Considering the Gnostic Sacraments

Copyright 1990 by John R. Mabry

To the Catholic Christian (Roman, Orthodox or Anglican) the sacraments are absolutely central to the spiritual life. The Catholic depends on the Eucharist for his or her soul's sustenance and there is little cynicism regarding their importance or efficacy; Baptism, Confirmation and Matrimony all mark momentous occasions of spiritual passage, and this seems to have been so since as early as the second century when the Christian community recorded their rituals in the Didache. Competing with (and often residing within) the early community were the Gnostic Christians, offering similar sacraments that in some ways differed from the sacraments of orthodox practice. How were they similar and what did the Gnostics' innovations accomplish for them that transported them beyond the reach of the orthodox rites?

At first it seems unlikely that the Gnostics would have sacraments at all. The Gnostic mythos made a strong point of its radical dualism, the logic by which made it impossible for the truly divine to be soiled in any way through contact with corruptible matter. To the orthodox, though, the sacraments are themselves divine, in the case of the Eucharist, or communicators of gracious states in the remaining sacraments. "The sacraments are," according to the Book of Common Prayer, "outward and visible signs of inward and spiritual grace, given by Christ as sure and certain means by which we receive that grace."1

The sacraments then, are not simply the means of the transmission of grace but they are psychological confirmation of contact with the Divine. For modern Protestants, grace, salvation and union are wholly intellectual exercises, not lived physical experience, which is the Catholic birthright. Corrupt or not, fallen or not, the physical world is where we live and that is where God meets us. This poses problems for the dualistic Gnostics, and different schools dealt with this challenge in various ways. For some Gnostics it is unthinkable that the truly Divine could ever have any contact with the corrupt corporeal world, to the extent of even denying the incarnation of Jesus.2

Some Gnostics cursed and rejected the orthodox sacraments on the grounds that they are alien and were established in the name of the demiurge.3 For the readers of the Gospel of Philip, though, we can be absolutely certain concerning the corporeal nature of their sacramental system. It tells us that the "truth did not come to the world nakedly; rather, it cam in prototypes and images: the world will not accept it in any other form. Rebirth exists along with an image of rebirth: by means of the this image one must be truly reborn."4 The purpose of the image is to make "the lower like the upper and the outer like the inner."5 Thus, as even the orthodox would agree, the "outward and visible" signs correspond to an "inward and spiritual" effect.

The Gospel of Philip, in fact, has been invaluable in the study of the early Gnostic sacramental system. Dr. Stephan A. Hoeller, Presiding Bishop of the Ecclesia Gnostica, calls it "a manual of Gnostic sacramental theology."6 Often the Gnostic literature refers to "the five seals."7 This is apparently in reference to the five sacraments honored by the Valentinian school, to which the author of the Gospel of Philip seems to belong. The Gospel of Philip informs us that "The Lord [did] all things by means of a mystery...." The word for sacrament in the Greek is musterion, so we can assume that for the authors of the Gospel of Philip God works primarily through the "mysteries," the sacraments listed thus: "baptism, chrism, eucharist, ransom and bridal chamber."8

There has been much speculation on the relationship of the orthodox sacraments to those listed in ...Philip. Baptism and the eucharist seem to be intact, but there is dissent over the others. Chrism would appear to be confirmation, although Stephan Hoeller suggests it could be either holy orders or unction since both also incorporate the anointing of oil.9 Dr. Hoeller thinks it likely that the Gnostic redemption and bridal chamber have degenerated into the much more mundane sacraments of penance and matrimony.10 And although the Book of Common Prayer refers to baptism and eucharist as the "great sacraments,"11 ...Philip informs us that "...there are higher ones than these."12 Could it be that the early orthodox church's "minor sacraments" were far more glorious than the remnants we have inherited? Episcopal priest John Rossner in his book In Search of the Primordial Tradition and the Cosmic Christ informs us that

...some of the more Hellenized of the early church Fathers, such as Clement of Alexandria and Origen, described what they believed to be a genuinely Christian "gnosis"--or tradition of esoteric wisdom--in the Gospels and in the primitive Church. Orthodox Fathers, such as Polycarp, Ignatius of Antioch and many others, wrote of the sublime "mysteries" of the Gospel and of the Church and sacraments in language apparently borrowed from the pagan mystery religions and from pre- Christian philosophical traditions.13

