The diatessaron was the basic building block of Greek music. This because the interval of the perfect fourth was used to form tetrachords which are defined in Wikipedia as follows:
Traditionally, a tetrachord is a series of four tones filling in the interval of a perfect fourth, a 4:3 frequency proportion. In modern usage a tetrachord is any four-note segment of a scale or tone row. The term tetrachord derives from ancient Greek music theory. It literally means four strings, originally in reference to harp-like instruments such as the lyre or the kithara, with the implicit understanding that the four strings must be contiguous. Ancient Greek music theory distinguishes three genera of tetrachords. These genera are characterised by the largest of the three intervals of the tetrachord:
Diatonic - A diatonic tetrachord has a characteristic interval that is less than or equal to half the total interval of the tetrachord (or 249 cents). This characteristic interval is usually slightly smaller (approximating to 200 cents), becoming a whole tone. Classically, the diatonic tetrachord consists of two intervals of a tone and one of a semitone.
Chromatic - A chromatic tetrachord has a characteristic interval that is greater than half the total interval of the tetrachord, yet not as great as four-fifths of the interval (between 249 and 398 cents). Classically, the characteristic interval is a minor third (approximately 300 cents), and the two smaller intervals are equal semitones.
Enharmonic - An enharmonic tetrachord has a characteristic interval that is greater than four-fifths the total tetrachord interval (greater than 398 cents). Classically, the characteristic interval is a major third (otherwise known as a ditone), and the two smaller intervals are quartertones.
As the three genera simply represent ranges of possible intervals within the tetrachord, various shades (chroai) of tetrachord with specific tunings were specified. Once the genus and shade of tetrachord are specified the three internal intervals could be arranged in six possible permutations.
What the author isn't making clear here is that in each of these tetrachords only the second and third strings are being changed, the first and fourth strings are always tuned to a diatessaron (i.e. C - - F).
In order to understand this analogy better I think it might be useful to come to terms with how ancient Greeks moved developed music from the tetrachord. We read:
The only accompaniment for the voice used by the early Greeks was a four-stringed cithara, the tetrachord; and this instrument had been so generally used, and held in such repute, that the whole system of music was founded upon the tetra- chord. Terpander was the first who added three airings to this instrument, as he himself testifies in two extant verses. 'Disdaining the four-stringed song, we shall sound new hymns on the seven-stringed phorminx.' The tetrachord was strung so that the two extreme strings stood to one another in the relation called by the ancients diatessaron, and by the moderns a. fourth; that is to say, the lower one made three vibrations in the time that the upper one made four. Between these two s rings, which formed the-principal harmony of this simple instrument, there were two others ; and in the most ancient arrangement of the gamut, called the diatonic, these two were strung so that the three intervals between these four strings produced twice a whole tone, and in the third place a semitone. Terpander enlarged this instrument by adding ohe tetrachord to another : he did not however make the highest tone of the lower tetrachord the lowest of the upper, but he left an interval of one tone between the two tetrachords. By this arrangement the cithara would have had eight strings, if Terpander had not left out the third string, which must have appeared to him to be of less importance. The heptachord of Terpander thus acquired the compass of an octave, or, according to the Greek expression, a diapason; because the highest tone of the upper and the lowest of the lower tetrachord stood in this relation, which is the simplest of all, as it rests upon the ratio of 1 to 2; and which was soon acknowledged by the Greeks as the fundamental concord. At the same time the highest tone of the upper tetrachord stands to the highest of the lower in the relation of the fifth, the arithmetical expression of which is 2 to 3; and in general the tones were doubtless so arranged that the simplest consonances after the octave octave — that is to say, the fourth and fifth — governed the whole. Hence the heptachord of Terpander long remained in high repute, and was employed by Pindar ; although in his time the deficient string of the lower tetrachord had been supplied and an octachord produced.
