The Conflict of Religions in the Early Roman Empire Part 37

He is no longer arguing; he surrenders to a tide of emotion, and is borne along singing, and as he sings, he seems to gather up all the music of the ancient world; we catch notes that come from Greek and Hebrew song, and the whole is woven together {283} into a hymn to "the Saviour," "my Singer," "our new Orpheus," that for sheer beauty, for gladness and purity of feeling is unmatched in early Christian literature. One comes back to it after years and the old charm is there still. That it can survive in a few translated fragments is hardly to be expected.

He begins with the famous singers of Greek myth--Amphion, Arion, and Eunomus with the gra.s.s-hopper... You will believe empty myths, he says, but "Truth's bright face seems to you to be false and falls under eyes of unbelief." But Cithaeron and Helicon are old. "Let us bring Truth and s.h.i.+ning Wisdom from heaven above to the holy mount of G.o.d and the holy choir of the prophets. Let her, beaming with light that spreads afar, illumine all about her them that lie in darkness, and save men from error." "My Eunomus sings not Terpander's strain, nor Capion's, not the Phrygian, the Lydian or the Dorian, but the eternal strain of the new harmony, the strain that bears the name of G.o.d, the new song, the song of the Levite, with

A drug infused antidote to the pains Of grief and anger, a most potent charm For ills of every name,[76]

a sweet and true cure of sorrow." Orpheus sang to enslave men to idols, to foolish rites, to shadows. "Not such is my singer; he has come, soon to end cruel slavery to tyrannic daemons; he transfers us to the gentle and kindly yoke of piety, and calls to heaven them that were fallen to earth."[77]

It was this new song that first made the whole cosmos a harmony, and it is still the stay and harmony of all things. It was this Logos of G.o.d who framed "the little cosmos, man," setting soul and body together by the holy spirit, and who sings to G.o.d upon this organ of many tones--man. The Logos himself is an organ for G.o.d, of all the harmonies, tuneful and holy.[78] What does this organ, this new song, tell us?

The Logos, that was before the Day-Star was, has appeared among men as a teacher,--he by whom all things were made. {284} As Demiurge he gave life; as teacher he taught to live well; that, as G.o.d, he may lavish upon us life forever. Many voices and many means has the Saviour employed for the saving of men. Lest you should disbelieve these, the Logos of G.o.d has himself become man that you might learn from man how man may become G.o.d.[79]

He casts a glance over Greek myths and mysteries--cymbals, tambourines, emblems, legends and uncleanness, the work of men who knew not the G.o.d who truly is, men "without hope and without G.o.d in the world." "There was from of old a certain natural fellows.h.i.+p of men with heaven, hidden in the darkness of their ignorance, but now on a sudden it has leapt through the darkness and s.h.i.+nes resplendent--even as that said by one of old,

See'st thou that boundless aether there on high That laps earth round within its dewy arms?

and again,

O stay of earth, that hast thy seat on earth, Whoe'er thou art, beyond man's guess to see;

and all the rest that the children of the poets sing."[80] But wrong conceptions have turned "the heavenly plant, man," from the heavenly life and laid him low on earth, persuading him to cleave to things fas.h.i.+oned of earth. So he returns to the discussion of pagan wors.h.i.+ps--"but by now your myths too seem to me to have grown old"--and he speaks of the daemon-theory by which the pagans themselves explained their religion. The daemons are inhuman and haters of men; they enjoy the slaying of men--no wonder that with such a beginning superst.i.tion is the source of cruelty and folly. But "no! I must never entrust the hopes of the soul to things without souls."[81] "The only refuge, it seems, for him who would come to the gates of "Salvation is the Divine Wisdom."[82]

{285}

He now reviews the opinions of the philosophers about G.o.d. The Stoics (to omit the rest) "saying that the divine goes through all matter, even the most dishonourable, shame Philosophy."[83] "Epicurus alone I will gladly forget."[84] "Where then are we to track out G.o.d, Plato?

'The Father and maker of this whole it is hard to find, and, when one has found him, to declare him to all is impossible.' In his name why?

