_|_ | C O P | N E T CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA: The Original Christian Philosopher by MARK MOUSSA OUT OF THE CATACOMBS AND "HOUSE"-CHURCHES of early Christendom rose a new brand of Christian Orthodoxy under the leadership of the Alexandrian fathers of the second and third century. It is these ancestors that defended the Christian faith against the disdain and hatred launched against them and their religion. Yet, while their pains to defend the legitimacy of Christianity is still remembered today, it is their innovative theology, their Christian philosophy in particular, that set so many precedents for later believers to behold and effectively use. In essence, it is these fathers - Clement, Origen, Athenagoras, and many others - that developed new ways to manifest Christianity as a philosophical religion in response to pagan humiliation. Why, though, did these theologians have to defend themselves at all? The answer is the fact that Christianity was never going to remain an enclosed sect of believers. At one point or another Christianity was going to diffuse and spread across imperial society. Thus, the religion had to be presented as the least bit legitimate in its doctrines and yet on par intellectually with the philosophical sciences of the age. Otherwise, Christianity would have been ridiculed and refuted as too mysterious and not liable to be understood by the human mind. In one way or another, Clement and his followers had to present Christianity as a form of philosophy without ever compromising the essence of the Christian faith. At the same time, these early defenders of the faith worked against a twofold danger. While they genuinely tried to resolve the pagan antagonisms they experienced so much of for simply being Christians, it was their own fellow believers who were also hostile for any sort of theological compromise. As Lilla observed, it seemed that a chance of any peace between the Greeks and Christians was virtually impossible: On the one hand, the completely negative attitude of many uneducated Christians towards Greek philosophy prevented Christianity from assuming a scientific and philosophical character, and thus limited greatly its chances of success; on the other hand, the pagan world did not refrain from attacking the new religion.[1] However, the Alexandrian fathers found a solution. It was contained in the mission of the Alexandrian school and its teachers to develop once and for all a coherent synthesis of Greek science and religion. The result was Christian philosophy, which, Clement realized, was the only hope of joining the pagan and Christian parties together under one rational and acceptable Christian religion. While those in the like of Tertullian renounced the remolding of Christian doctrine to fit philosophical ideals[2], the Alexandrian party became a pioneer in both its fresh theological endeavors and in its success to finally spread the Christian faith among the intellectual circles of imperial society. Clement of Alexandria, one of the most revered deans of the Catechetical School for his philosophical theology and intellectual acumen, was one of the foremost figures who succeeded in uniting the missions of religion and science. In setting the stage for the feats of such theologians as Gregory of Nyssa and Athanasius the Apostolic, Clement had to first understand the origins of Greek philosophy and then apply his learning to form a readily accepted "rapport" of sorts with Greek intellectualism.[3] Yet, before turning to Clement and his teaching, an essential historical and intellectual background of sorts is due first. By the middle of the second century the city of Alexandria was already one of the intellectual capitals of the Roman Empire. Philosophy was prominent in the capital, and yet Christianity was also rising despite the popular hatred against it. For this the Coptic Church had already instituted its known Catechetical School to train pagan converts. As Dawson points out, the school was an ecclesiastically sponsored institution devoted to preparing candidates for Christian baptism by teaching them the basic tenets of the Christian faith.[4] While its earliest known dean was the Sicilian Pantaenus, Clement and Origen became its most famous leaders. As will be shown, Clement's goals and motivations for his theology were clearly influenced by the school in which he taught and was most known. The school itself was built on a tradition that always emphasized allegory more than literalism. Its approach to scripture and its overall exegesis mirrored "otherworldly" concerns.