It will be convenient in this place to explain the difference between the scales and the styles and harmonies of Greek music, since it is probable that they were regulated by Terpander. The musical scales are determined by the intervals between the four tones of the tetrachord. The Greek musicians describe three musical scales, viz., the diatonic, the chromatic, and the enharmonic. In the diatonic, the intervals were two tones and a semitone ; and hence the diatonic was considered the simplest and most natural, and was the most extensively used. In the chromatic scale the interval is a tone and a semitone, combined with two other semitones. This arrangement of the tetrachord was also very ancient, but it was much less used, because a feeble and languid, though pleasing character, was ascribed to it. The third scale, the enharmonic, was produced by a tetrachord, which, besides an interval of two tones, had also two minor ones of quarter-tones. This was the latest of all, and was invented by Olympus, who must have flourished a short time after Terpander. The ancients greatly preferred the enharmonic scale, especially on account of its liveliness and force. But from the small intervals of quarter tones, the execution of it required great skill and practice in singing and playing. These musical scales were further determined by the styles or harmonics, because on them depended, first, the position or succession of the intervals belonging to the several scales, mid, secondly, the height and depth of the whole gamut. Three styles were known in very early times, — the Doric, which was the lowest, the Phrygian, the middle one, and the Lydian, the highest. Of these, the Doric alone is named from a Greek race ; the two others are called after nations of Asia Minor, whose love for music, and particularly the flute, is well known. It is probable that national tunes were current among these tribes, whose peculiar character was the origin of these styles. Yet their fixed and systematic relation to the Doric style must have been the work of a Greek musician, probably of Terpander himself, who, in his native island of Lesbos, had frequent opportunities of becoming acquainted with the different musical styles of his neighbours of Asia Minor. Thus a fragment of Pindar relates, that Terpander, at the Lydian feasts, had heard the tone of the pectis, (a Lydian instrument, with a compass of two octaves,) and had formed from it the kind of lyre which was called Barbiton. The Lesbians likewise used a particular sort of cithara, called the Asiatic; and this was by many held to be the invention of Terpander, by others to be the work of his disciple Cepion. It is manifest that the Lesbian musicians, with Terpander at their head, were the means of uniting the music of Asia Minor with that of the ancient Greeks (which was best preserved among the Dorians in Peloponnesus), and that they and founded on it a system in which each style had its appropriate character. To the establishment of this character the nomes contributed, musical compositions of great simplicity and severity, something resembling the most ancient melodies of our church music. The Doric style appears from the statements of all the witnesses to have had a character of great seriousness and gravity, peculiarly calculated to produce a calm,firm, collected frame of mind. " With regard to the Doric style (says Aristotle), all are agreed that it is the most sedate, and has the most manly character." The Phrygian style was evidently derived from the loud vehement styles of music employed by the Phrygians in the worship of the Great Mother of the gods and the Corybantes. In Greece, too, it was used in orgiastic worships, especially in that of Dionysus. It was peculiarly adapted to the expression of enthusiasm. The Lydian had the highest notes of any of the three ancient styles, and therefore approached nearer to the female voice; its character was thus softer and feebler than either of the others. Yet it admitted of considerable variety of expression, as the melodies of the Lydian style had sometimes a painful and melancholy, sometimes a calm and pleasing character. Aristotle (who, in his Politics, has given some judicious precepts on the use of music in education) considers the Lydian style peculiarly adapted to the musical cultivation of early youth. [Karl Otfried Muller, The History of the Literature of Ancient Greece p 203 - 204]
The point we are trying to establish in all of this is that Greek music was necessarily developed from the diatessaron. The diatessaron was really understood to have been the basic 'building block' not only of the musical universe, but the universe itself. I think it would have been quite natural for the Alexandrian Church to have associated the diatessaron with holy writings.