'For it is unspeakable.' Well said! Plato! thou hast touched the truth!"[85] "I know thy teachers," still addressing Plato, "Geometry thou dost learn from Egyptians, Astronomy from Babylonians, the charms that give health from Thracians; much have the a.s.syrians taught thee; but thy laws--such of them as are true--and thy thought of G.o.d, to these thou hast been helped by the Hebrews."[86] After the philosophers the poets are called upon to give evidence--Euripides in particular.[87] Finally he turns to the prophets and their message of salvation--"I could quote you ten thousand pa.s.sages, of which 'not one t.i.ttle shall pa.s.s' without being fulfilled; for the mouth of the Lord, the holy spirit, spoke them."[88]

G.o.d speaks to men as to his children--"gentle as a father," as Homer says. He offers freedom, and you run away to slavery; he gives salvation, and you slip away into death. Yet he does not cease to plead--"Wake, and Christ the Lord shall lighten upon you, the sun of resurrection."[89] "What would you have covenanted to give, oh! men!

if eternal salvation had been for sale? Not though one should measure out all Pactolus, the mythic river of gold, will he pay a price equal to salvation."[90] Yet "you can buy this precious salvation with your own treasure, with love and faith of life ... that is a price G.o.d is glad to accept."[91] Men grow to the world, like seaweed to the rocks by the sea, and despise immortality "like the old Ithacan, yearning not for Truth and the fatherland {286} in heaven, and the light that truly is, but for the smoke."[92] It is piety that "makes us like G.o.d"--a reference to Plato's familiar phrase. G.o.d's function (_ergon_) is man's salvation. "The word is not hidden from any. Light is common and s.h.i.+nes upon all men; there is no Cimmerian in the reckoning. Let us hasten to salvation, to re-birth. Into one love to be gathered, many in number, according to the unity of the essence of the Monad, let us hasten. As we are blessed, let us pursue unity, seeking the good Monad. And this union of many, from a medley of voices and distraction, receives a divine harmony and becomes one symphony, following one coryphaeus (_ch.o.r.eutes_) and teacher, the Word, resting upon the Truth itself, and saying 'Abba Father.'"[93] Here indeed Philosophy and the Gospel join hands, when the Monad and Abba Father are shown to be one and the same.[94]

It is easy to see which of the thoughts represented by these names means most to Clement. "Our tender loving Father, the Father indeed, ceases not to urge, to admonish, to teach, to love; for neither does he cease to save"--"only, oh! child! thirst for thy Father, and G.o.d will be shown to thee without a price."[95] "Man's proper nature is to be at home with G.o.d;" as then we set each animal to its natural task, the ox to plough and the horse to hunt, so "man, too, who is born for the sight of heaven, a heavenly plant most truly, we call to the knowledge of G.o.d.... Plough, we say, if you are a ploughman, but know G.o.d as you plough; sail, if you love sea-faring, but calling on the heavenly pilot"[96] "A n.o.ble hymn to G.o.d is an immortal man, being built up in righteousness, in whom are engraved the oracles of truth"[97]; and very soon he quotes "Turn the other cheek" as a "reasonable law to be written in the heart."[98] {287} "G.o.d's problem is always to save the flock of men. It was for that the good G.o.d sent the good Shepherd.

The Logos has made truth simple and shown to men the height of salvation."[99] "Christ wishes your salvation; with one word he gives you life. And who is he? Hear in brief: the Word of truth, the Word of immortality, that gives man re-birth, bears him up to truth, the goad of salvation, who drives away destruction, who chases forth death, who built in men a temple that he might make G.o.d to dwell among men."[100]

The last chapter is a beautiful picture of the Christian life, full of wonderful language from Homer, the _Bacchae_ of Euripides, and the Mysteries, and in the centre of it--its very heart--"Come unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy-laden, and I will give you rest."