[5] Its teachers as a result tended to look for the hidden and spiritual meanings of what they confronted. Alexandrian theology, just like Platonism, was idealistic, not materialistic. From this one can see how easy it was for the school's teachers to reformulate their ideas to effectively unite Christianity with Greek thought. Clement of Alexandria was no exception to his school's line of thought. Titus Flavius Clemens was born towards the middle of the century from pagan parents and grew up in Athens. Like most of the students of his time, he was trained in all the classical works. Yet, his attraction towards the Christian faith brought him to Alexandria, where his philosophical and religious ideals were both met. He was tutored by the above mentioned Pantaenus, and took over the leadership of the school towards the end of the second century. Clement's writing was not voluminous. His three chief works were Exhortation to Conversion (Protrepticus), the Tutor (Paedagogus), and the Miscellanies (Stromateis). While he also had other treatises written specifically to guide rich converts in living by true Christian ethics, he strove, more than anything else, to unite the Christian faith and science. Clement realized that before he could start on his philosophical theology he had to prove that Christian philosophy was itself a justified solution for the enmity between the pagan and Christian communities. First, he had to convince Greek philosophers that their doctrines were actually very similar to Christian doctrines. Both share doctrines that are fundamental to their respective religions. Secondly, he had to present to his Christians a coherent enough argument that philosophy is not inherently evil. Instead, philosophy agrees for the most part with every Christian notion of both this world and eternity. While during Clement's time Christianity was still predominant only among slaves and uneducated women, he showed that his faith was not just for the ignorant. Christianity, depending on both faith and reason, crossed all intellectual boundaries, from the ignorant to the most educated, in imperial society. When Clement finally proved that Christianity was the ultimate goal of philosophers, and that at the same time philosophy was a necessary but not a dangerous means to convert more pagans, he went ahead and showed that Christianity and philosophy were actually a perfect match. Their unity and compatibility was all too easily derived by the Alexandrian pioneer. As for Christians, Clement perceived that if Christianity was to be more than a religion for the uneducated it must come to terms with Greek philosophy and Greek science; simple-minded Christians must no longer "fear philosophy as children fear a scarecrow".[6] Clement encouraged Christians to study philosophy. He felt that doing so would provide protection to a faith that was always under much attack. "Rather than attempting to define and restrict the concept of the Christian dogma, Clement searched even among heretical literature for material he could utilize, and as Quasten puts it '... it is not exaggeration to praise him as the founder of speculative theology.'"[7] In his Stromateis he listed several hypotheses as to why his argument was right. The first, as Lilla explains, was that he believed in the divine origin of Greek philosophy.[8] Secondly, he tried to prove that Christianity, instead, was actually the "true philosophy". The Greeks had absorbed some elements of truth, but their knowledge was mostly constrained in comparison to the light that Christians have been presented with. Greek thought, Clement claimed, was actually "stolen" from the Old Testament. He concluded that Greek philosophy was inferior to the perfection of the Christian faith. Even then, it was still very useful for the Christians, who could find it to be an excellent preparation to study Christian doctrines.[9] Clement also focused on how to convince his Greek foes. While Greek philosophy was clearly seen as "at least essentially and consistently rational, in the efforts of its earliest representatives to frame a rational interpretation of the cosmos and in connection with every problem to which their successors addressed themselves"[10], Clement considered it critical to go further in regarding the philosophy of his day. For him, philosophy was a true preparation for the gospel. Until the incarnation, he says, philosophy was essential to the Greeks for righteousness, but even after the incarnation it may still prove useful in leading them to Christ.[11] What the Law of Moses provided for the life of a Jew, philosophy enlightened the mind and heart of a learned Greek. Moreover, because the practice of philosophy was bestowed upon the best and most virtuous among the Greeks, the source of such learning was granted by the providence of God.[12] The Creator himself brought this righteousness upon both Gentiles and supposed barbarians, having a universal calling for one united faith. Philosophy was not unique it its own right but rather wholly depended on Christianity for its own ideology. THUS, IT IS CLEAR THAT CLEMENT WANTED TO USE A NEW BRAND OF PHILOSOPHY to attract Gentiles to the faith, and yet prove that Christianity is actually a "higher" philosophy, and therefore quite rational in itself. It is here then, that Clement comes forward with his presentation of "Christian" philosophy. He had a three-step approach for formulating his ideas. The first and most obvious was his effort to prove that philosophy had its origins not in the minds of Aristotle, Plato, or Pythagoras, but rather in the writings of the Old Testament itself. After proving his case, he goes on to show that philosophical and Christian perspectives of human reason, mind and soul are particularly similar, deriving from the same supreme God. At the same time, it is this supreme Creator and divine Being that is present in and out of this world, with His Logos appearing in flesh and providing the fulfillment of all promises for both pagans and Jews. Both philosophers and Christians alike had premonitions of a supernatural existence, but only the latter had a clear perspective of Him, due to the supremacy of their faith. As Charles Bigg explains, the Gospel in his view is not a fresh departure, but actually the meeting point of two converging lines of progress, of Hellenism and Judaism. To him all history is one, because all truth is one.