Baptism

Baptism is so central to Christian praxis that it's hard to imagine this ritual as having a pagan origin. But in fact, "purification rituals were common in Judaism and one use in particular, i.e., the initiation of proselytes, is thought by many to lie behind the baptism of John the Baptist."14 Although mentioned in all four of the canonical gospels, John's baptism itself was pre-Christian and was a familiar rite practised widely by many religious traditions. The books of the Old Testament Pseudepigrapha make it clear that there was a long history of pre-Christian Gnostic use of the baptismal rite. The Sibylline Oracles demanded that the people "...abandon daggers and groanings, murders and outrages and wash your whole bodies in perennial rivers."15 Pre-Christian Gnostic texts also made use of baptism, providing the faithful with the arcane knowledge of the names of the beings who preside over the baptismal waters.16 The Apocalypse of Adam, which we are reasonably sure developed independently of Christian influence includes a truly transcendent vision of a messianic baptismal initiation which echoes loudly the canonical initiation of Jesus:

He received the glory of that one and the power.

He came to the bosom of his mother. And thus he came to the water.

...He came from a great prophet.

And a bird came, took the child who was born, and carried him to a high mountain.

And he was nourished by the bird of heaven.

An angel came forth there and said to him, "Rise up! God has given you glory."

He received glory and strength.

And thus he came to the water.

...This is the secret knowledge of Adam which he imparted to Seth, which is the holy baptism of those who know the eternal knowledge through the ones born of the word and the imperishable illuminators, those who came from the holy seed...Then the seed will fight against the power, those who will receive his name upon the water, and of them all.17

For the Christian Gnostics, this was the initiatory stage of spiritual progress.18 The Gospel of the Egyptians "tells the gnostic myth as thought it were the solemn prelude to a baptismal ritual;" Bentley Layton writes in the introduction to this gospel "the work ends with an account of the establishment of gnostic baptism and a baptismal service book, including a list of metaphysical beings that preside over gnostic baptism and a hymn to be said by the baptized."19 For the Christian Gnostics, the archetypal baptism is Jesus', for according to some Gnostic belief, the Christ is a principle or an office or a state of being that was inferred on Jesus and not intrinsic to his nature. The savior was not Jesus the human, but "the dove that descended into him."20

Although The Gospel of Philip is clear as to the outward "signs" of the sacraments, many other of the Christian Gnostics abhorred such rites. Elaine Pagel quotes The Testimony of Truth saying that "Physical rituals like baptism become irrelevant, for 'the baptism of truth is something else; it is by renunciation of [the] world that it is found.'"21 St. Epiphanius wrote that the Archontics believe that when one is converted, the soul "gets gnosis and flees the baptism of the [non-gnostic] church."22 Layton, in The Gnostic Scriptures inquires as to whether there was "also a physical gnostic rite of baptism, and if so was it a once-for-all initiation into the new kinship of the gnostic church or a repeatable act of mystical enlightenment?" For clearly, for some "the ceremony takes place not on earth, but only in the spiritual realm."23 It seems unlikely to me that it was a "repeatable act of mystical enlightenment" since one cannot conveniently "forget" knowledge in order to experience one's initial experience of exposure to it. Stephen Hoeller has a synthesis that is worth considering, though, when he proposes that

Baptism was practiced by the authors of this gospel in two forms. Ordinary baptism as administered by the orthodox was known to the Gnostics as "psychic baptism," because it was designed for people whose consciousness was lodged in them in-emotion complex and who were not ready to enter the realm of spirit.A higher form of baptism was known/n as "pnuematic baptism," indicating that when administered in this fashion, the baptismal rite no longer merely served the purpose of purifying the should, but rather put the personality in touch with the higher, or spiritual Self. Baptism as well as all the other mysteries possessed an indelible character; their effect could never be wiped out."24

Although it seems to me that Dr. Hoeller is speculating somewhat freely, it is speculation worth considering, and especially his final point regarding the security of the experience. ...Philip tells us, in the parable of God as the dyer, that what God has dyed--by dipping in water--are "imperishable."25

Anyone who goes down into the water and comes up without having received anything and says, "I am a Christian," has borrowed the name. But one who receives the holy spirit has the gift of the name. Anyone who has received a gift will not have it taken away...So it is with us, if something comes to pass through a mystery.26 (emphasis mine.)