In the pa.s.sages here quoted from the _Protrepticus_ some of Clement's main ideas in the realm of Christian thought are clearly to be seen; and we have now to give them further and more detailed examination. We have to see what he makes of the central things in the new religion--of G.o.d, and the Saviour, and of man, and how he interprets the Gospel of Jesus in the language of Greek philosophy. It is to be noted that, whatever happened in the course of his work--and very few books are, when written, quite what the writer expected on beginning--Clement looked upon his task as interpretation. The Scriptures are his authorities--"he who has believed the divine Scriptures, with firm judgment, receives in the voice of G.o.d who gave the Scriptures a proof that cannot be spoken against."[101] Amid the prayers and hymns of the ideal Christian comes daily reading of the sacred books.[102] Clement has no formal definition of inspiration, but he loved the sacred text, and he made it the standard by which to judge all propositions. It is perhaps impossible to over-estimate the importance of this loyalty in an age, when Christian speculation was justly under suspicion on account {288} of the free re-modelling of the New Testament text that went with it. Clement would neither alter, nor excise, but he found all the freedom he wanted in the accepted methods of exegesis.

Allegory and the absence of any vestige of historical criticism--and, not least, the inability induced by the training of the day to conceive of a work of art, or even a piece of humbler literature, as a whole--his very defects as a student secured his freedom as a philosopher. He can quote Scripture for his purpose; the phrase will support him where the context will not; and sometimes a defective memory will help him to the words he wants, as we have seen in the case of the wors.h.i.+p of sun, moon and stars. To the modern mind such a use of Scripture is unwarrantable and seems to imply essential indifference to its real value, but in Clement and his contemporaries it is not inconsistent with--indeed, it is indicative of--a high sense of the value of Scripture as the _ipsissima verba_ of G.o.d. And after all a mis-quotation may be as true as the most authentic text, and may help a man as effectually to insight into the thoughts of G.o.d.

[Sidenote: The Logos]

We have seen that Clement quarrelled with the Stoics for involving G.o.d in matter--"even the most dishonourable." The World-soul was, in fact, repugnant to men who were impressed with the thought of Sin, and who a.s.sociated Sin with matter. This feeling and a desire to keep the idea of G.o.d disentangled from every limitation led to men falling back (as we saw in the case of Plutarch) on the Platonic conception of G.o.d's transcendence. Neo-Platonism has its "golden chain" of existence descending from Real Being--G.o.d--through a vast series of beings who _are_ in a less and less degree as they are further down the scale. It is not hard to sympathize with the thoughts and feelings which drew men in this direction. The best thinkers and the most religious natures in the Mediterranean world (outside the circle of Jesus, and some Stoics) found the transcendence of G.o.d inevitably attractive, and then their hearts sought means to bridge the gulf their thoughts had made. For now he was out of all knowledge, and away beyond even revelation; for revelation involved relation and limitation, and G.o.d must be absolute.

{289}

We have seen how Plutarch found in the existence of daemons a possibility of intercourse between G.o.ds and men, while above the daemons the G.o.ds, he implies, are in communication with the remote Supreme.

But for some thinkers this solution was revolting. Philo, with the great record before him of the religious experience of his race, was not prepared to give up the thought "O G.o.d, thou art my G.o.d."[103]

Linking the Hebrew phrase "the word of the Lord" with the Stoic Logos Spermaticos and Plato's Idea, he found in the resulting conception a divine, rational and spiritual principle immanent in man and in the universe, and he also found a divine personality, or quasi-personality, to come between the Absolute and the world. He pictures the Logos as the Son of G.o.d, the First-born, the oldest of angels, the "idea of ideas," and again as the image of G.o.d, and the ideal in whose likeness man was made. As the amba.s.sador of G.o.d, and High Priest, the Logos is able to mediate directly between man and G.o.d, and bridges the gulf that separates us from the Absolute.[104] More than anything else, this great conception of Philo's prepared the way for fusion of Greek thought and Christianity. Clement is conspicuously a student and a follower of Philo--nor was he the first among Christian writers to feel his influence.

Clement, as already said, professed himself an eclectic in philosophy, and of such we need not expect the closest reasoning. Our plan will be to gather pa.s.sages ill.u.s.trative of his thoughts--we might almost say of his moods--and set side by side what he says from time to time of G.o.d.

