The opponents of Gnosticism did not deny the idea that some could have better knowledge than others in the world. Nor did they reject the idea that God could and would reveal himself to the world. Indeed, they would not deny the superiority of Christian revelation over any other religious tradition. They knew that God could and did show himself to the world, that revelation was not only possible but that it had been given, and God’s revelation was what made Christianity superior to all other religions.
But they emphasized that it is not merely a belief in some exclusive knowledge that saved; rather, it was the work of God. Because people are different, one from another, certainly some will understand the doctrines and teachings of the Christian faith better than others. But, in theory at least, people are free to explore their faith, and to learn all that is possible for one to learn without restrictions upon that learning; the teachings of the Christian faith are open to all who are willing to engage them and put them into practice. One does not need any special initiation paved by simony to learn the fullness of the faith. It has always been clear that one’s salvation and place in the kingdom of God is not based upon how well one understands the great mysteries of the faith, but how well one lives out that faith. Does one act as God wants them act? Does one heed the call of God in their life and follow him wherever he should lead? Some of the greatest, holiest exemplars of the Christian life came from those who were simple minded. What made them great is that they were so pure at heart that God wrought great things through them. This is not to say knowledge and wisdom should be ignored, or even worse, ridiculed. We are called to realize our vocation according to what God has given to us, and for some, this path takes them to study and to become scholars. Whatever standing one is to have in life, they should not look down upon those whose life and calling are different, rather, they should glorify all who properly live out the will of God in their lives.
The content of Gnostic theology was shown to be outright diabolical. This was especially true in regards to its proclamation of salvation where they taught that salvation was properly given to some “elite” alone. The Church had to reject this soteriology. Certainly, when examining their teachings , the Church realized that not everything the Gnostics said was wrong. Moreover, many questions they raised were legitimate. But their overarching system was dangerous and needed to be rejected. As to the secret tradition which the Gnostics claimed, Christianity replied with the teachings of the Apostolic tradition. There was no secondary, hidden tradition; there was only the open tradition of the faith founded by the Apostles and passed on down, in the open, to their successors. “It is within the power of all, therefore, in every Church, who may wish to see the truth, to contemplate clearly the tradition of the apostles manifested throughout the whole world; and we are in a position to reckon up those who were by the apostles instituted bishops in the Churches, and [to demonstrate] the succession of these men to our own times; those who neither taught nor knew of anything like what these [heretics] rave about. For if the apostles had known hidden mysteries, which they were in the habit of imparting to ‘the perfect’ apart and privily from the rest, they would have delivered them especially to those to whom they were also committing the Churches themselves. For they were desirous that these men should be very perfect and blameless in all things, whom also they were leaving behind as their successors, delivering up their own place of government to these men; which men, if they discharged their functions honestly, would be a great boon [to the Church], but if they should fall away, the direst calamity,” Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses. trans Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. ANF1 (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdman’s Publishing), III-3.1.
One of the reasons why the Gnostics were a great threat to the Church is that they tried to claim the authority of Christianity, to be true Christianity, while teaching error upon error, thoughts and practices which openly contradicted the basic tenets of the Christian faith. The Gnostics wanted to have it both ways. They wanted to be seen as Christians, because this would attract other Christians into their sects; but they also wanted to be seen as superior to other Christians, and for people to believe that they were given a greater, fuller revelation, one which selected individuals were allowed to know only after they have been accepted into their elite Gnostic group (not unlike the later claims of many other secret societies such as the Freemasons or the Rosicrucians).
Unlike what many of the Gnostics said, Christ affirmed the validity of the Torah, and had seen no need for us to utterly reject the world. He was its creator and he had come into it for its own good. Of course Christians know that the world we live in is fallen world, and so we do not believe what we see is as good as it should be. But that means the world can be better, and through Christ will be made better. We are to work for its transformation and purification. We pray for the kingdom of God to be on earth as it is in heaven, not for God to annihilate it. Of course we must not have any hubris and think this is something we can do entirely by ourselves. But it is not to be done without our work and our cooperation with the will of God. Christ sends us out into the world. Christians are called to be mediators of God’s grace to the rest of creation. As grace perfects us, so it too will perfect the rest of nature.
