The writings of Clement of Alexandria, Vol. 2 (of 2)Clement, of Alexandria, Saint
Religion
The writings of Clement of Alexandria, Vol. 2 (of 2)
Clement, of Alexandria, Saint
Theology -- Early works to 1800; Theology -- History -- Early Church, ca. 30-600
We say, then, that it is characteristic of the same persons to vilify
philosophy and run down faith, and to praise iniquity and felicitate
a libidinous life. But now faith, if it is the voluntary assent of
the soul, is still the doer of good things, the foundation of right
conduct; and if Aristotle defines strictly when he teaches that ποιεῖν
is applied to the irrational creatures and to inanimate things, while
πράττειν is applicable to men only, let him correct those who say that
God is the maker (ποιητής) of the universe. And what is done (πρακτον),
he says, is as good or as necessary. To do wrong, then, is not good,
for no one does wrong except for some other thing; and nothing that
is necessary is voluntary. To do wrong, then, is voluntary, so that
it is not necessary. But the good differ especially from the bad in
inclinations and good desires. For all depravity of soul is accompanied
with want of restraint; and he who acts from passion, acts from want of
restraint and from depravity.
I cannot help admiring in every particular that divine utterance:
“Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that entereth not in by the
door into the sheepfold, but climbeth up some other way, the same
is a thief and a robber. But he that entereth in by the door is the
shepherd of the sheep. To him the porter openeth.” Then the Lord says
in explanation, “I am the door of the sheep.”[834] Men must then
be saved by learning the truth through Christ, even if they attain
philosophy. For now that is clearly shown “which was not made known to
other ages, which is now revealed to the sons of men.”[835] For there
was always a natural manifestation of the one Almighty God, among all
right-thinking men; and the most, who had not quite divested themselves
of shame with respect to the truth, apprehended the eternal beneficence
in divine providence. In fine, then, Xenocrates the Chalcedonian was
not quite without hope that the notion of the Divinity existed even in
the irrational creatures. And Democritus, though against his will, will
make this avowal by the consequences of his dogmas; for he represents
the same images as issuing, from the divine essence, on men and on the
irrational animals. Far from destitute of a divine idea is man, who,
it is written in Genesis, partook of inspiration, being endowed with a
purer essence than the other animate creatures. Hence the Pythagoreans
say that mind comes to man by divine providence, as Plato and Aristotle
avow; but we assert that the Holy Spirit inspires him who has believed.
The Platonists hold that mind is an effluence of divine dispensation in
the soul, and they place the soul in the body. For it is expressly said
by Joel, one of the twelve prophets, “And it shall come to pass after
these things, I will pour out of my Spirit on all flesh, and your sons
and your daughters shall prophesy.”[836] But it is not as a portion
of God that the Spirit is in each of us. But how this dispensation
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account