This Pythagorean theory is reflected in Strom 6.11 and also Clement's Exhortation to the Greeks (Protreptikos). The Protreptikos implicitly confirms that there were two 'things' symbolically 'harmonized' according to a 'diatessaron.' I will cite the opening words in full, go back to some Greek musical theory and then demonstrate that the text says what I claim it does. First the reference from the beginning:
Amphion of Thebes and Arion of Methymna were both minstrels, and both were renowned in story. They are celebrated in song to this day in the chorus of the Greeks; the one for having allured the fishes, and the other for having surrounded Thebes with walls by the power of music. Another, a Thracian, a cunning master of his art (he also is the subject of a Hellenic legend), tamed the wild beasts by the mere might of song; and transplanted trees--oaks--by music. I might tell you also the story of another, a brother to these--the subject of a myth, and a minstrel--Eunomos the Locrian and the Pythic grasshopper. A solemn Hellenic assembly had met at Pytho, to celebrate the death of the Pythic serpent, when Eunomos sang the reptile's epitaph. Whether his ode was a hymn in praise of the serpent, or a dirge, I am not able to say. But there was a contest, and Eunomos was playing the lyre in the summer time: it was when the grasshoppers, warmed by the sun, were chirping beneath the leaves along the hills; but they were singing not to that dead dragon, but to God All-wise,--a lay unfettered by rule, better than the numbers of Eunomos. The Locrian breaks a string. The grasshopper sprang on the neck of the instrument, and sang on it as on a branch; and the minstrel, adapting his strain to the grasshopper's song, made up for the want of the missing string. The grasshopper then was attracted by the song of Eunomos, as the fable represents, according to which also a brazen statue of Eunomos with his lyre, and the Locrian's ally in the contest, was erected at Pytho. But of its own accord it flew to the lyre, and of its own accord sang, and was regarded by the Greeks as a musical performer.
How, let me ask, have you believed vain fables and supposed animals to be charmed by music while Truth's shining face alone, as would seem appears to you disguised, and is looked on with incredulous eyes? And so Cithaeron, and Helicon, and the mountains of the Odrysi, and the initiatory rites of the Thracians, mysteries of deceit, are hallowed and celebrated in hymns. For me, I am pained at such calamities as form the subjects of tragedy, though but myths; but by you the records of miseries are turned into dramatic compositions.
But the dramas and the raving poets, now quite intoxicated, let us crown with ivy; and distracted outright as they are, in Bacchic fashion, with the satyrs, and the frenzied rabble, and the rest of the demon crew, let us confine to Cithaeron and Helicon, now antiquated.
But let us bring from above out of heaven, Truth, with Wisdom in all its brightness, and the sacred prophetic choir, down to the holy mount of God; and let Truth, darting her light to the most distant points, cast her rays all around on those that are involved in darkness, and deliver men from delusion, stretching out her very strong right hand, which is wisdom, for their salvation. And raising their eyes, and looking above, let them abandon Helicon and Cithaeron, and take up their abode in Sion. "For out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem, --the celestial Word, the true athlete crowned in the theatre of the whole universe. What my Eunomos sings is not the measure of Terpander, nor that of Capito, nor the Phrygian, nor Lydian, nor Dorian, but the immortal measure of the new harmony which bears God's name--the new, the Levitical song.
"Soother of pain, calmer of wrath, producing forgetfulness of all ills."
Sweet and true is the charm of persuasion which blends with this strain.
To me, therefore, that Thracian Orpheus, that Theban, and that Methymnaean,--men, and yet unworthy of the name,--seem to have been deceivers, who, under the pretence of poetry corrupting human life, possessed by a spirit of artful sorcery for purposes of destruction, celebrating crimes in their orgies, and making human woes the materials of religious worship, were the first to entice men to idols; nay, to build up the stupidity of the nations with blocks of wood and stone,--that is, statues and images,--subjecting to the yoke of extremest bondage the truly noble freedom of those who lived as free citizens under heaven by their songs and incantations. But not such is my song, which has come to loose, and that speedily, the bitter bondage of tyrannizing demons; and leading us back to the mild and loving yoke of piety, recalls to heaven those that had been cast prostrate to the earth. It alone has tamed men, the most intractable of animals; the frivolous among them answering to the fowls of the air, deceivers to reptiles, the irascible to lions, the voluptuous to swine, the rapacious to wolves. The silly are stocks and stones, and still more senseless than stones is a man who is steeped in ignorance. As our witness, let us adduce the voice of prophecy accordant with truth, and bewailing those who are crushed in ignorance and folly: "For God is able of these stones to raise up children to Abraham;" and He, commiserating their great ignorance and hardness of heart who are petrified against the truth, has raised up a seed of piety, sensitive to virtue, of those stones--of the nations, that is, who trusted in stones. Again, therefore, some venomous and false hypocrites, who plotted against righteousness, He once called "a brood of vipers." But if one of those serpents even is willing to repent, and follows the Word, he becomes a man of God.