It is a popular theory that during this initiatory ritual the gnosis was first conferred. It is in this act that the acquaintance, or the meeting and joining of the (masculine) human soul with the (feminine) Divine Spirit is first made, creating the immortal androgynous unity. It is in the baptismal liturgy of the neo-gnostic Liberal Catholic Church that the priest asks that the "gate of Thy glory [the mind]" be "replenished with the spirit of Thy wisdom [Sophia, the holy spirit."27 The initiate was now considered spiritually immortal, promised in the First Thought in Three Forms that "whichever persons have gained acquaintance of their receivers, according as they have been instructed and have learned, shall not taste death."28 ...Philip concurs, explaining that Jesus had perfected the ritual, so that the believer (or rather, I suppose, the Knower) might go down into the water, but he or she does not go down likewise into death.29 Eloquently the author of ...Philip offers a poetic pun on pnuema (the word for both wind and spirit in Greek), saying "Whenever the [wind] blows, winter comes: whenever the holy spirit blows, summer comes."30 First Thought in Three Forms continues, confirming in baptism "that along with [the] glories, you become the glory in which you existed in the beginning."31 The fatal cosmic rift between the believer and the Original God is thus repaired.

Baptism, for the Gnostic and the orthodox Christian, symbolizes--and sacramentally, bestows--death and resurrection. But whereas for the orthodox, this resurrection is a spiritual foreshadowing of a coming physical resurrection--a "vouchsafe" or "downpayment" of the Spirit to be redeemed at the end of the world, for the Gnostic, the baptismal ritual is the resurrection. "People who say they will first die and then arise are mistaken. If they do not first receive resurrection while they are alive, once they have died they will receive nothing."32 The Gospel of Philip gives us a verse that summarizes the breadth of Gnostic baptismal efficacy:

We are anointed by the Spirit. When we were born [again] we were joined. No one can see himself in the water or in a mirror without light. Nor, again, can you see by the light without water or a mirror. For this reason it is necessary to baptize with two things-- light and water. And light means Chrism.33

Chrism

Chrism is not a familiar word in Christian circles, though the act itself is common enough; the anointing with oil is practiced for a variety of reasons, including baptism, confirmation, ordination, unction and reconciliation. Which of these, precisely is intended by the Gnostics is difficult to say. The act itself goes far back into Judaic tradition and signifies favor or that something is chosen for sacred purposes. Even for the Jews, anointing had a sacramental quality to it, as when Enoch tells his son in the Pseudepigraphal book of 2 Enoch, "Since the time when the Lord anointed me with the ointment of my glory, it has been horrible for me, and food is not agreeable to me, and I have no desire for earthly food."34

Dr. Hoeller places the sacrament of chrism second in what he sees as initiatory stages into the Gnostic mysteries. "Water is used to wash," he writes, "oil is employed to seal."35 The Roman Catholic Catechism defines confirmation as the "sacrament of spiritual strength-ening,"36 also regarding it as a secondary stage after baptism.

This is a little confusing when we look to the Gospel of Philip because it seems to be giving us mixed signals. It is often referred to accompanied by the baptismal water, yet we are also told that whoever has it has already received all things from the father in the bridal chamber--the last sacrament in our hierarchy of musterion. "Whoever has been annointed has everything: resurrection, light, cross, holy spirit; the father has given it to that person in the bridal chamber, and the person has received it."37 It may be that, like the orthodox sacraments, there was the single sacrament of Chrism, but that anointed was also the sacred seal employed in the subsequent rituals as well.

Since it is even employed at baptism, oil seems to be universally regarded as communicating and sealing, verifying and sacralizing these ritual acts. Bishop of the Liberal Catholic Church C.W. Leadbeater writes in his Science of the Sacraments "The chrism is that kind of sacred oil which contains incense, and therefore it is used always for purificatory purposes."38 This makes sense in our hierarchy of sacraments: there is the washing of the body and psyche/soul (baptism) and then the purifying of the spirit (chrism). "Soul and spirit are constituted of water and fire," says ...Philip.39 To the Gnostics it was more than purifying the old soul, and more than regeneration. For them it was the identification with the archetype of the anointed one (Christ), wherein the believer becomes, literally, anointed, and equally literally, the anointed one, Christ. "For this person is no longer a Christian but rather is Christ."40

