Resurrection in 2 Clement
(avg. read time: 5–11 mins.)
Unlike 1 Clement, 2 Clement is not a letter so much as it is a homily. It was traditionally transmitted alongside 1 Clement, but it is not clear that it is by the same person, nor is there any internal claim to that effect (and indeed its attribution to Clement was considered dubious in the Early Church). It could be that they were related to the same congregations, and it would make sense if it was preserved alongside 1 Clement if both texts were addressed to Corinth and went forth from there to other Christian communities. But that is speculative.
What is clearer is that hope for resurrection and the larger eschatological reality it will be part of suffuses the text at both explicit and implicit levels. The first explicit references to resurrection appear in ch. 9, where we have some of the earliest declarations of the hope for the resurrection of the flesh, as the preacher tells his audience not to say that this flesh will not be judged nor raised (ἀνίστημι; 9:1). After all, how were we first saved and enlightened to see but as fleshly beings (9:2)? As we were called in the flesh, we will come in the flesh (9:4). Indeed, the flesh is to be kept watch over as the temple of God that it is (9:3). This description resembles how Jesus described his body as the temple (John 2:19–22), but it resembles more closely Paul’s teaching in 1 Cor 6:12–20 (cf. 3:16–17; 2 Cor 6:16). Some will certainly find the emphasis on the language of “flesh” rather than “body” here to be a remarkable contrast with Paul, but for reasons I have explored here in response to those same people objecting to the description of “physical” resurrection, this is not necessarily the case.
In further support of the expectation of the resurrection of the flesh, the preacher cites the case of Jesus himself. Although Christ was first spirit, he came in the flesh to save us and to call us who are enfleshed (9:5). It is unclear why the author did not cite Jesus’s resurrection as such for precedent, but it appears that, like other early Christian writers, the fact of Christ’s incarnation made such a deep impression on his soteriology that this was at the forefront of his mind as he taught about the ultimate goal of salvation for the flesh. If God the Son became flesh to save us, what sense could it possibly make to disregard the flesh? Of course, one must remember that “flesh” here is used in the neutral sense as a synonym or synecdoche for the body (cf. Rom 1:3; 2:28; 4:1; 8:3; 9:5; 1 Cor 15:39; 2 Cor 4:11; 7:5; Gal 2:20; Eph 2:11, 15; 5:29, 31; Phil 1:22, 24; Col 1:22, 24; 1 Tim 3:16), as opposed to the negative references to the same where it is linked with sin.
The theological-ethical implication taken from the foregoing, being linked with a “therefore,” is the call to love one another so that we should all come into the kingdom of God (9:6). As with other texts we have seen, the hope of resurrection has a theological-ethical function of motivating conduct with the resurrection being in view. Both the prospect of final judgment and the abundant life of the kingdom motivate virtuous living in the present in the face of various trials. Furthermore, the connection of entering the kingdom with resurrection here informs other uses of that language elsewhere in this text (6:9; 11:7), at least in reference to the dead (although entrance into the kingdom will mean immortalization for both the dead and the living, per 1 Cor 15:50–57).
The other explicit reference comes in ch. 19. There, the preacher calls on us to practice righteousness in order that we may be saved to the end, for the obedient who suffer affliction in the world do so for a short time, but they will reap the immortal fruit of resurrection (ἀνάστασις; 19:3). Therefore, he says, the godly one should not be grieved if he is miserable now, for a blessed time awaits him above with the ancestors in which he will rejoice after coming to life again (ἀναβιόω) in an age without sorrow (19:4). Resurrection is also linked to immortality in 1 Cor 15, as I have explored here. This is another way of referring to the resurrection of the righteous that is specifically the resurrection to everlasting life. And there is a familiar dynamic here that we have seen many times over (such as in Dan 12 and the series here, among many others) of the suffering faithful being vindicated and exalted for their faithfulness, as their faithful way of life is enabled to go on forever (cf. 10:4–5). The pan-historical scope of the resurrection is also implied with the reference to the ancestors as also participating in coming to life again in the resurrection.
Resurrection belief also implicitly stands behind several other portions of the sermon. The teaching in 5:2–6 references a modified form of the sayings in Matt 10:28 and Luke 12:5 that speak of the destruction of the body and the life to cast them into Gehenna. This obviously implies a bodily resurrection to condemnation. Similarly, the promise of rest in the kingdom and everlasting life (5:5; cf. 8:4, 6) is embodied and will require resurrection for those who die prior to Jesus’s return. And as we have seen already, this hope has a theological-ethical function in motivating holy and righteous conduct that attains the promise.
Chapter 6 builds from part of Jesus’s teachings in Matt 6:24 // Luke 16:13 and Matt 16:26 // Mark 8:36 // Luke 9:25 (6:1–2). The application is that this age and the coming one are enemies (6:3–5). It is better to love the things of the coming age because they are good and imperishable/incorruptible/completely vivifying (ἄφθαρτος; 6:6). This is language linked with everlasting, divine life and resurrection, as we have noted in the NT here, here, here, here, and here. The rest of the chapter either falls back on the language of the previous chapter in terms of the promise of rest and everlasting life vs. the outcome of everlasting punishment (6:7–8)—both of which have been noted as embodied fates—and in terms of being found having holy and righteous works (6:9). Most evocative of all is the language of entering the kingdom in 6:9, which we have already noted is animated by the sense of resurrection life and everlasting life according to 9:6 in its context.