Others he figuratively calls wolves, clothed in sheep-skins, meaning thereby monsters of rapacity in human form. And so all such most savage beasts, and all such blocks of stone, the celestial song has transformed into tractable men. "For even we ourselves were sometime foolish, disobedient, deceived, serving divers lusts and pleasures, living in malice and envy, hateful, hating one another." Thus speaks the apostolic Scripture: "But after that the kindness and love of God our saviour to man appeared, not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy, He saved us."
Behold the might of the new song! It has made men out of stones, men out of beasts. Those, moreover, that were as dead, not being partakers of the true life, have come to life again, simply by becoming listeners to this song. It also composed the universe into melodious order, and tuned the discord of the elements to harmonious arrangement, so that the whole world might become harmony. It let loose the fluid ocean, and yet has prevented it from encroaching on the land. The earth, again, which had been in a state of commotion, it has established, and fixed the sea as its boundary. The violence of fire it has softened by the atmosphere, as the Dorian is blended with the Lydian strain; and the harsh cold of the air it has moderated by the embrace of fire, harmoniously arranging these the extreme tones of the universe. And this deathless strain,the support of the whole and the harmony of all,--reaching from the centre to the circumference, and from the extremities to the central part, has harmonized this universal frame of things, not according to the Thracian music, which is like that invented by Jubal, but according to the paternal counsel of God, which fired the zeal of David. And He who is of David, and yet before him, the Word of God, despising the lyre and harp, which are but lifeless instruments, and having tuned by the Holy Spirit the universe, and especially man,--who, composed of body and soul, is a universe in miniature,makes melody to God on this instrument of many tones; and to this intrument--I mean man--he sings accordant: "For thou art my harp, and pipe, and temple." --a harp for harmony--a pipe by reason of the Spirit a temple by reason of the word; so that the first may sound, the second breathe, the third contain the Lord. And David the king, the harper whom we mentioned a little above, who exhorted to the truth and dissuaded from idols, was so far from celebrating demons in song, that in reality they were driven away by his music. Thus, when Saul was plagued with a demon, he cured him by merely playing. A beautiful breathing instrument of music the Lord made man, after His own image. And He Himself also, surely, who is the supramundane Wisdom, the celestial Word, is the all-harmonious, melodious, holy instrument of God. What, then, does this instrument--the Word of God, the Lord, the New Song--desire? To open the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf, and to lead the lame or the erring to righteousness, to exhibit God to the foolish, to put a stop to corruption, to conquer death, to reconcile disobedient children to their father. The instrument of God loves mankind. The Lord pities, instructs, exhorts, admonishes, saves, shields, and of His bounty promises us the kingdom of heaven as a reward for learning; and the only advantage He reaps is, that we are saved. For wickedness feeds on men's destruction; but truth, like the bee, harming nothing, delights only in the salvation of men.[Protreptikos 1.1 - 1.5]
The image of David playing the lyre is key because we learn from various Psalms of an instrument called a Sheminith, an eight stringed lyre (shemini = eight). So the Targum of Psalm 6 reads: "To praise with song on a kinnor of eight cords." Josephus informs us that the kinnor had ten strings while R. Judah interprets the superscription of Psalm xii as "For the liturgy on sheminith, meaning on the eighth string," from which he decudes that the kinnor of the Messianic times will have eight strings. (b.Arakhin 13b)
The concept of the eight stringed lyre is absolutely critical. Most lyres at the time that Clement was writing were seven stringed. As Muller references above, the seven stringed lyre necessarily droped one of the notes is the second tetrachord. As Mathiesen notes:
Although the lyre may have had, in earliest times, only three or four strings, from at least as early as the time of Terpander, it had seven or more strings. The Homeric hymn In Mercurium, "seven consonant strings of sheep gut," and the Nicomachean Excerpta repeats this number. In the third chapter of his Manuale harmonices, Nicomachus suggests that these seven strings were associated with the planetary revolutions and named hypate, parhypate, hypermese or lichanos, mese, paramese, paraneate, and neate. In the fifth chapter, Nicomachus observes that the seven strings formed two conjunct tetrachords, each of which embraced the interval of a fourth. As the interval between the lowest and highest string was a seventh, Nicomachus explains, Pythagoras added an eighth string in order to produce the overall range of an octave.
