christ the King, The holy reward of the doctrine of life;
Let us with one mind accompany the mighty Son.
Those who have been begotten by Christ are a choir of peace; Let us as a sober folk Praise together the God of peace.
(Clement: Paidagogos, Conclusion)
3. The Stromateis (""Carpet-bags"). We might expect that Clement would go on from his works of apologetics and ethics to a third book on Christian doctrine. But this third great book which we possess does not correspond at all to that expectation. The book of doctrine was either never written or has disappeared. What we have is a work in which the author has allowed his mind to rove at will over an astonishing range of subjects; but the book has a purpose, and is very far from being insignificant. Of the seven books, the first two or three are taken up in the main witha comparison of the pagan and the Christian systems of philosophy; in the later books Clement is concerned to work out in detail the picture of the "true Gnostic', the Christian wise man, and to distinguish his wisdom from the false and heretical
Gnostic ideas.
In this great work Clement is dealing with the kind of themes that he might well have held over to be dealt with in his work on doctrine. We rather get the impression that this work has slipped into the place which the other was intended to fill. The Stromateis has a much more special and intimately
Christian character than those that we considered first.
Clement is not now writing for pagans, or for newly converted Christians; he is writing for those who have long been
Christians, and now ought to advance, and wish to advance, in knowledge.
4. We will mention briefly one other short writing of Clement, the tract Quis Dives Salvetur? (Who is the rich man who can be saved?) It is clear that the command of Christ to "sell all that thou hast" is not in every case to be taken in its literal sense:
For complete poverty is not in itself anything great or desirable, unless it be accepted for the sake of eternal life. (If it were not so, the absolutely indigent, who in their poverty beg their daily bread, the beggars who lie by the wayside, would be the happiest
of men, and God's best-loved childrén, and, even though they knew nothing of God and of God's righteousness, would be possessors of eternal life, from the simple fact that they are entirely without resources, cannot support themselves, and have no possessions at all.) Nor is it an unheard-of thing for a man to renounce wealth, and to hand it over to the poor or to his fatherland; many did this before the coming of our Saviour, some in order to find leisure for study and for the sake of the dead philosophy of the world, others for idle fame and vain glory.
(Quis dives salvetur 11) So, clearly, what the Saviour demands is cleansing from worldly lusts, or to put it positively, the fulfilment of the command to love. The little book ends with an urgent call to penitence, to illustrate which Clement tells the wellknown story of St. John and the robber chieftain:
Now hear a tale—or rather it is not a tale, but a true record— concerning the apostle John, which has been handed down and never forgotten.
After the death of the emperor he was set free from theisland of Patmos and returned to Ephesus. From there he went round the neighbouring districts, in response to their invitation, in some places appointing bishops, in others bringing whole Churches into order, here and there ordaining one of those who had been indicated by the Spirit as fit to serve in the priesthood. And in a certain place, seeing a young man of fine stature and good to look on, and of an eager disposition, he said to the bishop of that place, "I commit this young man to you, as a deposit in the presence of the Church and of Christ as witness." The bishop took the young man home, brought him up, cared for him, and finally baptized him. Then he somewhat relaxed his care of him.
The young man, who had been too soon released from supervision, fell into the hands of dissolute and idle lads of his own age, who soon led him into evil ways. First they led him astray through extravagant feasts. Then, if they were going out to rob at night, they even took him with them. And they went on to oF
even worse things than this. The young man soon became accustomed to their ways. Being now completely apostate, and never giving a thought to the salvation wrought for him by God, he collected the others and formed them into a robber band; he himself became their leader, the most violent and murderous and cruel of all.
Some time later the Church of which we have spoken again invited the apostle to come. When he had set everything else in order, he said to the bishop "Give me back the deposit which Christ and I committed to you." At first the bishop was astonished, thinking that he was referring to some sum of money; but when he understood, he groaned and wept, and said "He is dead." "When and how did he die?" said the apostle. "He has turned to bad ways; in short, he has become a robber. He has left the Church and gone to the mountains, taking with him a band of fellows as bad as himself."