Another motif that has an indirect link with resurrection is the motif of judgment. We have noted on many occasions how frequently resurrection is linked with final judgment explicitly and implicitly. We have already seen the prospect of judgment being related to the resurrection of the flesh, and that informs the references to the same in 7:6; 11:5–7; 16:3; 17:5–7; 18. The first text is a reference to Isa 66, which is also quoted in Mark 9:48 (cf. 2 Clem 17:5). I have noted the connection to resurrection in that text here (more generally on judgment in the Gospels, see here). The second notes the promise of recompense according to works, which fits with one of the author’s emphases in the teaching on the resurrection of the flesh, and it is the other use of the description of entering the kingdom that implies resurrection for those who are dead (and immortalization in any case; 11:7). I have noted the text of 16:3 in another post on 2 Peter, and I think the comments I made there about how this imagery relates to new creation are applicable here. The fourth text exemplifies the public nature of final judgment, and it relies on the assumption that all will be resurrected to face that judgment (cf. 10:4–5). Chapter 18 simply illustrates the theological-ethical function of invoking the final judgment as a motivation for righteous conduct.
Two parts of ch. 8 anticipate the focus on the resurrection of the flesh in ch. 9. 8:4 says that those who do the will of the Father, keep the flesh pure, and guard the commandments of the Lord will receive everlasting life. This is then reiterated in 8:6 with the call to keep the flesh pure (using the same vocabulary) and to keep the “seal” spotless. This text then leads directly into 9:1, as if to address an anticipated objection that the flesh will not rise. Keeping the flesh pure is not unrelated to the outcome of judgment, because it is as enfleshed beings that we will face judgment, whether we or not we must be resurrected to face it.
Chapter 12 refers to awaiting the coming of the kingdom. That coming is implicitly related to a larger eschatological schema involving resurrection for the dead, judgment for all, and immortalization for the righteous living and resurrected, as we have seen already. Of course, there is a further curiosity here in the reference to a saying of Jesus that is not in the canonical Gospels and an interpretation of the same in 12:2–5. Sayings similar to this appear in the Gospel according to Thomas 22; Clement of Alexandria, Strom. 3.13.92–93; and Martyrdom of Peter 9. Given that the preacher tends to quote from memory and not always precisely, even when he is quoting from Jesus’s speech in the Gospels, it seems that he has tended to rely on memory and oral transmission, and that is probably the case here as well, since his version does not quite match any of the others. The preacher’s interpretation links the outside and inside with the body and the spirit. Given that his point is about letting one’s life/soul be manifest through good works as one’s body is manifest (12:4), this further buttresses the need for keeping the flesh pure.
Chapter 14 is notable for its use of body imagery and the descriptor of πνευματικός, which Paul applied to the resurrection body in 1 Cor 15:44. I have gone over the use of the latter term in detail here (also see here). The ecclesiological teaching in this particular text is quite intriguing, more so than we can explore here, and the notion of the assembly/church being before the sun and moon is an extension both of the identification of the Church as the body of Christ (1 Cor 12 and elsewhere), the marriage of Christ and the Church (esp. Eph 5:25–33) and of teachings like Eph 1:4 of being chosen in him from before the foundation of the world. And so the Church is said to be manifested in the flesh in the last days because of Christ, but it has belonged to the Spirit—one way of translating the sense of πνευματικός, such as in 1 Cor 15:44—from before the beginning. He even speaks of the flesh as the antitype or representation of the spirit. All of this imagery contributes to the reiterated command, so that one who defiles the flesh will not receive what belongs to the Spirit (or spirit; 14:3). All of this imagery thus upholds the command to watch/observe/keep guard of the flesh in order that one may have a share in the Spirit (14:3). Likewise, if one links the flesh to the Church and the spirit to Christ, then one who defiles the flesh cannot partake of the Spirit who is Christ (identified as the life-giving Spirit in 1 Cor 15:45). And as we have seen many times, the preacher ends this particular part of his sermon by noting that this flesh can receive life and immortality if the Holy Spirit is joined with it (14:5). This reflects not only the role of the Spirit in giving everlasting, divine life of the age to come, but it also implicitly conveys the role of the Spirit in conveying resurrection life, as we have seen elsewhere in various posts on resurrection in the NT (also see here).
Finally, the closing chapter builds off of the teaching on resurrection and vindication in judgment in ch. 19. That teaching motivates the perseverance called for in the face of the prosperity of the unrighteous and the suffering of the righteous in the present age. The preacher even says that the righteous man does not reap his fruit immediately, but waits for it, which fits with a theme I noted in my first proper post on this Substack. Particularly notable is 20:4: “For if God paid the recompense of the righteous promptly, straightaway we would be engaged in trade and not godliness; for we should seem to be righteous, pursuing not what is pious, but what is profitable.” The sermon then closes with a doxology to the only God invisible, the Father of truth, who sent forth to us the Savior and Pioneer/Champion of complete vivification, through whom he made manifest to us the truth and the heavenly life (20:5). Again, this language fits with what we have seen elsewhere in this text, but it is particularly reminiscent of the latter part of 1 Cor 15.