We have our 'eight stringed lyre.' There were two two tetrachords - i.e. two 'sets' of four notes each contained within a diatessaron and in turn separted from each other by a diatessaron (i.e. an interval of a perfect fourth). However, there is good reason to believe that this is not the instrument Clement has in mind in the Protreptikos (προτρεπτικός).
For as Mathiesen notes, there was something inherently imperfect in the design of the Greek eight stringed lyre. It was not the pattern of 'diatessaronic' perfection that Clement was trumpeting throughout his writings:
He did not add this new string, however, at the top, as might have been expected, but rather between the old mese and and paramese. Thus, while the old paramese was renamed trite — a name not present in the original heptachord - it retained the same intervallic relationship with its neighboring notes: a whole tone above and a semitone below. The new string was now called paramese, separated from the mese by a whole tone and the trite by a semitone. In the eleventh chapter, Nicomachus then clarifies that as the Greek scale system expanded to two octaves, two new tetrachords were needed to accommodate this range; they were added above and below the tetrachords of the old seven- or eight-string lyre The new bottom tetrachord, which was conjunct with the old lower tetrachord, was called the hyperbolaion. In consequence, the original tetrachords took on names as well: that from e' to a' began to be known as the meson (or, "middle"); from a' to d", the synemmenon (or "conjunct"); and from b' to e", the diezeugmenon or, ("disjunct"). Finally, in order to complete the double octave the proslambanomenos note (or, "added" note) was indeed added at the bottom. Nicomachus is very careful not to specify the intervals between each string, but the outline of his first two systems may be deduced and represented as in figure below
heptachord
Pythagorean octachord
[e f' g' a] [b c" d" e]
Nicomachus's explanation may very well represent something close to the actual manner in which the early lyres were strung and tuned. It would have been a simple matter to tune the two conjunct fourths of the heptachord or the octave and two disjunct fourths of the octachord. Nevertheless, there are other explanations. The Greeks commonly referred to the intervals of a fourth and a fifth as diatessaron (δια τεσσάρων) and diapente (διὰ πέντε) because these intervals presumably ranged "through four strings" or "through five strings" — , but with a few exceptions they called the octave 'dia pason' (διά πασων), that is 'through all the strings' rather than di octo, as might be expected. In response to a question about this anomaly, the Aristotelian Problemata (19:32) assert that Terpander tuned the lyre so that the seven strings would span an octave; thus, 'through all the strings' rather than 'through eight strings' [Mathiesen, Apollo's Lyre p. 244 - 245]
Interestingly Mathiesen has identified for us why the perfect fourth was originally called 'dia tessaron.' The arrangement of strings on a lyre led to the perfect fourth and perfect fifth spanning 'across four' and 'five' strings respectively.
The Greek lyres of antiquity we necessarily had two tetrachords stacked beside one another as illustrated above. The 'diatessaron' actually spanned the four strings but the second and third strings had nothing to do with the perfect fourth. Their position on the lyre may have given birth to the idea that Matthew, Mark, Luke and John formed such a tetrachord. But four together would be just that - a tetrachord not a diatessaron. In the aforementioned collection Matthew and John form a sort of 'diatessaron' on their own.
Nevertheless it is absolutely clear that the text called 'the Diatessaron' was not identified as this tetrachord but the second tetrachord in the familiar seven string lyre (i.e. heptachord). This is clearly the germ of the idea - i.e. two tetrachord 'arrangements' themselves established as perfect fourths separated by a perfect fourth (or diatessaron). There is no way around this interpretation now that we see the unshakable grounding of the very concept of the diatessaron on the arrangement of strings on a lyre. Irenaeus could not have established the idea of a fourfold harmony of the gospels without having to necessarily excise this very concept from its original 'grounding' of two tetrachords separated by diatessaron on the neck of a lyre.
