P
PLeeD
Guest
Did Clement think the Phoenix was real?
- Status
P
puzzleannie
Guest
are you going to help us out here with a link?
V
Verbum
Guest
en.wikisource.org/wiki/1_Clement_%28Hoole_translation%29
It it obvious that he did believe the phoenix existed. He used that belief as an illustration of our own resurrection.
Verbum
It it obvious that he did believe the phoenix existed. He used that belief as an illustration of our own resurrection.
Verbum
S
Salvatore123
Guest
I agree with Verbum. Clement does not appear to be speaking as though the Phoenix was a myth. He describes it, as Verbum said, as evidence for the proposition that if God will resurrect a lowly bird, why would he not resurrect some much more dear to him: holy men?
In a footnote in the book The Apostolic Fathers by Michael W. Holmes, the translator/editor notes that, “The story of the phoenix, well known in antiquity, was widely used (with varying levels of credulity) by early Christian writers.; sanction for this usage was found in Ps. 92:12 (Septuagint Ps. 91:13), where in the Greek Septuagint, ‘phoinix’ meaning ‘palm tree’ was confused with ‘phoinix’ meaning ‘phoenix bird’.”
If Clement had been addressing pagans, then one might plausibly argue that Clement was simply referencing a pagan belief to make a point about resurrection as believed by Christians. But as 1 Clement was addressed to fellow Christians in Corinth, it appears that not only did he believe the phoenix myth himself, but that the myth was so well known throughout the ancient world, that the Corinthians would immediately know what he meant when he mentioned the bird.
In a footnote in the book The Apostolic Fathers by Michael W. Holmes, the translator/editor notes that, “The story of the phoenix, well known in antiquity, was widely used (with varying levels of credulity) by early Christian writers.; sanction for this usage was found in Ps. 92:12 (Septuagint Ps. 91:13), where in the Greek Septuagint, ‘phoinix’ meaning ‘palm tree’ was confused with ‘phoinix’ meaning ‘phoenix bird’.”
If Clement had been addressing pagans, then one might plausibly argue that Clement was simply referencing a pagan belief to make a point about resurrection as believed by Christians. But as 1 Clement was addressed to fellow Christians in Corinth, it appears that not only did he believe the phoenix myth himself, but that the myth was so well known throughout the ancient world, that the Corinthians would immediately know what he meant when he mentioned the bird.
P
patrick457
Guest
To begin with: well, if he did, then so what?
I
Ignatius
Guest
Actually, it is a form of speech known as an analogy wherein a widely known story is used to illustrate something new that is not easily understood by the intended audience. Since most people in the region were familiar with that story, he used it as an aid in their coming to understand The Resurrection of Christ. You’ll also find that Christ and OT prophets used this form throughout the Bible. It is even used in modern writing.
Christ is Risen!
Truely He is Risen!
S
Salvatore123
Guest
Ignatius,
I think it possible to disagree with me on what Clement might have really believed regarding the Phoenix without ridiculing me by suggesting I do not know the meaning of a metaphor, parable, fable, or an analogy. I would not do that to you . . .
For someone speaking in terms of an analogy, and doing so for a myth that was acknowledged as widely known throughout the ancient world, Clement certainly went to great lengths to explain the entire life cycle of the bird. If he was speaking metaphorically, I think Clement could have easily just said: “If God sees fit to raise from the dead the Phoenix - a bird, no less - why is it so hard to believe he would raise those who lived holy lives and praised him?”
I simply trying to answer the OP’s question with what I thought was a serious answer.
I think it possible to disagree with me on what Clement might have really believed regarding the Phoenix without ridiculing me by suggesting I do not know the meaning of a metaphor, parable, fable, or an analogy. I would not do that to you . . .
For someone speaking in terms of an analogy, and doing so for a myth that was acknowledged as widely known throughout the ancient world, Clement certainly went to great lengths to explain the entire life cycle of the bird. If he was speaking metaphorically, I think Clement could have easily just said: “If God sees fit to raise from the dead the Phoenix - a bird, no less - why is it so hard to believe he would raise those who lived holy lives and praised him?”