[13] Philosophy and Christianity, then, are the product of "one river of truth".[14] Clement claimed that there existed an identity, arising from their common origin in God, between the law of nature and the law of instruction.[15] Eager to show the agreement between Greek philosophical doctrines and the teaching of Scripture, he adds that the followers of Pythagoras and of Plato had also held the view that reason was something which had been given by God to man.[16] Timothy relates that Greek science itself had one dominant source. "There is an element of truth which each of them contains, a fragment torn from, but still a part of, eternal truth, for many of the dogmas of the sects, although pitched on different keynotes, compose one harmony, and he who reassembles the separate fragments and restores their unity 'will without peril ... contemplate the perfect Logos, who is truth'".[17] As was a common characteristic of the teachers at the Catechetical School of Alexandria, Clement had looked up to the great master-minds of the Hellenic schools with a generous admiration, and infused the same spirit into his teachings and theology.[18] It is within the philosophical spectrum that he attempted to define the Christian man and the Christian God. While he would use Plato's system of this and the supernatural world to explain less understandable Christian mysteries to pagan proselytes, he took every opportunity to fuse the system of Stoic virtue to the mannerisms and behavior of a true Christian. Philosophy for Clement, and specifically the Stoic ideals of virtue, were not static but actually dynamic qualities for pagan converts to utilize in their Christian endeavors as new humans[19] in a new faith.[20] Yet, even though the Church and its school used philosophical ideals to explain one's conduct to a pagan proselyte, it still possessed purer morals and a more reasonable creed than pagan philosophy as evidence of its superior quality of life.[21] Even if a negative attitude could be accepted against certain negative aspects of philosophy, like Stoic pantheism or the subordinate view of the Logos, the merits of philosophy were strenuously asserted by Clement not only for its past but its continuous necessity for church members.[22] While Stoicism clearly had a defined materialistic view of the universe, denying any separate world of "spirit" and maintained that the universe only contained matter, Stoicism was still used with Christianity in two main areas. Clement used this side of philosophy to show that all human beings are rational and have within them the "spark of reason" or the "divine spark".[23] Secondly, Stoicism was used to show to pagan converts that Christian morals were actually quite similar to the ethics they had somewhat embraced in their Stoic beliefs. Clement here developed a doctrine quite unique to himself. He believed in a "seminal" Christ. Clement supposed that God had installed a notion in every human of an eternal God who had the essential role in creation of the world and humanity itself. Clement also supposed that humanity as a whole understood Christ and the eternal existence of another world in some form or another. It is obvious that Christians have the fullest understanding of Him, but philosophers alike received a clue to at least who the ultimate focus of worship really was. Clement gives examples of some of those that were given that "spark" of divine knowledge. Pythagoras, his disciples, and Plato are inspired "prophets" who had attained a partial knowledge of the truth.[24] "Plato in fact reaches a position not very far from that of the Psalmist who says 'The knowledge of God is the beginning of wisdom' - though he reaches this position by a very different road. Although Plato does not formally identify the Good with God, he speaks of its divine nature in such a way that formal identification would make little difference."[25] Moses, David and Plato were all "Christians before Christ". Secondly, Platonism held that every human being is comprised of soul and body. However, since the soul is a spiritual, not a material, entity, its true home is not in the material world and thus is imprisoned, in some sense, until it attains its freedom. One of the most famous sayings of the Platonists was "the body is a tomb" (ho soma sema)[26], which indicates the philosophy's distinct differentiation and separation of the spiritual and earthly realms. Against this, though, Clement had his objections and agreements. Clement clarified his Christian beliefs against Greek speculation by stating that their was an eternal unity between soul and body once a human being is created. While indeed flesh and spirit continuously fight each other[27], one will rise again with both soul and a transformed body of a different and glorious nature. Thus, as is clear about Clement, the body has a definite use and value. Clement, then, used Platonic thought in this case to reach pagan converts, but at the same time purified their beliefs to a more Christian standard. The end result is a Christianized philosophy, whether in Stoic or Platonic terms. Besides a human being's innate divine qualities, he must be admired also for his reasoning capabilities, even if it was not initially used for belief in Christ. "Philosophy for one and all is a gift, not of devils, but of God through the Logos, whose light ever beams upon his earthly image, the intelligence of man."