Eucharist

The Feast of Thanksgiving, the eucharist is the single most important sacrament in orthodox Christian life. Its importance is attested to in the Didache and other early church documents, and it remains central to Catholic life and worship. The Catechism tells us of the elements of bread and wine

When you see it exposed, say to yourself: Thanks to this body, I am no longer dust and ashes, I am no more captive but a free man. Hence I hope to obtain heaven and the good things that are there in store for me, eternal life, the heritage of the angels, companionship with Christ. Death has not destroyed this body, which was pierced by nails and scourged.41

Volumes of sentimental devotional material have been published in honor of this sacrament, which has always been an object of great emotional attachment to the Catholic. It is also the most disputed sacrament in the history of the church, with Protestants checking in at all levels of reverence from Luther's "consubstantiation" to the Baptist declaration, "it's only a symbol." (Whatever that means.) But for those whom the feast is truly sacred, this bread and wine are every bit as necessary to their sustenance as the more mundane food of daily life. It is the "continuing grace" which is repeatable and efficacious for a lifetime.

It may be that this feast was not only the next step in Gnostic initiation but their ongoing center of worship. This seems most likely as regards the Valentinian school we find in ...Philip who could pass, if one did not question too closely for early Christians and sometimes did. According to Geddes MacGregor, the Gnostic Christians might even have felt at home with the concept of the Real Presence.42 Neo-Gnostics like the Liberal Catholic Church glory in the mystery of transubstantiation, describing the elements in the moment of consecration as being "switched aside with the speed of a lightening flash, and its place is taken by what looks like a line of fire--a single thread of communication, reaching up, without division or alteration, to the Lord Christ Himself."43 This is ironic, since the formulation of the doctrine of transubstantiation is traditionally attributed to St. John and St. Ignatious for the sole purpose of keeping the idea of the union of God's spirit with flesh in Jesus before the minds (and eyes) of the early Christians in order to battle the heretical dualisms of the Gnostics.

Yet, the Gospel of Philip says that the "Cup of prayer contains wine and contains water, being established as a representation of the blood over which thanksgiving is offered. And it is full of the holy spirit, and belongs entirely to the perfect human being. Whenever we drink it we take unto ourselves the perfect human being."44 Here, then is the difference between the orthodox and gnostic mystery. The orthodox receives in the feast grace to compensate for his imperfect state, and the Gnostic receives perfection itself. Perfection in the eucharist is "spread out" as ...Philip says, to the community.45 The eucharist also seems to be for the Gnostics an affirmation of their salvation. Denying the physical resurrection, the eucharist is evidence of their present spiritually resurrected state.

What is this flesh that will not inherit [the kingdom of God]? The one that we are wearing. And what, too, is this flesh that will inherit it? It is Jesus' flesh, along with his blood. Therefore he said, "He who does not eat my flesh and drink my blood does not have life within him."46 (emphasis mine.)

Redemption

Redemption is the most ambiguous of the Gnostic sacraments. It has no orthodox ritual equivalent (excepting the reconciliation theory) but is for the orthodox a state or an act of God, not an act ritually performed by humans. Whatever the ritual was to the Gnostics it must remain a true mystery to us. At least the sacrament of the Bridal chamber provides us with rich imagery suggestive of possible ritual actions. Dr. Hoeller calls redemption "a heroic act of renunciation and commitment," in which the Gnostic becomes "free of the compelling attachments to this world and its rulers."47 For Elaine Pagels, the Greek equivalent of redemption is apolytrosis, "release."

"Before gaining gnosis the candidate worshiped the demiurge, mistaking him for the true God: now, through the sacrament of redemption, the candidate indicates that he has been released from the demiurge's power. In this ritual he addresses the demiurge, declaring his independence, serving notice that he no longer belongs to the dimiurge's sphere of authority and judgement, but to what transcends it."48

Pagels' source for this conclusion is Ireaneus and is as good as any other theory I can devise or have read. In the neo-Gnostic rite, the initiate repeats the words "I am established, I am redeemed, and I redeem my soul from this aeon, and from all that comes from it, in the name of IAO, who redeemed his soul unto the redemption of Christ the living one."49 This utterance of "Iao" first appears as the words that dropped from the mouth of Sophia as she left the safety of the pleroma50, so that the repetition of the name occurs upon the initiate's spiritual reunification with the All, completing a sort of redemption; a "buying back" and reparation of the fatal cosmic moment.