On such a subject it is perhaps impossible to hope for logic or consistency except at the cost of real aspects of the matter in hand.

Something will be gained if we can realize the thoughts which most moved the man, even though their reconciliation is questionably possible. This doubt however does not seem to have occurred to himself, for he connects the dogmata of the philosophers and the teaching of the New Testament as if it were the most natural thing in the world.

{290}

To begin with the account of G.o.d which Clement gives in philosophical language. "The Lord calls himself 'one' (_hen_)--'that they all may be one ... as we are one; I in them, and thou in me, that they may be perfected into one.' Now G.o.d is 'one' (_hen_) and away beyond the 'one' (_hens_) and above the Monad itself."[105] Again, after quoting Solon and Empedocles and "John the Apostle" ("no man hath seen G.o.d at any time"), Clement enlarges on the difficulty of speaking of G.o.d:--"How can that be expressed, which is neither genus, nor differentia, nor species, neither indivisible, nor sum, nor accident, nor susceptive of accident? Nor could one properly call him a whole (_holon_); for whole (_t holon_) implies dimension, and he is Father of the Whole (_ton holon_). Nor could, one speak of his parts, for the one is indivisible and therefore limitless, not so conceived because there is no pa.s.sing beyond it, but as being without dimension or limit, and therefore without form or name. And if we ever name him, calling him, though not properly, one, or the good, or mind, or absolute being, or father, or G.o.d, or demiurge, or lord, we do not so speak as putting forward his name; but, for want of his name, we use beautiful names, that the mind may not wander at large, but may rest on these. None of these names, taken singly, informs us of G.o.d; but, collectively and taken all together, they point to his almighty power. For predicates are spoken either of properties or of relation, and none of these can we a.s.sume about G.o.d. Nor is he the subject of the knowledge which amounts to demonstration; for this depends on premisses (_protera_) and things better known (_gnorimotepa_);[106] but nothing is anterior to the unbegotten. It remains then by divine grace and by the Logos alone that is from him to perceive the unknowable."[107] Again, "G.o.d has no natural relation (_physiken schesin_) to us, as the founders of heresies hold (not though he make us of what is not, or fas.h.i.+on us from matter, for _that_ is not at all, and _this_ is in every point different from G.o.d)--unless you venture to say that we are part of him and of one essence (_h.o.m.oousious_) with G.o.d; and I do not understand how anyone who {291} knows G.o.d will endure to hear that said, when he casts his eye upon our life and the evils with which we are mixed up.

For in this way (and it is a thing not fit to speak of) G.o.d would be sinning in his parts, that is, if the parts are parts of the whole and complete the whole--if they do not complete it, they would not be parts. However, G.o.d, by nature (_physei_) being rich in pity (_eleos_), of his goodness he cares for us who are not his members nor by nature his children (_mete morion onton autou mete physei teknon_).

Indeed this is the chief proof of G.o.d's goodness, that though this is our position with regard to him, by nature utterly 'alienated' from him, he nevertheless cares for us. For the instinct of kindness to offspring is natural (_physike_) in animals, and so is friends.h.i.+p with the like-minded based on old acquaintance, but G.o.d's pity is rich towards us who in no respect have anything to do with him, I mean, in our being (_ousia_) or nature or the peculiar property of our being (_dynamei te oikeia tes ousias hemon_), but merely by our being the work of His will."[108] "The G.o.d of the Whole (_ton helon_), who is above every voice and every thought and every conception, could never be set forth in writing, for his property is to be unspeakable."[109]

