Podcast episode
June 12, 2020
Episode 94: Becoming Gods: Divinisation and Angelomorphic Transformation in Clement
Having set the stage in previous episodes, we are finally (somewhat, with trepidation) ready to discuss Clement’s endgame: face-to-face encounters with the deity, angelomorphic hierarchies in which Gnostic Christians can take their place – even the highest place of all – and a universal apokatastasis, whereby all created, intelligent beings are evolving, slowly but surely, toward god. This is western esotericism at its absolute finest.
Works Cited in this Episode:
Thanks to Geoffrey Smith for sending us his Valentinian sourcebook (which you can order here) ahead of its publication so we could cite his text and translation of the Extracts of Theodotus.
Primary:
In the references below, refs. in square brackets do not appear in the episode, but are extra citations for the zealous Gnostic reader who wishes to go ad fontes.
Clement:
- Clement gives an account of the Holy Spirit in his [lost] On Prophecy and On the Soul: Strom. V:13:88 [cf. Strom. I:24:158, IV:13:93].
- The ‘heptad of the spirit’ (τοῦ πνεύματος τῇ ἑπτάδι): Paed. 3:12:87.
- [The Logos/God as the world of Forms: e.g. Strom. IV.155.2; V.73.3; IV.156.1-2; V.38.7].
- ‘The operative power (ἡ δραστικὴ ἐνέργεια) is imparted by descent through those that are moved successively (δὶα τῶν προσεχέστερον κινουμένων)’: Strom. VI.16.148, trans. Bucur 2007.
- The 7 Protoktists as the ‘first-created nature of the angels’ (εἰς τὴν πρωτόκτιστον τῶν ἀγγέλων φύσιν …): Ecl. Proph. 57.4.
- The 7 ‘first-born rulers of the angels (οἱ πρωτόγονοι ἀγγέλων ἄρχοντες) who have the greatest power’: Strom. VI.16.142-143 [Cf. Strom. V.6.35, in an esoteric interpretation of the Temple drawing on Isa 11:1-2; Zech 4:2, 10; Rev 1:4; Rev 5:6; Rev 8:2].
- On the 7 Protoktists as primordial numerical plurality in the chain of being: Exc. Theod. 10: οἱ δὲ Πρωτόκτιστοι, εἰ καὶ ἀριθμῷ διάφοροι καὶ ὁ καθ’ ἕκαστον περιώρισται καὶ περιγέγραπται, ἀλλ’ ἡ ὁμοιότης τῶν πραγμάτων ἑνότητα καὶ ἰσότητα καὶ ὁμοιότητα ἐνδείκνυται. Οὐ γὰρ τῷδε μὲν πλέον, τῷδε δὲ ἧττον παρέσχηται τῶν Ἑπτά· οὐδ’ ὑπολείπεται τις αὐτοῖς προκοπή, ἐξ ἀρχῆς ἀπειληφότων τὸ τέλειον, ἅμα τῇ πρώτῃ γενέσει παρὰ τοῦ Θεοῦ διὰ τοῦ Υἱοῦ.
- The soul, ascending, is by herself, communes with the forms, and is like an angel, with Christ: Strom. IV.155.4: ὅταν γὰρ ψυχὴ γενεσέως ὑπεξαναβᾶσα καθ’ ἑαυτήν τε ᾖ καὶ ὁμιλῇ τοῖς εἴδεσιν … οἷος ἄγγελος ἤδη γενόμενος σὺν χριστῷ ἔσται … [cf. e.g. Strom. VII.56.7: τῶν ὑπὸ τῷ Σωτῆρι πρώτων τεταγμένων γενησόμενοι].
- On those from among the humans, angels, and archangels who are perfected to the first-created nature of the angels: οἱ τελειωθέντες εἰσὶν ἐξ ἀνθρώπων, ἀγγέλων, ἀρχαγγέλων εἰς τὴν πρωτόκτιστον τῶν ἀγγέλων φύσιν … Ecl. Proph. 57.4.
- ‘They have been named ‘gods,’ being destined to be enthroned together with the other gods that have been given the first rank by the Saviour’: Strom. VII.10.56-57 [cf. Strom. VI.13.1; 56.3].
- On the ‘celestial customs’, with need for a symbolon to pass by the guardian angels: Strom. IV.116.2 [cf. IV.117.2, VII.83.1].
On divinisation:
- Irenæus: Adv. Haer. I.71: πνεύματα νοερὰ γεγομένους.
- Paul: 1 Cor. 13:12: βλέπομεν γὰρ ἄρτι δι᾽ ἐσόπτρου ἐν αἰνίγματι, τότε δὲ πρόσωπον πρὸς πρόσωπον· ἄρτι γινώσκω ἐκ μέρους, τότε δὲ ἐπιγνώσομαι καθὼς καὶ ἐπεγνώσθην. Paul’s account of an ascent to the third heaven while still alive: II Cor. 12:2-4. Incidentally, Paul specifically says that this ascender to heaven was not himself; however, Christians have always read this account as really referring to Paul, which I guess means Paul is being either modest or esoteric here.