Hans Jonas in his The Gnostic Religion also makes mention of the concept of the redeemed redeemer, that previous to humankind's redemption, Jesus, through a series of lifetimes, had to effect his own redemption prior to helping with ours. "Ultimately the descending Alien redeems himself, that is, that part of himself (the Soul) once lost to the world and for its sake he himself must become a stranger in the land of darkness and in the end a "saved savior."51 This is reminiscent of Jung's proposition in Answer to Job that the crucifixion wasn't for man's atonement, but primarily for God's. Archetypically, the story is the same: reconciliation with a Dark God. "The one anointed in the beginning was reanointed; the one who had been ransomed ransomed others in return."52

Bridal Chamber

Of all the Gnostic sacraments, the bridal chamber seems to be the most important, both by virtue of archetypal action involved and the weight of the frequency of references in The Gospel of Philip. There is still some dispute over whether the climactic sacrament was the bridal chamber or redemption, but most sources favor the former.53

The import of this sacrament is the culmination of the Gnostic mythos. The archetypal myth (from One into many, the many into the One) has the bridal chamber as its end, the reunification of the believer with his spiritually sexual opposite, creating an androgynous unification that renders the archons helpless and seals the believer's destiny.

The use of sexual imagery to symbolize human union with the divine is not unfamiliar to the orthodox Christian, indeed canonical sources are rich with it. The Song of Songs in both its Jewish and Christian interpretations positively drips with sexually unabashed language and with spiritual overtones that suggest much more than they actually say. In the minor prophets, Hosea's own life played out an object lesson concerning Yaweh's marriage to humankind and our unfaithfulness in that covenant. In the Christian scriptures, Jesus often relates parables in which he casts himself as the bridegroom and the souls of humankind as the bride. In Hebrew, the word yada is the equivalent of the Greek gnosis, yet its connotations include both acquaintance and sexual intamicy.

The mythic roots of the Gnostic rite go back to the Garden. "In the days when Eve was [in] Adam, death did not exist. When she was separated from him, death cam into existence. If he [reenters] and takes it unto himself death will not exist."54 So the primeval man was perfect because s/he possessed unity. Matthew Fox suggests that the original sin was dualism, which is not far from the Gnostic position.55 For the Gnostic, it is Jesus' role (as redeemer) to reunite with Sophia, and, mythically, to allow humankind with the help of gendered angels to share in that mystery. "It was for this purpose that his body came into being. On that day he came forth from the bridal bedroom as from what comes to pass between a bridegroom and a bride,"56 which is to say, a unity. This represents "the healing of this disruption and the restoration of wholeness."57

The Gnostics aren't through with Jesus yet, however; this spiritual union was, as myths are, played out on numerous stages, and Jesus "shared the bill" with Mary Magdalene in the gnostic accounts of his life. She is the "woman who knew the All."58 Jesus also loses the holy spirit as his true father, for in the gnostic accounting, spirit (pneuma) is feminine (the word is gendered such) and therefore "the Holy Spirit in their view is none other than God the Mother and thus cannot be the paternal agency of Jesus' conception."59 Stephan Hoeller informs us of the result of this twist: "The transcendental bride chamber thus is said to have united God the Father with God the Mother (the Holy Spirit) and Jesus has replicated this divine example for the benefit of divided humanity."60

The Gospel of Philip compares the bridal ceremony to the mystical architecture of the Jewish temple in Jerusalem. The court of the gentiles is the bastard creation, ruled by the archons, but within there is the holy place. I see the outer court (the holy place) as signifying the level of knowledge of the hylics, or material men. They get brief glimpses of glory, but do not pursue it. The intermediate stage between creation (the outer court/holy place) and the pleroma (the holy of holies), represents the psyche, the abode of the spiritually alert psychics, the group into which the orthodox fell.61 The inner chamber, the Holies of Holies is only accessible to the Knowers, the pneumatics. ...Philip borrows imagery from the Gospel of St. Matthew in speaking of the veil separating the Holies of Holies from the lesser chamber being rent from top to bottom as a result of Jesus' ministry, opening the way for humankind back into union.62 "By means of this image, the bridal chamber and the image must embark upon the realm of truth, that is, embark upon the return."63