It follows that the language of the Bible is not to be taken literally when it attributes feelings to G.o.d. Clement has cited texts which speak of "joy" and "pity" in connexion with G.o.d, and he has to meet the objection that these are moods of the soul and pa.s.sions (_tropas psyches ka pathe_). We mistake, when we interpret Scripture in accordance with our own experience of the flesh and of pa.s.sions, "taking the will of the pa.s.sionless G.o.d (_tou apathous theou_) on a line with our own perturbations (_kinemasi_). When we suppose that the fact in the case of the Almighty is as we are able to hear, we err in an atheistic way. For the divine was not to be declared as it _is_; but as we, fettered by flesh, were able to understand, even so the prophets spoke to us, the Lord accommodating himself to the weakness of men with a mind to save them {292} (_soterios_)." Thus the language of our emotions, though not properly to be employed, is used to help our weakness.[110] For G.o.d is, in fact, "without emotion, without wrath, without desire" (_apathes_, _athumos_, _anepithumetos_).[111] Clement repeatedly recurs with pleasure to this conception of "Apathy"; it is the mark of G.o.d, of Christ, of the Apostles, and of the ideal Christian, with whom it becomes a fixed habit (_hexis_).[112]

G.o.d is not like a man (_anthropoeides_), nor does he need senses to hear with, nor does he depend on the sensitiveness of the air (_t eupathes tou heros_) for his apprehensions, "but the instantaneous perception of the angels and the power of conscience touching the soul--these recognize all things, with the quickness of thought, by means of some indescribable faculty apart from sensible hearing. Even if one should say that it was impossible for the voice, rolling in this lower air, to reach to G.o.d, still the thoughts of the saints (_agion_) cleave, not the air alone, but the whole universe as well. And the divine power instantly penetrates the whole soul like light. Again do not our resolves also find their way to G.o.d, uttering a voice of their own? And are not some things also wafted heavenward by the conscience?

... G.o.d is all ear and all eye, if we may make use of these expressions."[113] Thus it would seem that G.o.d is not so far from every one of us as we might have supposed from the pa.s.sages previously quoted, and the contrast between the two views of G.o.d grows wider when we recall Clement's words in the _Protrepticus_ about the Heavenly Father. While a Greek, the pupil of the philosophers, could never use the language of a Jew about "G.o.d our Father" with the same freedom from mental reservation, Clement undoubtedly speaks of G.o.d at times in the same spirit that we feel in the utterances of Jesus. He goes beyond what contemporary philosophers would have counted suitable or desirable, as we can see in the complaints which Celsus makes of Christian language about G.o.d, though Celsus, of course, is colder than the religious {293} of his day. But the main difference between Christians and philosophers was not as to G.o.d the Father, but as to Christ.

When Clement, in his work of restatement, came to discuss Christ, he found Philo's Logos ready to his hand and he was not slow to use it.

It is characteristic that, just as he unquestioningly accepted the current philosophic account of G.o.d and saw no great difficulty in equating a G.o.d best described in negations with the Abba Father of Jesus, so he adopted, not less light-heartedly, the conflate conception of the Logos. Whether its Platonic and Stoic elements would hold together; whether either of them was really germane to the Hebrew part; whether in any case any of the three sets of const.i.tuents corresponded with anything actually to be reached by observation or experience; or whether, waiving that point, the combination was equal to its task of helping man to conceive of G.o.d at once as immanent and transcendent, Clement hardly inquired. So far he followed Philo. Then came in a new factor which might well have surprised Plato, Zeno and Philo alike.

Following once more, but this time another leader, Clement equates the Philonian Logos with the historic Jesus of Nazareth.

So stated, the work of Clement may well look absurd. But after all he is not the only man who has identified the leading of instinct with philosophic proof. In succession he touched the central thoughts of his various leaders, and he found them answer to cravings within him.

He wanted a G.o.d beyond the contagion of earth, Supreme and Absolute; and Plato told him of such a G.o.d. Yet the world needed some divine element; it must not be outside the range and thought of G.o.d; and here the conception of divine Reason, linking man and nature with G.o.d Himself, appealed to his longing. Lastly the impossibility of thinking Jesus and his work to be accidental, of conceiving of them as anything but vitally bound up with the spiritual essence of all things, with G.o.d and with G.o.d's ultimate mind for man and eternity, was the natural outcome of entering into the thoughts of Jesus, of realizing his personality and even of observing his effect upon {294} mankind.[114]

When one remembers how in every age men have pa.s.sed through one form and another of experience, and have then compacted philosophies to account for those experiences, have thought their constructions final, and have recommended their theories as of more value than the facts on which, after reflection, slight or profound, but perhaps never adequate, they have based them, it will not seem strange that Clement did the same.