- Plato on divinisation ‘insofar as possible’: Theæt. 176b. After death: Laws 10: 904d. We quote Malcolm Schofield, editor, Tom Griffin, translator. Plato: Laws. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 2016.
- Apuleius de Plat. 2.249: nam vinculis liberata corporeis sapientis anima remigrat ad deos et pro merito vitæ purius castiusque transactæ hoc ipso usu deorum se condicioni conciliat [Cf. 2.255].
- Plotinus: ‘our concern is not to be sinless, but to be god’: Enn. I.2.6.2-3.
- Poemandres 26: δυνάμεις γενόμενοι ἐν θεῷ γίνονται. τουτό ἐστι τὸ ἀγαθὸν τέλος τοῖς γνῶσιν ἐσχηκόσι, θεωθήναι.
On Angels and Other Beings:
- Matt. 22:30; cf. Mark 12: 25, Luke 20:35-36.
- Psalms 81:6: θεοί ἐστε καὶ υἱοὶ ὑψίστου πάντες.
Secondary:
- Bucur: see publications listed below.
- Crispin Fletcher-Lewis. Luke-Acts: Angels, Christology and Soteriology. Number 94 in Wissenschaftliche Untersuchungen zum Neuen Testament. Mohn Siebeck, Tübingen, 1997. We cite pp. 14-15.
- Lilla 1971 (see below): Excerpta e Theod. 27 cannot be by Clement, because it is ‘Gnostic’: p. 175.
- Raoul Mortley. Mirror and 1 Cor 13:12 in the Epistemology of Clement of Alexandria. Vigiliae Christianae, 30:109–120, 1976.. We cite pp. 112-14.
- Oeyen 1966: see below.
- Andrei A. Orlov. The Enoch-Metatron Tradition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 2005.
Recommended Reading:
Most Generally:
- Bogdan Bucur. The Other Clement of Alexandria: Cosmic Hierarchy and Interiorized Apocalypticism. Vigiliae Christianae, 60:251–68, 2006.
- Idem. Revisiting Christian Oeyen: “The Other Clement” on Father, Son, and Angelomorphic Spirit. Vigiliae Christianae, 61:381–413, 2007.
- Idem. Angelomorphic Pneumatology: Clement of Alexandria and other Early Christian Witnesses. Brill, Leiden/Boston, MA, 2009a.
- Idem. The Place of the Hypotyposeis in the Clementine Corpus: An Apology for “The Other Clement of Alexandria”. Journal of Early Christian Studies, 17: 313–35, 2009b.
- Idem. Hierarchy, Eldership, Isangelia: Clement of Alexandria and the Ascetic Tradition. In Doru Costache, Philip Kariatlis, and Mario Baghos, editors, Alexandrian Legacy: A Critical Appraisal, pages 2–45. Cambridge Scholars Publishing, Newcastle-on-Tyne, 2015.
- G.W. Butterworth. The Deification of Man in Clement of Alexandria. JTS, 17:157–69, 1916.
- Christian Oeyen. Eine frühchristliche Engelpneumatologie bei Klemens von Alexandrien. Bern, 1966.
On Cosmic Ascent in Clement:
- G. Békés. De continua oratione Clementis Alexandri doctrina. Studia Anselmiana, 14, 1942. pp. 73-88.
- D.W. Bousset. Die Himmelsreise der Seele. Archiv fúr Religionswissenschaft, pages 136–69, 220–71, 1901. pp. 148-9.
- Salvatore Lilla. Clement of Alexandria: A Study in Christian Platonism and Gnosticism. Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1971. pp. 181-89.
- A. Méhat. Étude sur les ‘Stromates’ de Clément d’ Alexandrie. Paris, 1966. pp. 456-75.
On Angelification/Deification:
- John J. Collins. A Throne in the Heavens: Apotheosis in Pre-Christian Judaism. In John J. Collins and Michael Fishbane, editors, Death, Ecstasy, and Other Worldly Journeys, pages 43–58. State University of New York Press, Albany, NY, 1995.
- Andrei A. Orlov. The Enoch-Metatron Tradition. Mohr Siebeck, Tübingen, 2005.
Themes
Angelology, Angelomorphic Transformation, Astronomy, Clement of Alexandria, Cosmic Ascent, Divinisation, Esoteric Christianity, Metaphysics, Metempsychosis, Middle Platonism, Otherworld Journeys, Soul, Valentinianism
Kenneth Selens
June 13, 2020
John J. Collins also has a good article, “The Angelic Life” in Metamorphoses: Resurrection, Body and Transformative Practices in Early Christianity.
Albert Hand
June 22, 2020
I’m glad you spent so much time with Clement, knew almost nothing about this stuff. Mind blown as usual.
Travis Wade ZINN
September 7, 2020
Fantastic episode! – where/does Clement’s lineage reemerge in Christianity?
Earl Fontainelle
September 7, 2020
Well, Origen is a good place to start. Then the Cappadocian Fathers.