[28] The Alexandrian theologian even used scripture to prove his theory. Biblical passages (Gen. 1:26, 27) showed that God bestowed upon man a rational principle which was an imitation of his own image, the Logos.[29] Thus, it does not matter whether one was a philosopher or a Jew. All had the same gift to realize the power, wisdom, and teachings of God by which they should live their lives. For Clement, there is a close kinship between the human mind and the universal Logos, the Son of God.[30] No matter how distorted their beliefs were, there was a divine element dwelling in them which allowed them to attain even the faintest reflection of the eternal truth. CLEMENT ALSO SHOWED SIMILARITIES BETWEEN PLATONIC THOUGHT AND THE CHRISTIAN GOD. Platonists had no doubt of the existence of a spiritual realm, and their main concern was trying to relate it to the impure and lustful world that humanity exists in. Their answer was that there exists a Source of All Things, named "The One", who has been existing eternally from the beginning and is the potential for all things. Secondly, Platonic thought assumed that creation was not possible without The Divine Mind, who is actually the thought process by which The One can possibly cause creation at any level. However, for the full mode of creation to occur The World-Soul has to join the above two entities and thus all concrete particular ideals of the world can come to fruition through their united action. It is obvious, first of all, that the Platonic view of the world had some correct intuition. As with the Christian Trinity, there exists a triune entity in the Platonic spiritual world. At the same time, creation for either party is impossible without the participation of all members of that entity. There is ample evidence in the creation story of the Trinitarian involvement of the seven days of creation.[31] Yet, neither Jesus Christ the Logos of God[32], who corresponded to The Divine Mind of Platonic thought, nor the Holy Spirit, the equivalent of The World-Soul, are subordinate to the Father. As opposed to Platonism in this note, all three hypostases in the Trinity are equal, unlike the pagan argument. Hence, the Christian religion is still superior theologically despite a quite coherent argument from the Greeks. Indeed, Clement actually proved that what was taught in the classical schools abroad was actually the same teachings that Christianity held so dear. One had to incorporate all that is believed in by Greek society, and finally produce a faith that is both appealing to the learned in philosophy yet profound to the believers. Clement, arguably, never failed to accomplish his goals of uniting the opposite ends of faith and science. All the more surprising, his Orthodoxy remained intact for later generations to take example from and marvel at. In doing so, he was apparently a professional teacher of the kind who in all parts dispensed the ideas of both philosophy and rhetoric.[33] He set both the example and the method by which the School would present Christianity to prospective proselytes and how a Christian was to approach and benefit from secular learning. In order for one to attempt to understand Clement's motives, one has to grasp both the role and the popularity of the Catechetical School during his time. The school itself was motivated to teach of the allegorical side of Christianity. It was famous for its role in developing catechisms of scripture far from a literal approach. Though Origen might have admittedly went too far, Clement's allegory itself related quite strongly to the highly idealistic philosophy he fought. There are a few implications that lie behind our interpretations and portrayals of Clement of Alexandria. The first and most obvious is the fact that Clement was quite successful in his endeavors. While this work does not do him any justice whatsoever, he was the first and probably most adventurous, next to Athanasius, in presenting Christianity in pagan terms, as explained above, to pagan proselytes. The sudden rise of pagan conversion during his time are quite a testimony to his success. Secondly, he philosophized Christianity in order to develop a Christian system of rational and quite understandable doctrines. He was able to speak of the mysterious Trinity in an Orthodox standard and yet reach out to Greek intellect. Thirdly, Clement proved that Christianity is not really an ignorant religion. He showed that both philosophers and Christians believed in the same doctrines, and that the faith was actually for one and all, regardless of their education. If Plato and Moses believed in the same God, then neither can really be called unlearned. On the contrary, both were geniuses in their own right. In setting a precedent for later generations, he showed that all the negative nuances of one's environment can actually be used and incorporated into theory and practice. A pure faith can indeed afford the sciences and new discoveries of everyday life. For that particular reason, more than any other, Clement of Alexandria fused Greek philosophy and the "true" religion, Christianity, to produce what we now know as Christian philosophy. While he pointed out the faults in Greek learning, he still used it without ever compromising the righteousness of his faith. As none can object, Clement was justified in Lilla's view: Since the universal truth represented by the Logos is scattered in the different systems of Greek philosophy, it naturally follows, in Clement's opinion, that he who wants to know the whole truth must gather together the best doctrines of the different systems; in this way he can build up a kind of absolute philosophy which is also identical with the truth.