Ah yet, when all is thought and said, The heart still overrules the head; Still what we hope we must believe, And what is given us receive.

The old task is still to do. The old cravings are still within us; still the imperishable impulse lives to seek some solution of the great question of the relations of G.o.d and the soul and the universe, which may give us more abiding satisfaction than Clement's can now have, and which will yet recognize those old cravings, will recognize and meet them, not some but all of them.

"Most perfect, and most holy of all," says Clement, "most sovereign, most lordly, most royal and most beneficent, is the nature of the Son, which approaches most closely to the One Almighty Being. The Son is the highest Pre-eminence, which sets in order all things according to the Father's will, and steers the universe aright, performing all things with unwearying energy, beholding the Father's secret thoughts through his working. For the Son of G.o.d never moves from his watch-tower, being never divided, never dissevered, never pa.s.sing from place to place, but existing everywhere at all times and free from all limitations. He is all reason, all eye, all light from the Father, seeing all things, hearing all things, knowing all things, with power searching the powers. To him is subjected the whole army of angels and of G.o.ds--to him, the Word of the Father, who has received the holy administration by reason of Him who subjected it to him; through whom also all men belong to him, but some by way of knowledge, while others have not yet attained to this; some as friends, some as faithful servants, others as servants merely."[115]

{295}

[Sidenote: The Logos]

The Logos is the source of Providence, the author, as already seen, of all human thought and activity, of the beauty of the human body too,[116] Saviour and Lord at once of all men--man being "his peculiar work," for into him alone of animals was a conception of G.o.d instilled at his creation. "Being the power of the Father, he easily prevails over whomsoever he will, not leaving even the smallest atom of his government uncared for."[117] "He it is in truth that devises the bridle for the horse, the yoke for the bull, the noose for the wild beast, the rod for the fish, the snare for the bird; he governs the city and ploughs the land, rules and serves, and all things he maketh;

Therein he set the earth, the heaven, the sea, And all the stars wherewith the heaven is crowned.

O the divine creations! O the divine commands! This water, let it roll within itself; this fire, let it check its rage; this air, let it spread to aether; and let earth be fixed and borne, when I will it. Man I yet wish to make; for his material I have the elements; I dwell with him my hands fas.h.i.+on. If thou know me, the fire shall be thy slave."[118]

"All[119] gaze on the supreme Administrator of the universe, as he pilots all in safety according to the Father's will, rank being subordinated to rank under different leaders till in the end the Great High Priest is reached. For on one original principle, which works in accordance with the Father's will, depend the first and second and third gradations; and then at the extreme end of the visible world there is the blessed ordinance of angels; and so, even down to ourselves, ranks below ranks are appointed, all saving and being saved by the initiation and through the instrumentality of One. As then the remotest particle of iron is drawn by the breath (_pneumati_) of the stone of Heraklea [the magnet] extending through a long series of iron rings, so also through the attraction of the holy spirit (_pneumati_) the virtuous are adapted to the highest {296} mansion; and the others in their order even to the last mansion; but they that are wicked from weakness, having fallen into an evil habit owing to unrighteous greed, neither keep hold themselves nor are held by another, but collapse and fall to the ground, being entangled in their own pa.s.sions."[120] This last clause raises questions as to evil and freewill. Clement believed in freewill; for one thing, it was necessary if G.o.d was to be acquitted of the authors.h.i.+p of evil. "G.o.d made all things to be helpful for virtue, in so far as might be without hindering the freedom of man's choice, and showed them to be so, in order that he who is indeed the One Alone Almighty might, even to those who can only see darkly, be in some way revealed as a good G.o.d, a Saviour from age to age through the instrumentality of his Son, and in all ways absolutely guiltless of evil."[121]

Clement also brings in the Platonic Idea to help to express Christ.