Let's go back to Clement's Protreptikos. Clement is not simply developing some 'superfluous' or 'poetic' rhetoric here. The reference to 'Amphion of Thebes and Arion of Methymna' in the first sentence is critical to the understanding of all that follows. For these men were renowned in antiquity for playing seven string lyres. If we look again the section which follows the identification of Christianity as 'the new song' it is clear that Clement is identifying the tradition as 'the new instrument' - the eighth stringed lyre, the Sheminith, which as we will see shortly not only had messianic implications for contemporary Jews but literally arranged the same seven notes in a radical new way.
Let's first look again at Clement's words to make clear that the Sheminith is at the heart of his conception. The first paragraph brings forward various famous historical lyre players who supposedly had the power to charm wild animals. Clement begins by denying these myths - viz. "How, let me ask, have you believed vain fables and supposed animals to be charmed by music while Truth's shining face alone" - but insteads put forward a new Christian understanding of the same metaphor of a divinely inspired musician:
But let us bring from above out of heaven, Truth, with Wisdom in all its brightness, and the sacred prophetic choir, down to the holy mount of God; and let Truth, darting her light to the most distant points, cast her rays all around on those that are involved in darkness, and deliver men from delusion, stretching out her very strong right hand, which is wisdom, for their salvation. And raising their eyes, and looking above, let them abandon Helicon and Cithaeron, and take up their abode in Sion. "For out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem, --the heavenly Word (λόγος οὐράνιος), the true athlete crowned in the theatre of the whole universe. What my Eunomos sings is not the measure of Terpander, nor that of Capito, nor the Phrygian, nor Lydian, nor Dorian, but the immortal measure of the new harmony which bears God's name (ἀλλὰ τῆς καινῆς ἁρμονίας τὸν ἀίδιον νόμον τὸν φερώνυμον τοῦ θεοῦ) --the new, the Levitical song.
The can be no doubt that everyone reading this passage again will acknowledge the obvious comparison with the great musicians of the ancient past. Yet I bet everyone missed the reference to the divinely inspired 'instrument' (ὄργανον) at the heart of the whole Protreptikos.
I am sure that everyone just passed over the reference to Isa 3.2 - "For out of Sion shall go forth the law, and the word of the LORD from Jerusalem" - and naturally understood 'the law' and 'the word of the Lord' to be a repeated allusion to the same concept. This is certainly not how Clement and the Alexandrian tradition read the passage. Clement is envisioning an one instrument 'harmonized' according to the diatessaron according to two parts - viz. 'the law' and 'the word of God.' For his successor Origen certainly takes the two to be separate things:
For the law came forth from the dwellers in Sion, and settled among us (in Alexandria) as a spiritual law. Moreover, the word of the Lord came forth from that very Jerusalem, that it might be disseminated through all places, and might judge in the midst of the heathen, selecting those whom it sees to be submissive, and rejecting the disobedient, who are many in number. (Contra Celsus 5.33)
Once we understand that Clement like Origen necessarily sees two texts at work in the world. Notice that Clement only speaks of a 'heavenly word' immediately following Isaiah's reference to 'the word of the Lord from Jerusalem' (καὶ λόγος κυρίου ἐξ Ἱερου σαλήμ). Irenaeus intimates that there was indeed a Marcionite interpretation of this passage. They must necessarily have identified the λόγος κυρίου ἐξ Ἱερουσαλήμ as the gospel. Notice also that Clement originally references the 'wisdom' of 'Truth' which is the 'heavenly word' (λόγος οὐράνιος) and 'spiritual' Law to use Origen's terminology. It is the harmony between this 'wisdom' and the 'word of the Lord from Jerusalem' which establishes the diatessaron harmony which creates the 'music' of contemporary Christian literature.
So we see Clement now says:
Behold the might of the new song! It has made men out of stones, men out of beasts. Those, moreover, that were as dead, not being partakers of the true life, have come to life again, simply by becoming listeners to this song. It also composed the universe into melodious order, and tuned the discord of the elements to harmonious arrangementκαὶ (τῶν στοιχείων τὴν διαφωνίαν εἰς τάξιν ἐνέτεινε συμφωνίας), so that the whole world might become harmony (ὁ κόσμος αὐτῷ ἁρμονία γένηται). It let loose the fluid ocean, and yet has prevented it from encroaching on the land. The earth, again, which had been in a state of commotion, it has established, and fixed the sea as its boundary. The violence of fire it has softened by the atmosphere, as the Dorian is blended with the Lydian strain; and the harsh cold of the air it has moderated by the embrace of fire, harmoniously arranging these the extreme tones of the universe. And this deathless strain,the support of the whole and the harmony of all (καὶ ἁρμονία τῶν πάντων),--reaching from the centre to the circumference, and from the extremities to the central part, has harmonized this universal frame of things (ἡρμόσατο τόδε τὸ πᾶν), not according to the Thracian music, which is like that invented by Jubal, but according to the paternal counsel of God (κατὰ δὲ τὴν πάτριον τοῦ θεοῦ βούλησιν), which fired the zeal of David.