Jesus, in The Gospel of Thomas may be making reference to the fulfillment of this unity when he is quoted as saying "When you make the two one, and when you make the inner as the outer and the outer as the inner and the above as the below and when you make the male and the female into a single one...then shall you enter the kingdom."64

About what the ritual itself consisted of, few have dared to make any concrete speculation. It is perhaps too obvious to suggest that the drama of sexual union is played out in the Holies of Holies. The initiate might have been found with a woman (if the initiate is male) who represented, or perhaps was "possessed" by the feminine energy or spirit of an angel or even the holy spirit, depending on the particulars of the group's cosmology. The experience of climax, being one of the most powerfully mystical experiences possible for humankind would certainly provide the emotional and psychic fuel for the culmination of the initiate's unitive experience. All we can do is speculate here, and even then, the text of ...Philip condemns our doing even that, saying no one can understand the mystery unless they have actually experienced it.65 The neo-Gnostic church, Ecclesia Gnostica Mysteriorum in Palo Alto incorporates the bridal chamber imagery into its eucharist by inviting communicant to receive, declaring "Come enter the Bridal Chamber and receive the most holy mystery of the Three-in-One. As the Logos and the Holy Spirit are united in the Father, so may ye attain to this divine union."66

The effects of the bridal chamber, once completed, were perpetual, continuing through the remainder of the initiate's incarnate existence and beyond, safely beyond the archons' power. The Gospel of Philip assures the believer that

Whoever receives that light will be invisible and cannot be restrained. And nothing can harass such a person even while living in the world. And, furthermore, when that person leaves this world, he or she had already received the truth in the form of images, and the world has already become the eternal realm.67

The rational is, that the evil archons can invade and, like the succubi of medieval mythology, destroy the soul, or at least continue it's imprisonment. "But when they [the archons] see a man and his wife sitting together, the female ones cannot make advances to the male, nor can the male ones make advances to the female. Just so, if the image and the angel join with one another none can dare to make advances...."68

The attainment of union with the Divine is traumatic (in its finest meaning) and cannot help but to affect one's psychological state. Jung was fascinated by the Gnostics because he recognized their mythology to be an example of mankind's disparate state, and the mysteries of the Gnostics as calling one to wholeness, integration, or to use Jung's term, individuation. Dr. Hoeller elaborates:

The Gnosis considers the human being as divided and fragmented within itself. The divisions have numerous aspects: We are involved in what modern psychology would call and Ego-Self dichotomy, in an Anima-Animus dichotomy, in a body-mind dichotomy, in a subjective- objective dichotomy, and many others. All of these divisions require mending, or healing. Even as the Pleroma or divine plenum, is characterized by wholeness, so the human being must once again become whole and thereby acquire the qualifications to reenter the Pleroma.69

The Gnostics are a complex group, too complex to label their systems or methods "good" or "bad." They were "different," and in ways we would do well to give some attention to. The striving for integration, like the refining systems of the Chinese and medieval alchemists, must be acknowledged and admired. "The Gnostic severs every connection with unconsciousness and compulsion and lives and dies as a sovereign being of light and power henceforth."70 David Fideler notes that, for the Gnostic "The Christ, or the power of gnosis within, thus acts as a bridge through which not only may the individual remember his origins, but also through which God is re-memberd, his mystical body restored."71

There is a pervading feeling that something was lost from Christianity with the demise of the Gnostic movement. Jacob Needleman in Lost Christianity maintains that the gnosis is still there, the esoteric traditions being carried on quietly by the medieval mystics, and is alive today, if we can dig deep enough in the Christian orthodox tradition to find it. Many in the Church are turning to syncristic systems involving Eastern philosophy in order to restore the "lost" dimension to the gospel. Fr. Rossner writes:

Unfortunately for Christians...something very precious went out of the Church with the gnostic Christians. That is the tradition of live psychic and spirit experience which they, like Jesus, James, John and Paul had lived by. For although they had become involved with exotic, world-denying Asian mythologies and an utterly passive stance of inward-looking mysticism, the gnostic Christians...were undoubtedly in contact with a living tradition of psychical and spiritual phenomena. This included dreams, visions, heavenly apparitions, and healing experiences which continued to feed their faith in a transcendent order behind the physical universe It was just this kind of live psychic and spirit experience and mystic vision which had fed and nurtured the wellsprings of the faith of the Fathers of the Judeo-Christian tradition...The entire Primordial Tradition of psychic intuition and spiritual insight of the ancient world, are depicted in the Bible and in pagan writing as having been motivated by divine initiative through such paranormal psychic and mystical experiences.72