"The idea is a thought of G.o.d (_ennoema_), which the barbarians have called G.o.d's Logos."[122] "All the activity of the Lord is referred to the Almighty, the Son being, so to speak, a certain activity (_energeia_) of the Father,"[123] and a little lower he adds that the Son is "the power (_dynamis_) of the Father."[124] As such he may well be "above the whole universe, or rather beyond the region of thought."[125] And yet, as we have seen, he leans to the view that the Logos is a person--the Great High Priest. In criticizing him, it is well to remember how divergent are the conceptions which he wishes to keep, and to keep in some kind of unity.

Once again, in many of Clement's utterances upon the Logos there is little that Philo, or perhaps even a pagan philosopher, could not have approved; but through it all there is a new note which is Clement's own and which comes from another series of thoughts. For it is a distinctive mark of Clement's work that the reader rises from it impressed with the idea of "the Saviour." The _Protrepticus_ is full of the thought of that divine love of men, warm and active, which {297} Jesus a.s.sociated with "your heavenly Father," but which Clement, under the stress of his philosophy must connect with the Logos--"cleansing, saving and kindly; most manifest G.o.d indeed, made equal with the ruler of the universe."[126] He is our "only refuge" (_mone kataphyge_), the "sun of resurrection," the "sun of the soul."[127] And yet one group of ideas, familiar in this connection, receives little notice from Clement. The Logos is indeed the Great High Priest, but the symbolism of priest and sacrifice and sin-bearer is left rather remarkably unemphasized. He is "the all-availing healer of mankind,"[128] but his function is more to educate, to quicken, and to give knowledge than to expiate.

The great and characteristic feature of the Logos is that "he took the mask (_prosopeion_) of a man and moulded it for himself in flesh and played a part in the drama of mankind's salvation; for he was a true player (_gnesios agonistes_), a fellow-player with the creature; and most quickly was he spread abroad among all men, more quickly than the sun, when he rose from the Father's will, and proved whence he was and who he was by what he taught and showed, he, the bringer of the covenant, the reconciler, the Logos our Saviour, the fountain of life and peace, shed over the whole face of the earth, by whom (so to say) all things have become an ocean of blessings."[129] Though essentially and eternally free from pa.s.sion (_apathes_) "for our sake he took upon him our flesh with its capacity for suffering" (_ten patheten sarka_)[130] and "descended to sensation (_aisthesis_)."[131] "It is clear that none can in his lifetime clearly apprehend G.o.d; but 'the pure in heart shall see G.o.d' when they come to the final perfection.

Since, then, the soul was too weak for the perception of what _is_ (_ton onton_), we needed a divine teacher. The Saviour is sent down to teach us how to acquire good, and to give it to us (_ch.o.r.egos_)--the secret and holy knowledge of the great Providence,"[132]--"to show G.o.d to foolish men, to end corruption, {298} to conquer death, to reconcile disobedient children to their Father.... The Lord pities, educates, encourages, exhorts, saves and guards, and as the prize of learning he promises us out of his abundance the kingdom of heaven--this alone giving him joy in us, that we are saved."[133] All this was foreknown before the foundation of the world; the Logos was and is the divine beginning or principle of all things, "but because he has now taken the long-hallowed name, the name worthy of his power, the Christ, that is why I call it the new song."[134] And indeed he is right, for "the Epiphany, now s.h.i.+ning among us, of the Word that was in the beginning and before it"[135] is new in philosophy; and it is a new thing also that the doctrine of a Logos should be "essentially musical." The Incarnation of the divine Teacher is the central fact for Clement.

The identification of this incarnate Logos with Jesus of Nazareth was part of Clement's inheritance, and as usual he accepted the form which the tradition of the Church had a.s.sumed. But Clement's theology altered the significance of Jesus. For the Abba Father whom Jesus loved, he subst.i.tuted the great Unknowable, and then he had to bring in a figure unfamiliar to the thought of Jesus--the Logos, whom he clothed with many of the attributes of the Father of Jesus, and then identified with Jesus himself. Not unnaturally in this combination the historic is outweighed by the theoretic element, and indeed receives very little attention. The thought of Incarnation is to Clement much more important than the Personality.