Freethought & Rationalism Archive

stephan huller · 03-21-2011, 03:00 PM

hi ph2ter DCH

I never thought of consulting the Physiologus but your assistance has proved invaluable. Already I see Tertullian's description of Marcion as the 'self-castrating castor' and Clement's identification of the hyena as a hermaphrodite comes from here. Great resource! Thanks so much

stephan huller · 03-24-2011, 10:31 PM

I have actually proved that Clement identified Jesus as the unicorn from a lost work of his cited in a later writer (you see how important 'lost works of Clement are' now?) This brings to a close the subject of whether Alexandrian Christians referenced their relationship with Jesus in ways that might seem 'homosexual' to outside observers. The reference comes from Macarius Chrysocephalus: Parable of the Prodigal Son, Luke xv., Oration on Luke xv., Towards the Close:

Quote:

To the sons, then, who come to Him, the Father gives the calf, and it is slain and eaten. But those who do not come to Him He pursues and disinherits, and is found to be a most powerful bull. Here, by reason of His size and prowess, it is said of Him, “His glory is as that of an unicorn.” [Numb. xxiii. 22] And the prophet Habakkuk sees Him bearing horns, and celebrates His defensive attitude—“horns in His hands.” [Hab. iii. 4]. Wherefore the sign shows His power and authority,—horns that pierce on both sides, or rather, on all sides, and through everything. And those who eat are so strengthened, and retain such strength from the life-giving food in them, that they themselves are stronger than their enemies, and are all but armed with the horns of a bull; as it is said, “In thee shall we butt our enemies.”

The citation is universally regarded as originating in some lost work of Clement. The point of this of course is that the abovementioned line:

Quote:

Rightly, then, are those called children who know Him who is God alone as their Father, who are simple, and infants, and guileless, who are erastai of the horns of the unicorns.

clearly infer that the Christians Clement was referring to are erastai of Christ, thus signifying a 'direct hit' against the claims of those who promote the hoax hypothesis. For the claim is always made, in some for or other, that 'Clement would never have conceived of the relationship between the presbytery and Jesus in flagrantly erotic terms. This claim can now at long last be put to rest.

andrewcriddle · 03-26-2011, 07:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stephan huller

...............
I have actually proved that Clement identified Jesus as the unicorn from a lost work of his cited in a later writer (you see how important 'lost works of Clement are' now?) This brings to a close the subject of whether Alexandrian Christians referenced their relationship with Jesus in ways that might seem 'homosexual' to outside observers. The reference comes from Macarius Chrysocephalus: Parable of the Prodigal Son, Luke xv., Oration on Luke xv., Towards the Close:

Quote:

To the sons, then, who come to Him, the Father gives the calf, and it is slain and eaten. But those who do not come to Him He pursues and disinherits, and is found to be a most powerful bull. Here, by reason of His size and prowess, it is said of Him, “His glory is as that of an unicorn.” [Numb. xxiii. 22] And the prophet Habakkuk sees Him bearing horns, and celebrates His defensive attitude—“horns in His hands.” [Hab. iii. 4]. Wherefore the sign shows His power and authority,—horns that pierce on both sides, or rather, on all sides, and through everything. And those who eat are so strengthened, and retain such strength from the life-giving food in them, that they themselves are stronger than their enemies, and are all but armed with the horns of a bull; as it is said, “In thee shall we butt our enemies.”

The citation is universally regarded as originating in some lost work of Clement. ...

FWIW this fragment is not included by Stahlin among the Clementine fragments (brief discussion volume III p XXXII). My German is weak but the Lemma for this citation apparently reads PAIDAG ALEXANDRI(AS) and does not explicity mention Clement.

The passage feels Clementine but in its present form can't be because of the mention of Novatus.

Quote:

But whom Christ finds lost, after sin committed since baptism, those Novatus, enemy of God, resigns to destruction

The ANF translator regarded the first part of the citation, (containing the passage about the unicorn), as Clementine but the ending as post-Clementine.

This is IMO possible but speculative.

Andrew Criddle

stephan huller · 03-26-2011, 08:47 AM

I haven't actually read what Stahlin has to say. I had seen it included in every collection I had ever come across. My only way of judging things is this parallel found in Macarius's writings and a catena on Luke:

From the Catena on Luke, Edited by Corderius.

Quote:

Luke iii. 22. God here assumed the “likeness” not of a man, but “of a dove,” because He wished, by a new apparition of the Spirit in the likeness of a dove, to declare His simplicity and majesty.

Quote:

Macarius Chrysocephalus: Oration VIII. On Matt. viii., and Book VII. On Luke xiii.
Therefore God does not here take the semblance of man, but of a dove, because He wished to show the simplicity and gentleness of the new manifestation of the Spirit by the likeness of the dove. For the law was stern, and punished with the sword; but grace is joyous, and trains by the word of meekness. Hence the Lord also says to the apostles, who said that He should punish with fire those who would not receive Him, after the manner of Elias: “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of.”

To be honest, I have went through every known text of Clement that I could find and I have not found any reference to the dove so it is entirely possible that this is not Clementine. If you believe that Clement had access to the canonical narrative then my point is irrelevant.

I also want to make clear that looking back my choice of illustrations might have been seen to be in bad taste or to make it seem as if I believe that Clement viewed Christ in this way. At my blog (where I posted a more developed post) I emphasized that I don't believe that Clement or the Alexandrian tradition actually envisioned Christ in this way (i.e. the man in the picture). My point was that we are dealing with Roman misconceptions not an actual understanding of sexual relations (the misunderstanding developing from a common use of Plato).

I was only trying to present miconceptions not realities in Alexandrian Christianity. Sorry about any confusion about my motives. You'd be surprised about my real feelings nad motivations.

Thread Tools	Search this Thread
Show Printable Version	Search this Thread: Advanced Search

03-21-2011, 03:00 PM	#11
stephan huller Veteran Member Join Date: Jun 2010 Location: seattle, wa Posts: 9,337	hi ph2ter DCH I never thought of consulting the Physiologus but your assistance has proved invaluable. Already I see Tertullian's description of Marcion as the 'self-castrating castor' and Clement's identification of the hyena as a hermaphrodite comes from here. Great resource! Thanks so much

Freethought & Rationalism Archive

The archives are read only.