I simply trying to answer the OP’s question with what I thought was a serious answer.
P
PLeeD
Guest
I don’t know.To begin with: well, if he did, then so what?
I was reading through the book and came upon those chapters. Clement directly ascribed the events of the Phoenix’s life to the work of God. It seemed clear to me that he was speaking literally.
I just wondered if it was commonly understood that Clement thought the Phoenix was real.
P
patrick457
Guest
In the historical context, even if Clement thought that the phoenix was an actual bird, that wouldn’t be too surprising. Some writers at the time spoke of the phoenix as if it was real - it was no surprise, since with much of the world remaining unexplored and with the absence of Wikipedia, many folks had ideas of strange creatures dwelling in the remote corners of the Earth, most of whom we would now consider to be mythical. One of the first to write about the phoenix, the Greek historian Herodotus, seem to speak as if it was real as well (Histories 2.73):
Another sacred bird is the one called the phoenix. Now, I have not actually seen a phoenix, except in a painting, because they are quite infrequent visitors to the country; in fact, I was told in Heliopolis that they appear only at 500-year intervals. They say that it is the death of a phoenix’s father which prompts its visit to Egypt. Anyway, if the painting was reliable, I can tell you something about the phoenix’s size and qualities, namely that its feathers are partly gold but mostly red, and that in appearance and size it is most like an eagle. There is a particular feat they say the phoenix performs; I do not believe it myself, but they say that the bird sets out from its homeland in Arabia on a journey to the sanctuary of the sun, bringing its father sealed in myrrh, and buries its father there.
Apparently, many early Christian writers justified their use of the phoenix because the word appears in the Septuagint version of Psalm 92:12 (LXX 91:13): “The righteous shall flourish like a phoinix, he shall increase like a cedar in Libanos.” However, in the Hebrew form in that passage it speaks of a palm tree (tamar), not a bird.
I
Ignatius
Guest
Are you also posting under the name Verbum? Take another look at my post and the poster that I quoted and answered.Ignatius;7837007:
Actually, it is a form of speech known as an analogy wherein a widely known story is used to illustrate something new that is not easily understood by the intended audience. Since most people in the region were familiar with that story, he used it as an aid in their coming to understand The Resurrection of Christ. You’ll also find that Christ and OT prophets used this form throughout the Bible. It is even used in modern writing.Verbum:
Christ is Risen!
Truely He is Risen!
Ignatius,
I think it possible to disagree with me on what Clement might have really believed . . .
S
Salvatore123
Guest
Uh, Ignatius, I did . . . and looking at it does not change my point or question.
The OP did not ask if Clement was using an analogy - he clearly was.
But that wasn’t the question. The question was whether Clement REALLY BELIEVED in the existence of the Phoenix.
The OP did not ask if Clement was using an analogy - he clearly was.
But that wasn’t the question. The question was whether Clement REALLY BELIEVED in the existence of the Phoenix.
C
COPLAND_3
Guest
I imagine the Phoenix mentioned by him stuck in the minds of those who were in charge of defining the canon.
P
PLeeD
Guest
That was my thought too. I’ve read about 2/3’s of the way through 1 Clement, and it’s all good solid teaching. But, the Phoenix thing kind of jumped off the page. I glad they didn’t include this work in the bible!
C
COPLAND_3
Guest
No doubt the work is extremely valuable, I find tremendous comfort everytime I read from it. It troubled me when I first read it, but over time I have come to realize that the Saints can have had a brilliant grasp on theology while at the same time be wrong on many other things. I don’t plan to consult the Saints on astrology, physics, martial arts, mythology, etc. But when it comes to the Catholic Faith and how to apply it to my life, they are a priceless treasure.That was my thought too. I’ve read about 2/3’s of the way through 1 Clement, and it’s all good solid teaching. But, the Phoenix thing kind of jumped off the page. I glad they didn’t include this work in the bible!
- Status