The Gnostics presented in their writings and speculations a profound rejection of the world. Since its origin lies with some ignorant or evil creator, it has no lasting significance. Clearly what the Gnostic taught was opposite of what Christianity believed: either God the creator was good or evil, either all-knowing or ignorant. Since Christianity had always taught a wise, benevolent, all-loving creator, this belief would become the means by which Christianity would be able to reject the so-called knowledge of the Gnostics. Instead of truth, they professed a lie; instead of wisdom, they provided folly. St Irenaeus would not accept their claim to knowledge, and would refer to them only as the “so-called” Gnostics. Around the same time, St Clement of Alexandria would point out that it was only the Christian, following all the teachings of Christ, who could be called a true Gnostic. “So, then, also the Gnostics who tread in the footsteps of the apostles ought to be sinless, and, out of love to the Lord, to love also their brother; so that, if occasion call, enduring without stumbling, afflictions for the Church, ‘they may drink the cup.’ Those who witness in their life by deed, and at the tribunal by word, whether entertaining hope or surmising fear, are better than those who confess salvation by their mouth alone. But if one ascend also to love, he is a really blessed and true martyr, having confessed perfectly both to the commandments and to God, by the Lord; whom having loved, he acknowledged a brother, giving himself up wholly for God, resigning pleasantly and lovingly the man when asked, like a deposit,” Clement of Alexandria, Stromata. Trans Alexander Roberts and James Donaldson. ANF2 (Grand Rapids, MI: Wm. B. Eerdman’s Publishing) IV-IX. By following the faith as it is transmitted by the Church, a faith that is lived out in the flesh and through the sacraments sanctifies that flesh, one comes to know the true Lord of Salvation. “Faith itself builds true philosophy, that is, true conversion on the journey to take through life. Hence, authentic ‘gnosis’ is a development of faith inspired by Jesus Christ in the soul united with him, ” Pope Benedict XVI, General Audience, April 18, 2007.
Facing such a difficult opposition, Gnostics tried to justify themselves by creating books which claimed to be the real teachings of the Apostles. Some were easily seen by all for the forgeries they were, but, by the fact so many Gnostics attempted this kind of subterfuge, some books were more difficult to dismiss and challenged the authority of the Church. Looking at them, we can see that some, like the Gospel of Thomas, were closer in spirit and thought to true Christianity. This explains why even today some people consider them as authentic sources of Christian thought. Indeed, we can admit that some of them probably did mix in elements of the Apostolic tradition, known by all at the time but lost in the annals of history. For this reason, a scholar could use them to help understand the beliefs of ancient Christians. But the key here is that such a scholar must be careful, and not seduced by the Gnostics. Vladimir Solovyov, perhaps more than anyone else, showed us how difficult and valuable such an exploration can be, but even he, in the care he took to overcome the errors of the Gnostics, had problems overcoming their influences.
For most people, there is no need for such exploration, because the danger is ever present when one studies the writings of the Gnostics, and they can slowly affect the way we think of the world and our Christian faith by the power of suggestion. For example, Gnostic eschatology has had a profound influence on the history of Christian thought and especially on how many, if not most, Christians view salvation. How is eternal life presented to the public at large? We die and go to heaven, existing, as it were, as spirits or angels for all eternity. What role is there for the body here? What need is there for it? None. This popular understanding of eternal life does not show any comprehension or understanding that eternal life will begin with a universal resurrection of the dead and a restoration of the world to it ideal existence. “We know that the whole creation has been groaning in travail together until now; and not only the creation, but we ourselves, who have the first fruits of the Spirit, groan inwardly as we wait for adoption as sons, the redemption of our bodies” (Rom 8:22-23).
One can but wonder how this popular vision of Christianity became the norm. People can hold this mistaken view and still find salvation. But it is clear that this view is dangerous, and many people start with it and use it to justify practices which can and do harm souls and bodies. For the Gnostics, this belief suggested one of two ways of life. Some Gnostics rejected the flesh so much that they became austere ascetics, condemning any and all who live normal lives within the world. The ways of the world were to be entirely rejected; severe fasting and sexual abstinence were required for salvation. By doing this one slowly freed oneself from the prison of the flesh. We can find examples of this kind of Gnosticism in the teachings of Saturninus, an early Gnostic, or with the later Encratites following Tatian. Saturninus’ followers, who were probably far more radical than the Encratites, said that “marriage and generation are from Satan,” and that many “who belong to his school, abstain from animal food, and draw away multitudes by a feigned temperance of this kind,” Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, I.XXIV.2 For other Gnostics, the response was libertine. Since the world is evil, its mores are also evil. Instead of abstinence, promiscuity became the norm. For Gnostics of this kind, such as the Carpocrates, many of their religious services were agape “love feasts” which were nothing else than gluttonous meals followed by wild, free-for-all orgies, the kind of which became quite famous in the Roman world (cf. Clement,StromataIII-II). They justified these actions by all kinds of strange theological explanations (the Carpocrates, for example, said that it was by experiencing all that is possible in the flesh we grow tired of the flesh and we will therefore be ready to experience the higher, spiritual realms when we die). Because these Gnostics were believed to be Christians by the non-Christians, we can understand why Roman officials often believed Christians were morally lax. “These men, even as the Gentiles, have been sent forth by Satan to bring dishonour upon the Church, so that, in one way or another, men hearing the things which they speak, and imagining that we all are such as they, may turn away their ears from the preaching of the truth; or, again, seeing the things they practise, may speak evil of us all, who have in fact no fellowship with them, either in doctrine or in morals, or in our daily conduct,”Irenaeus, Adversus Haereses, I.XXV.3. While many might suggest that modern-day “spiritualists” who hold a similar eschatology do not follow such harmful and dishonorable teachings as these, if we just explore the situation further, we will see that this is not the case.
Ad-Free & Subscriber Log-In