The apostle rent his clothes, and smote his head witha loud cry, and said, "A fine guardian you have been of the soul of your brother. But have a horse prepared for me, and show me the way to where he is." He went straight from the church, just as he was. When he reached the place, he was taken captive by the sentinels of the robbers; but made no attempt to flee; he made no protest; he said, "This is what I have come for. Bring me to your leader." The leader stayed still, armed as he was; but, when he saw John approaching, he took to his heels in shame. The apostle ran after him as fast as he could, forgetting his age, and crying out, "My child, why do you run away from your old father, who has come to you unarmed? Have pity on me, my child, and do not be afraid. There is still hope of life for you. I must give account to Christ for you. If necessary I will gladly give my life for yours, as the Lord gave his life for me. Stand still, believe: it is Christ who has sent me." The young man, hearing this, stood downcast; then he cast away his weapons. He trembled and wept bitterly. He embraced the old man as he drew near to him, making such defence of himself as he could by his lamentations, and being as it were baptized a second time in his tears—but he kept his right hand hidden. The old man
swore to him that it would yet be possible for him to receive forgiveness from the Saviour; he knelt before him, and kissed his right hand, as though it had already been made clean by his repentance. And so he brought him back to the Church, thus providing a marvellous example of true repentance, and a great evidence of regeneration, a trophy of the resurrection that the eyes of men could see.
(Quis dives salvetur 42; the narrative has been slightly shortened in the translation.) Faith and Knowledge Clement stands then, as we see, in the succession that runs from Philo through the apologists. The chief interest of Clement is the same as that of Philo. Once we have accepted the principle that revelation is the foundation of philosophy and theology alike, the centre of our interest must be the doctrine of God as revealer—in other words, of the divine
Logos. From this principle Clement infers, as Justin had done before him, that the task of Greek philosophy had been to prepare the way of the Lord before He came:
Before the coming of the Lord philosophy was necessary for the Greeks as a way of righteousness; now it is useful with a view to godliness (being a kind of elementary education for those who are to receive faith through evident demonstration)
. .
"Your foot shall not stumble," says the Scripture (Prov. 3:23), if you attribute every good thing to divine providence, whether it be Greek or Christian. For God is the source of all that is good; but in one case He works directly, as in the Old and New
Testaments, and in another case indirectly, as through philosophy . .
. Philosophy educated the Greeks with a view to the coming of Christ in the same way as the law educated the Hebrews. So philosophy, as a builder of the way, prepared in advance that which was made perfect by Christ.
(Stromateis 1:28. 1-3) The giver of both law and philosophy to men is the divine
Logos. Here Clement is in agreement both with Philo and
with the apologists. But Clement is writing at a time in which the defensive campaign against Gnosticism, in which he himself was to play a leading part, has had profound effects on the mind of the Christian community. The very idea of Gnosis, heavenly wisdom, has been branded as heretical and unchristian. Clement undertakes to save it for the Christian
Church by making plain the relationship between faith and knowledge. If a man has believed, the very nature of faith impels him to seek after knowledge:
It is natural for that which has hands to take hold, for that which has healthy eyes to see light. In just the same way it is natural for the one who has believed to strive after knowledge, if he desires to complete his work, and on the foundation which has been laid to build gold, silver and precious stones. But he does not simply affirm that he wishes to attain—he is already making a beginning. And it is fitting not just to intend to be, but actually to be, in royal fashion, enlightened and filled with knowledge; not only to bear the name, but in act and deed to have taken the work in hand.
(Stromateis 6:152) Faith then is the foundation on which alone knowledge can build. Faith already holds knowledge in germ within itself, and knowledge is now understood as the deepening of faith and intelligent penetration into the mysteries of the faith. All those phrases, in the mystery-religions and in the Gnostic schemes, in which the journey of the soul to the heavenly world of light is described, can now be transposed in terms of the journey from faith to knowledge. But here
Clement adds a double warning. The simple believer, however little claim he may make to intellectual ability, must not rest content with simply accepting the content of the faith as true; it is his duty to make such progress in understanding as his abilities permit. Conversely the "Gnostic", the man of
knowledge, is warned not to regard faith as something of lower value than knowledge.
