Irenaeus Thought Clement was a Heretic

[Secret Alias]

Clement Stromata 1.1.13.3 "But secret things are entrusted to speech, not to writing, as is the case with God." (τὰ δὲ ἀπόρρητα, καθάπερ ὁ θεός, λόγῳ πιστεύεται, οὐ γράμματι)

Irenaeus Adv Haer 3.2.1 "For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but viva voce"

[andrewcriddle]

I don't think Irenaeus is flat out hostile to oral tradition as such, he is more concerned with arguing that the alleged traditions of his opponents are bogus.

1. When, however, they are confuted from the Scriptures, they turn round and accuse these same Scriptures, as if they were not correct, nor of authority, and [assert] that they are ambiguous, and that the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition. For [they allege] that the truth was not delivered by means of written documents, but vivâ voce: wherefore also Paul declared, But we speak wisdom among those that are perfect, but not the wisdom of this world. 1 Corinthians 2:6 And this wisdom each one of them alleges to be the fiction of his own inventing, forsooth; so that, according to their idea, the truth properly resides at one time in Valentinus, at another in Marcion, at another in Cerinthus, then afterwards in Basilides, or has even been indifferently in any other opponent, who could speak nothing pertaining to salvation. For every one of these men, being altogether of a perverse disposition, depraving the system of truth, is not ashamed to preach himself.

2. But, again, when we refer them to that tradition which originates from the apostles, [and] which is preserved by means of the succession of presbyters in the Churches, they object to tradition, saying that they themselves are wiser not merely than the presbyters, but even than the apostles, because they have discovered the unadulterated truth. For [they maintain] that the apostles intermingled the things of the law with the words of the Saviour; and that not the apostles alone, but even the Lord Himself, spoke as at one time from the Demiurge, at another from the intermediate place, and yet again from the Pleroma, but that they themselves, indubitably, unsulliedly, and purely, have knowledge of the hidden mystery: this is, indeed, to blaspheme their Creator after a most impudent manner! It comes to this, therefore, that these men do now consent neither to Scripture nor to tradition.

Andrew Criddle

[DCHindley]

Clement of Alexandria was a sort of mystic, interested in hidden or secret things that written statements are supposed to hint at.

Irenaeus was a pragmatist, adopting a set of written documents as more-or-less authoritative, implying that if you don't have such written things to anchor your teachings upon, you can make anything up whatsoever if you claim it is secret doctrine.

However, Clement was a closet Platonist, and in Platonism there were written texts considered authentic, but some of his "deeper" doctrines were never written down, but discussed by the key members of his school over the centuries following Plato's death. These secret doctrines were drawn on by Aristotle, a former member of the Platonic school who went off to do his own thing (and very successfully) and even by Stoics.

So it is possible, in the Platonic tradition loosely held by Clement of Alexandria, to transmit secret (and I suppose "true") doctrines expressed only orally.

Perhaps he differs in his opinion about this from the opinions of middle Platonists of his day. While I have a mild interest in ancient philosophy, I am not an expert by any means. I also recall that Clement expressed had also adopted Platonic concepts using Stoic terminology, and he also adopted the Logos doctrines previously expressed by Philo of Alexandria and some middle Platonists of that time.

Among middle-Platonists, Aristotelians and Stoics was a wide variety of doctrine based on unwritten (secret) things supposedly spoken by Plato in lectures, etc. Some of these individual philosophers vigorously refuted the ways that other philosophers had interpreted them to mean, indicating that to some at least, individual philosophers could stray into philosophic heresy and be called to task for it.

So I suppose Clement could take offense at those who generate differences of opinion on secret matters, and thus reject them as speculative and not based on examples from Plato's published doctrines on cosmology.

DCH

[Secret Alias]

I just don't understand how Andrew doesn't agree that Irenaeus has Clement on his mind. How much more explicit does it have to be?

[DCHindley]

I just don't understand how Andrew doesn't agree that Irenaeus has Clement on his mind. How much more explicit does it have to be?

But I don't think Irenaeus from Asia Minor and Gaul had much if any contact with Alexandrian Christianity as represented by Clement of Alex. Their thinking processes are so different. Contradictory concepts can develop independently of one another, yes?

DCH

[TedM]

I just don't understand how Andrew doesn't agree that Irenaeus has Clement on his mind. How much more explicit does it have to be?

Are you saying that in all the world ONLY Clement had the opposing view, and therefore Irenaeus could be referencing ONLY Clement? If not, then what is it that links his view to Clement and not someone else?

[Secret Alias]

I am saying Clement perfectly fits the description and they were contemporaries. All other identifications are hyper-theoretical ones. There simply is no better candidate so as a working hypothesis Clement should be identified as an extremely likely candidate for Irenaeus's statement

[Secret Alias]

Irenaeus wrote from Rome. Come on.

[TedM]

I am saying Clement perfectly fits the description and they were contemporaries.

He is one you know of, but what about all those you don't know of? How do you know he should be the one singled out when there might have been 15 others who also perfectly fit the description? IOW what makes him more fitting than those others - other than the fact that you know about him and perhaps don't know about the others? You mentioned they were contemporaries. That's a start but surely you see there needs to be more than that so narrow it down to one individual. Is either philosophy so unique that nobody else in the world had it during that same time? Is Irenaeus the only person in the world that had that view, and Clement the only one that had the opposite view? If not, then what other than being contemporaries and your own knowledge of the two compels you to link the two so strongly?

[Secret Alias]

But why doesn't it mean something that we found a match. It's stunning that you would encourage theoretical choices over an actual match