Of course we should take very seriously of this conception of a 'new song,' 'new music' and above all a 'new instrument' This clearly comes from the mystical harmony from the two 'strings' - but what are these strings?
It is important to note that superifically at least Clement goes on to declare that he is not thinking of 'lifeless' instruments (τὰ ἄψυχα ὄργανα) but a mystical harmony in heaven:
And He who is of David, and yet before him, the Word of God, despising the lyre and harp, which are but lifeless instruments, and having tuned by the Holy Spirit (ἁγίῳ πνεύματι ἁρμοσάμενος), the universe, and especially man,--who, composed of body and soul, is a universe in miniature, makes melody to God on this instrument of many tones and to this intrument--I mean man--he sings accordant (ψάλλει τῷ θεῷ διὰ τοῦ πολυφώνου ὀργάνου καὶ προσᾴδει τῷ ὀργάνῳ τῷ ἀνθρώπῳ): "For thou art my harp, and pipe, and temple." --a harp for harmony--a pipe by reason of the Spirit a temple by reason of the word; so that the first may sound, the second breathe, the third contain the Lord. And David the king, the musician (ὁ Δαβὶδ ὁ βασιλεύς, ὁ κιθαριστής) whom we mentioned a little above, who exhorted to the truth (προὔτρεπεν ὡς τὴν ἀλήθειαν) and dissuaded from idols, was so far from celebrating demons in song, that in reality they were driven away by his music. Thus, when Saul was plagued with a demon, he cured him by merely playing. A beautiful breathing instrument of music the Lord made man, after His own image. And He Himself also, surely, who is the supramundane Wisdom, the celestial Word, is the all-harmonious, melodious, holy instrument of God (Καλὸν ὁ κύριος ὄργανον ἔμπνουν τὸν ἄνθρωπον ἐξειργάσατο κατ' εἰκόνα τὴν ἑαυτοῦ· ἀμέλει καὶ αὐτὸς ὄργανόν ἐστι τοῦ θεοῦ παναρμόνιον, ἐμμελὲς καὶ ἅγιον, σοφία ὑπερκόσμιος, οὐράνιος λόγος).
David the lyre-player (ὁ κιθαριστής) stands very much in the heart of the whole exposition. Indeed most studies of the text miss the fact that the example of David the musician who 'exhorted' his contemporaries 'to the truth' (προὔτρεπεν ὡς τὴν ἀλήθειαν) is the source of the very title of the work (Προτρεπτικός προς Έλληνας).
In the same manner that David played an instrument, Christ his successor has also established a diatessaronic harmony between the mystic wisdom and the public gospel or as we read:
What, then, does this instrument - the Word of God, the Lord (τὸ ὄργανον, ὁ τοῦ θεοῦ λόγος, ὁ κύριος), the New Song - desire? To open the eyes of the blind, and unstop the ears of the deaf, and to lead the lame or the erring to righteousness, to exhibit God to the foolish, to put a stop to corruption, to conquer death, to reconcile disobedient children to their father. The instrument of God loves mankind (Φιλάνθρωπον τὸ ὄργανον τοῦ θεοῦ). The Lord pities, instructs, exhorts, admonishes, saves, shields, and of His bounty promises us the kingdom of heaven as a reward for learning; and the only advantage He reaps is, that we are saved. For wickedness feeds on men's destruction; but truth, like the bee, harming nothing, delights only in the salvation of men.
There is a lot to digest here.
Statistics: Posted by Stephan Huller — Sat Nov 08, 2014 4:03 pm