The individual and the Church Now, since the relationship between faith and knowledge is so close, true knowledge is to be found only within the Church. Heresy is to be firmly rejected. Clement argues in favour of the Church on the ground that it is older, in contrast to the heresies which have grown up at later dates. But such an. argument can never be absolutely convincing; so Clement turns to another and readily available argument: he bases the necessary unity of the Church on the unity of God:
There is only one God and one Lord; and so (the Church) which is in the highest sense honourable is praised precisely because of its oneness, since this makes it a reflection of that One which is its origin. So the one Church is related to that which in its nature is one—that Church which these men wish violently to split up into many sects.
. But the one Church gathers together into the oneness of the faith .
. those who according to the will of the one God were predestined thereto by the one
Lord. .
. And the superiority of the Church, corresponding to that source from which it takes its being, lies in its unity. For it surpasses every other thing, and there is nothing else which resembles it or is equal to it.
(Stromateis 7:107. 2-6) Clement can thus speak in the highest possible terms of the Church; and yet for all that the Church is in his writings a rather dim figure. The true "Gnostic" is an individualist; he lives rather to himself and to his God than as a Christian and a member of the Church. If he enters into the fellowship of the brethren, he comes as the divinely inspired teacher— the picture is the same as in the heathen and heretical Gnostic sects—to pass on to others that secret knowledge to which he has himself attained. And Clement really has not much to
say about the Church except that it reflects the order of the heavenly hierarchy and points to the unity of God:
He who has first brought his passions under control, and has striven to rise to the level of freedom from passion, and has attained to the virtuous life of the perfection of "the Gnostic', is already equal to the angels. .
. . Like the apostles, by means of this righteous knowledge he strives upwards through the help of God's love to the holy dwelling-place. For the apostles, called as they were by Christ, did not become apostles because of some superiority of their nature—Judas was called along with them— but they were enabled to become apostles because he who sees the end from the beginning called them. . .
. So those who observe the commandments of the Lorp, and live in accordance with the Gospel perfectly and according to true knowledge, can even now be taken up into the elect company of the apostles. .
. For I think that the ecclesiastical ranks of bishop, presbyter and deacon upon earth are reflections of the glory of the angels and of that dispensation of salvation, which according to the Scriptures awaits those who, after the examples of the apostles, have lived in perfect righteousness according to the Gospel.
(Stromateis 6 :105ff.) The way to perfect knowledge What then is this knowledge, of which Clement speaks, and which he urges men to seek after? In a very real sense it is a hidden knowledge; available to all, but only on condition that they fulfil certain conditions—a resolute will to know, a turning away from the body and its desires to the spiritual realm, and the good fortune to find a teacher who is really able to teach. Clement points out that in the ancient philosophical schools, much was kept secret and imparted only to those who were qualified to receive it:
The Pythagoreans and Plato kept many things secret; the Epicureans also say that much of the teaching of Epicurus is secret, and they do not permit everybody to read these writings.
The Stoics too say that Zeno wrote certain things which they do not readily permit their students to read—not, in fact, until they have given evidence that they intend to take their philosophy seriously. The followers of Aristotle also say that some of his writings are intended only for the inner circle; other writings can be understood by all, and are accessible even to those who are not followers of this school. The founders of the mysteries also—and they too were philosophers—have hidden their teachings in the form of myths, so that they should not be intelligible to all. Now if all these men took the trouble to conceal their purely human insights, and to prevent the unlearned from coming to the knowledge of them, is it not more fitting by far that the holy and blessed vision of those things which most truly are should have been kept hidden?
(Stromateis 5:56-8) Clement brings one example after another to demonstrate the hiddenness of divine teaching among pagans, Christians and Jews. One remarkable consequence of this is that Clement uses the word "grace" in the sense of God's gracious election of those to whom He will communicate this divine knowledge.
This must sound strange in western ears. For, in the thought of Clement, grace is related not to deliverance from sin but to election to knowledge. This knowledge is granted to those of whom God through His fore-knowledge knows that they will become good.