[34] Footnotes --------- [ 1] S. Lilla, Clement of Alexandria (London: Oxford University Press, 1971), 34. [ 2] "What has Athens to do with Jerusalem?" (Prescription Against Heretics 7) is a much quoted saying of his that exemplifies his hostile attitude towards Greek thought in general. The quotation could be found in E. Daily, etc., Tertullian: Apologetical Works. FOTC. (Washington: CUA Press, 1950). [ 3] H. B. Timothy, The Early Christian Apologists and Greek Philosophy (Assen: Van Gorcum, 1973), 13. [ 4] D. Dawson, Allegorical Readers and Cultural Revision in Ancient Alexandria (Oxford: University of California Press, 1992), 219. [ 5] D. Bell, A Cloud of Witnesses (Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian, 1989), 44. [ 6] E. R. Dodds, Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965), 106; cf. Strom. 1.6.80. [ 7] C. W. Griggs, Early Egyptian Christianity (Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991), 60. J. Quasten's quote is from his Patrology, vol. II (Westminster, Maryland: Christian Classics, 1986), 20. [ 8] Lilla, p. 10; cf. Strom. 1.20.1-2. [ 9] Lilla, p. 11; cf. Strom. 1.28.3, 1.80.5,6, and 1.28.4 for example. [10] Timothy, 10. [11] Bell, 46. [12] Timothy, p. 60. [13] C. Bigg, The Christian Platonists of Alexandria (Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1968 [repr. from 1913]), 76. [14] Strom. 1.5.29. [15] Timothy, p. 59. [16] C. Roth's introductory notes in her translation of Gregory of Nyssa, On the Soul and the Resurrection (Crestwood, New York: Saint Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1993), 14. [17] Strom. 1.8.57 quoted in Timothy, pp. 60-61. [18] Bigg., p. 70. [19] Eph. 4:24. [20] Bigg, p. 71. [21] Ibid., p. 72. [22] Ibid., p. 79. [23] Bell, p. 22. [24] Lilla, p. 17. [25] H. D. F. Kitto, The Greeks (Edinburgh, 1951), pp. 193-194, quoted from Timothy, p. 23. [26] Bell, pp. 23-26. [27] Gal. 5:17. [28] Bigg., p. 77. [29] Lilla, p. 15. [30] Ibid., p. 15. [31] Genesis 1 containing God speaking in the first person plural, only the beginning of Orthodox evidence that the creation was an act of the Trinity, not the Father alone. [32] John 1:1. [33] Stuart Hall, Doctrine and Practice in the Early Church (Grand Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdmans, 1992) 95. [34] Lilla, p. 54. BIBLIOGRAPHY ------------ PRIMARY SOURCES: --------------- (All three of the following have both patristic translations and introductory biographies of each respective author. None of them, however, give complete presentations of Clement's three chief works.) Bettenson, H. THE EARLY CHRISTIAN FATHERS (London: Oxford University Press, 1991 [eleventh ed.]). St. Gregory of Nyssa, trans. by C. Roth. ON THE SOUL AND THE RESURRECTION Crestwood, New York: St. Vladimir's Seminary Press, 1993. Jurgens, W. A. THE FAITH OF THE EARLY FATHERS (Collegeville, MN: The Liturgical Press, 1970). MacMullen, R. and E. Lane, eds. PAGANISM AND CHRISTIANITY; A SOURCEBOOK (Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1992). SECONDARY SOURCES: ----------------- Bell, D. N. A CLOUD OF WITNESSES Kalamazoo, MI: Cistercian Publications, 1989. Bigg, C. THE CHRISTIAN PLATONISTS OF ALEXANDRIA London: Oxford University Press, 1968, [repr.]. Blair, H. A. THE KALEIDOSCOPE OF TRUTH Worthing: Churchman Publishing, 1986. Chadwick, H. EARLY CHRISTIAN THOUGHT AND THE CLASSICAL TRADITION New York: Oxford University Press, 1966. ______. THE EARLY CHURCH New York: Penguin Books, 1967. Dawson, D. ALLEGORICAL READERS AND CULTURAL REVISION IN ANCIENT ALEXANDRIA Oxford: University of California Press, 1992. Dodds, E. R. PAGAN AND CHRISTIANITY IN AN AGE OF ANXIETY Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1965. Ferguson, J. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA New York: Twayne Publishers, 1974. Griggs, C. W. EARLY EGYPTIAN CHRISTIANITY Leiden: E. J. Brill, 1991. Gruner, R. "Science, Nature, and Christianity" JOURNAL OF THEOLOGICAL STUDIES 26 London, April 1975. Lilla, S. R. CLEMENT OF ALEXANDRIA London: Oxford University Press, 1971. Osborn, E. THE BEGINNING OF CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1981. Timothy, H. B. THE EARLY CHRISTIAN APOLOGISTS AND GREEK PHILOSOPHY Assen: Van Gorcum, 1972. Wagner, W. AFTER THE APOSTLES Minneapolis: Fortress Press, 1994. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- _|_ This article is one of many more articles about the Coptic Orthodox | Church, the Christian Apostolic Church of Egypt. These articles can be | retrieved from Copt-Net archives at http://pharos.bu.edu/cn/Menu.html COP|NET For more information, contact Copt-Net server at CN-request@cs.bu.edu -------------------------------------------------------------------------------