Travis Wade ZINN
September 7, 2020
Thanks, yes. I was thinking more in terms of a living tradition in more recent times, such as post enlightenment/Protestant reformation.
Earl Fontainelle
September 7, 2020
Ah, I see. I wonder that as well. We shall see as the podcast progresses and I speak with more folks. My guess, though, is that we’ll find Clement directly referenced mainly in the Orthodox tradition (and the Cambridge Platonists, who were Anglican), and perhaps in some esoteric dissenting Protestant groups. Keep in mind that the esoteric Stromateis and the Excerpta etc. was lost for many centuries in the far west, and our text is based entirely on the Laurentianus V 3, which was acquired from the East Roman world during the ‘Renaissance’. So anyone who did get into Clement in the Protestant world will necessarily have to have made some serious effort to get in touch with that text, which existed only in a handful of MSS.
Does anyone know better?
Mitchell Mignano
September 21, 2020
Really appreciate the deep dive into Clement, if for no other reason than that it provides some context for Rudolf Steiner’s systematic and elaborate treatment of the same topic. If you ever have the time or will, you can find some detailed explications of the ideas discussed in this episode all throughout Steiner’s work as he seems to have taken up the mission to make available as much of this previously ‘esoteric’ material before the 20th century had its way. I vaguely recall my mentor, William Irwin Thompson, lumping the Theosophists in with Aurobindo and Gurdjieff as avatars participating in the ‘planetization of the esoteric,’ his words.
You can even see Steiner’s affinity for Clement & Origen in this quick gloss paragraph from his 1917 lectures, ‘Building Stones for an Understanding of the Mystery of Golgotha:’
(pardon the clumsy grammar in this English translation)
“If we look back to Origen and to Clement of Alexandria we find men who were open-minded, men still imbued with the Greek spirit: yet they were also conscious of the significance of what had been accomplished through the Mystery of Golgotha. Their conception of this Mystery and of the crucified Christ is considered to be pure heresy in the eyes of all denominations today. In reality the great Church Fathers of the pre-Constantine age who are recognized by the Church are the worst heretics of all. Though they were aware of the significance of the Mystery of Golgotha for the evolution of the Earth, they gave no indication of wishing to suppress the path to the Mystery of Golgotha, the gate to the Mysteries or the path of the old clairvoyance, which had been the aim of the Christianity of Constantine. In Clement of Alexandria especially we see that his works are shot through with great mysteries, mysteries which are so veiled that it is even difficult for contemporary man to make head or tail of them. Clement speaks of the Logos for example, of the wisdom that streams through and permeates the Universe. He pictures the Logos as music of the spheres fraught with meaning, and the visible world as the expression of the music of the spheres, just as the visible vibration of the strings of a musical instrument is the expression of the sound waves. Thus, in the eyes of Clement, the human form is made in the image of the Logos; that is, to Clement the Logos is a reality and he sees the human form as a fusion of tones from the music of the spheres. Man, he says, is made in the image of the Logos. And in many of Clement’s utterances we find traces of that supernal wisdom that dwelt in him, a wisdom illuminated by the Christ Impulse. If you compare these utterances of Clement of Alexandria with the prevailing attitude today then the claim to recognize a man such as Clement of Alexandria without understanding him will appear as more than passing strange.”
Patrick Hegarty
October 21, 2020
I know you mention amulets at the end of the episode. Are the words “… having the name engraved upon his heart…” hinting at a lamen of some kind?
Earl Fontainelle
October 21, 2020
I’ll buy that as an intriguing suggestion! Or, alternately, not referring to a physical lamen, but to an internalised representation of one held in the heart?
Patrick Hegarty
October 21, 2020
It could be – if you look at the ‘priestly breastplate’ entry on wikipedia there is an image of a priest in a scene that I think matches the words at 30mins30secs in the podcast episode quite well.
Do you know of any studies of the ‘evolution’ of the mandala, amulet, talisman, lamen, priestly breast plate, sigil etc. ?
Earl Fontainelle
October 21, 2020
No. Please find some and post them here!
Lieven De Maeyer
February 16, 2021
Fascinating stuff, as always!
I’m interested in Clement’s notion of ‘understanding of the spirit’/’spiritual understanding’, mentioned around 20:00. Could anyone point me to a few relevant passages in the text? And what would be the Greek expression for it?
Earl Fontainelle
July 7, 2021
Lieven, sorry for the very delayed reply here. Check out Strom. III.64.1, where 2 Cor 4.16 is interpreted as having two senses, ‘visible’ and ‘spiritual’ (καλεῖ ἡ γραφὴ διχῶς, τόν τε φαινόμενον καὶ τὴν ψυχήν); V.1.7.5, where the apostle writes ‘spiritually’ for the sake of gnōsis of God (πνευματικῶς γοῦν ὁ ἀπόστολος ἐπὶ τῆς γνώσεως τοῦ θεοῦ γράφει); V.10.60.2, ‘spiritual understanding’ (συνέσει πνευματικῇ).