From what we have already said it will be clear that there are two hindrances in the way of the attainment of this knowledge. The first lies simply in the fact that the knowledge is itself veiled and hidden; the second arises from the incapacity and weakness even of the man who has been called, not least from the fact that heis tied to a physical body. This means, first, that instruction in the way of knowledge must proceed step by step; a sharp distinction is to be drawn, between elementary instruction and that which leads on to perfection. In the
second place, if man will attain to the vision of God, he must renounce his body; in consequence the ascent of the soul to this vision is a long and tedious business, and one that demands much self-denial:
For that reason, Plato says in the Second Book of the Republic:
"We must first sacrifice not a pigling, but some really splendid offering, and one that is hard to come by," and only then may we set ourselves to make enquiry after God. The apostle writes,
"Christ our paschal lamb has been sacrificed" (1 Cor. 5:7)—and that really is a sacrifice hard to come by, the Son of God himself, who sanctifies himself for our sake (John 17:19). Now the offering which is well-pleasing to God is the decisive separation of the soul from the body and its passions. This is, in fact, the true worship of God. For that reason Socrates was right when he spoke of philosophy as a preparation for death. .
. This was also the purpose of Pythagoras in the five-year silence which he imposed on those who studied with him, in order that they might turn away from sense-perception, and prepare themselves to see God with the spirit only. The chief thinkers among the Greeks had really learned their philosophy from Moses. For he laid it down that the burnt-offering must be stripped of itshideand cut in pieces. So the soul of one who seeks knowledge must be delivered from its earthly covering, and from the vain nonsense of the body and all its passions which arise from vain and false ideas; it must become free and put away all fleshly desires, in order that it may so become a fit and purified offering for the light.
(Stromateis 5:65.1-68. 3) The asceticism and the putting away of desire that Clement demands is not a meritorious work, by means of which the seeker can earn wisdom (Gnosis). It is a necessary preparation, necessary because of the nature of that Reality which man is setting himself to seek after. God is without body; therefore
He cannot be known in any bodily fashion or by any process of sense-perception. God can be known only in pure thought;
therefore those desires which interfere with thought must be set aside, together with the body from which they arise. In a word, the seeker after knowledge, if he is to attain, must become like the object of his knowledge, so that like is known by like.
A man who would know God must become like God. He must reach out towards God; if he is turned back upon himself, he will never find Him.
The principle can be expressed in a few words. It is not surprising that the practice of it is a long and exacting business.
In the earlier stages the learner must follow the guidance of his teacher, but in the final stage he is left to his own resources.
So there is more than an outward parallel between this process and the ascent of the soul as it was understood in the mystery-religions. Here we really are dealing with a mystery, in which the initiate will experience the direct action of God upon his soul.
Rightly, then, the mysteries among the Greeks begin with purifications, and among the non-Greeks with lustrations. Then follow the little mysteries, the aim of which is in a measure to prepare the candidate by instruction for that which is to follow.
The great mysteries, however, are concerned with the whole, in which there is now nothing more that can be learned; it is now a matter of seeing and apprehending the very inmost nature of reality.
We should attain to the level of purification through the confession of sin; we should then rise to the level of vision. .
. Then we take away from the body its natural characteristics; we rob it of extension in depth, then of extension in breadth, and finally of extension in length. Then the point which remains is a unity which, so to speak, has only position. When we have taken away from it even position, then what remains is a unity that is unity of thought only. So we must take away all that belongs to the body (and also what belongs to so-called bodiless existences); we must sink ourselves into the greatness of Christ and from there on move forward by means of holiness into the
Infinite; then we shall draw near in some way or other to awareness of the Almighty, and we shall learn not what He is but what He is not. We must not picture to ourselves in the Father of all things any form or movement or attitude or throne or place or right or left, though in writing of Him such expressions have been used.
We shall explain in the appropriate place what each of these expressions means. And He who is the first cause of all things is not in any place, but is raised high above space and time and name and imagination. For this reason
Moses says, "Reveal thyself to me".! By this he indicates as clearly as could be that man cannot attain to the knowledge of God through teaching or through words; God can be known only by that power which comes forth from God Himself. For that which men desire to know is without form and invisible.
The gracious gift of knowledge comes from God Himself through His Son.
(Stromateis 5:70-71.5) 1 Exodus 33:13.