Editing Nicolaism (section)

=== Clement of Alexandria ===
Not all early writers accepted the connection between the Nicolaitans and Nicolas the Deacon, saying that the Nicolaitans are "falsely so called" (ψευδώνυμοι).<ref>{{ws|[[Ignatius of Antioch|Ignat]]. [[s:Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume I/IGNATIUS/Epistle to the Trallians: Shorter and Longer Versions/Chapter XI.|''ad Trall''. xi]]}} (longer version): "Flee also the impure '''Nicolaitanes, falsely so called''', who are lovers of pleasure, and given to calumnious speeches." Cf. {{ws|[[s:Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume I/IGNATIUS/Epistle to the Philadelphians: Shorter and Longer Versions/Chapter VI.|''ad Phil''. vi]]}} (longer version): "If any one ... affirms that unlawful unions are a good thing, and places the highest happiness in pleasure, as does the man who is '''falsely called a Nicolaitan''', this person can neither be a lover of God, nor a lover of Christ, but is a corrupter of his own flesh, and therefore void of the Holy Spirit, and a stranger to Christ." {{ws|[[s:Ante-Nicene Fathers/Volume VII/Constitutions of the Holy Apostles/Book VI/Sec. II|''Const. Apost.'' vi]]}}: "... some are impudent in uncleanness, such as those who are '''falsely called Nicolaitans'''."</ref> This negative view of Nicolas is irreconcilable with the traditional account of his character given by Clement of Alexandria,<ref>"Such also are those (who say that they follow Nicolaus, quoting an adage of the man, which they pervert, 'that the flesh must be abused.' But the worthy man showed that it was necessary to check pleasures and lusts, and by such training to waste away the impulses and propensities of the flesh. But they, abandoning themselves to pleasure like goats, as if insulting the body, lead a life of self-indulgence; not knowing that the body is wasted, being by nature subject to dissolution; while their soul is buried in the mire of vice; following as they do the teaching of pleasure itself, not of the apostolic man" (Clement of Alexandria, ''[[Stromata]]'', ii. 20).</ref> an earlier writer than Epiphanius. He states that Nicolas led a chaste life and brought up his children in purity. He describes a certain occasion when Nicolas had been sharply reproved by the apostles as a jealous husband, and he repelled the charge by offering to allow his wife to become the wife of any other person. Clement also writes that Nicolas was in the habit of repeating a saying which is ascribed to the apostle [[Matthew the Evangelist|Matthias]], ''that it is our duty to fight against the flesh and to abuse'' (παραχρῆσθαι) ''it''. His words were perversely interpreted by the Nicolaitans as authority for their immoral practices.<ref>"But when we spoke about the saying of Nicolaus we omitted to say this. Nicolaus, they say, had a lovely wife. When after the Saviour's ascension he was accused before the apostles of jealousy, he brought his wife into the concourse and allowed anyone who so desired to marry her. For, they say, this action was appropriate to the saying: 'One must abuse the flesh.' ... I am informed, however, that Nicolaus never had relations with any woman other than the wife he married, and that of his children his daughters remained virgins to their old age, and his son remained uncorrupted. In view of this it was an act of suppression of passion when he brought before the apostles the wife on whose account he was jealous. He taught what it meant to 'abuse the flesh' by restraining the distracting passions. For, as the Lord commanded, he did not wish to serve two masters, pleasure and God. It is said that Matthias also taught that one should fight the flesh and abuse it, never allowing it to give way to licentious pleasure, so that the soul might grow by faith and knowledge" (Clement of Alexandria, ''Stromata'', iii. 4, §§25-26; and ''apud'' [[wikisource:Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book III/Chapter 29|Euseb. ''H. E''. iii. 29]]; see also [[wikisource:Nicene and Post-Nicene Fathers: Series II/Volume I/Church History of Eusebius/Book III/Chapter 25|footnote 31 in Chapter 25 of ''NPNF'']]).</ref> Theodoret repeats the foregoing statement of Clement in his account of the sect, and charges the Nicolaitans with false dealing in borrowing the name of the deacon.<ref>''Haeret. Fab.'' iii. 1.</ref>

Clement (in ''Stromata'' 3, 2) does condemn heretics whose views on sex he sees as licentious, but he does not associate them with Nicolas:
:But the followers of [[Carpocrates]] and Epiphanes think that wives should be common property. Through them the worst calumny has become current against the Christian name. ...he [Epiphanes] says [in his book ''Concerning Righteousness''] that the idea of Mine and Thine came into existence through the [Mosaic] laws so that the earth and money were no longer put to common use. And so also with marriage. 'For God has made vines for all to use in common, since they are not protected against sparrows and a thief; and similarly corn and the other fruits. But the abolition, contrary to divine law, of community of use and equality begat the thief of domestic animals and fruits. He brought female to be with male and in the same way united all animals. He thus showed righteousness to be a universal fairness and equality. But those who have been born in this way have denied the universality which is the corollary of their birth and say, "Let him who has taken one woman keep her," whereas all alike can have her, just as the other animals do.' After this, which is quoted word for word, he again continues in the same spirit as follows: 'With a view to the permanence of the race, he has implanted in males a strong and ardent desire which neither law nor custom nor any other restraint is able to destroy. For it is God's decree. ...Consequently one must understand the saying "Thou shalt not covet" as if the lawgiver was making a jest, to which he added the even more comic words "thy neighbor's goods". For he himself who gave the desire to sustain the race orders that it is to be suppressed, though he removes it from no other animals. And by the words "thy neighbor's wife" he says something even more ludicrous, since he forces what should be common property to be treated as a private possession.'

Clement asks: 
:And how can this man still be reckoned among our number when he openly abolishes both law and gospel by these words...Carpocrates fights against God, and Epiphanes likewise. ...These, so they say, and certain other enthusiasts for the same wickedness, gather together for feasts (I would not call their meeting an ''[[Agape]]''), men and women together. After they have sated their appetites ('on repletion [[Horae#The ten or twelve Hours|Cypris]], the goddess of love, enters,' as it is said), then they overturn the lamps and so extinguish the light that the shame of their adulterous 'righteousness' is hidden, and they have intercourse where they will and with whom they will. After they have practiced community of use in this love-feast, they demand by daylight of whatever women they wish that they will be obedient to the law of Carpocrates-it would not be right to say the law of God. ...Of these and other similar sects Jude, I think, spoke prophetically in his letter - 'In the same way also these dreamers'[Jude 1:8] (for they do not seek to find the truth in the light of day) as far as the words 'and their mouth speaks arrogant things.' [Jude 1:16]