It is worthwhile noting the great spiritual intuition of the Gnostic mythos and method. They had gone beyond the stage of faith that James Fowler describes as Stage III in his fine Stage of Faith or that Scott Peck calls Stage 2 in The Different Drum. According to Peck, Stage 2 represents a Formal, institutional faith, the kind held by a person who is the possessor of a literal faith; an attachment to forms, as opposed to the essence of their tradition. These are people who hold the Bible to be inerrant, who oppose reforms or any hint of chaos in their comfortable, well ordered system. They,

"are not threatened by Stage 1 people, the 'sinners.' But they are very threatened by the individualists and skeptics of Stage 3 and even more by the mystics of Stage 4, who seem to believe in the same sorts of things they do but believe in them with a freedom they find absolutely terrifying..[Stage 4 people] love mystery, in dramatic contrast to those in Stage 2, who need simple, clear-cut dogmatic structures and have little taste for the unknown and unknowable. While Stage 4 men and women will enter a religion in order to approach mystery, people in Stage 2, to a considerable extent, enter religion in order to escape from it.73

Perhaps these in Stage 4 are the inheritors of the Gnostic heritage. The mystics, who relate with the experiences inferred from the Gnostic texts, who resonate with their mysticism and sympathize with their need to remythologize the universe to make sense of it. But as Professor Needleman concludes, the Gnostic legacy has found a home, not a comfortable one, but a home nonetheless in orthodoxy.

For the vast majority of people in all religions are too spiritually immature to understand the gnostic purpose, while those who are more mature may find no more need to abandon the Church than does the eagle its nest; nor could they wish to do so. Through the ancient sacramental structure of the Church they find their own way of obtaining and (if such be their office) of administering her gnostic treasures, even if these treasures must come in curiously heavy wrappings.74

The sacraments can become for us doorways into the divine and an understanding of esoteric sacramental systems can only assist us in uncovering the buried treasure of the orthodox sacraments. Their similarities are handles for us, their transcendent differences are mystical opportunities.

For it is only by relating the experiences of the Holy claimed in the Gospels, in the lives of the saints, and in the sacramental experiences of the Church to the experiences of the Holy claimed by Hindus, Buddhists, Moslems, Jews, etc., and by New Religionists of various stripes, that the "saving link," or the "strategic bridge," can be built over which authentic forms of Christianity may pass to become once again a significant force in the global village.75

Notes

1 The Episcopal Book of Common Prayer (New York: Oxford University Press, 1979), p. 857.

2 Bentley Layton, ed. The Gnostic Scriptures (Garden City: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1987), p.211. "The Gnostics According to St. Epiphanius," 26.10.4.

3 Ibid., p. 196.

4 Ibid., p. 341. "The Gospel of Philip."

5 Ibid., p. 341.

6 Stephan A. Hoeller, Jung and the Lost Gospels (Wheaton: Quest/Theosophical Publising House, 1989), p. 204.

7 Layton, p. 99. "First Thought in Three Forms."

8 Layton, p. 341. "The Gospel of Philip."

9 Stephan A. Hoeller, "Valentinus: A Gnostic for all Seasons," Gnosis, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 23.

10 Hoeller, Jung...., p. 204.

11 Book of Common Prayer, p. 858.

12 Layton, p. 346. "The Gospel of Philip."

13 Fr. John Rossner, Ph.D. In Search of the Primordial Tradition and the Cosmic Christ (St. Paul: Llewellyn Publications, 1989), p. 87.

14 Keith Crim, ed. The Perennial Dictionary of World Religions (San Francisco: Harper & Row, 1981), pp. 89-90.

15 James H. Charlesworth, ed. The Old Testament Pseudepigrapha (Garden City: Doubleday & Company, Inc., 1983), p. 388. "The Sibylline Oracles."

16 Layton, p. 63. "Revelation of Adam."

17 Charlesworth, p. 716. "Apocalypse of Adam."

18 Hoeller Jung... pp. 204.

19 Layton, p. 101.

20 Layton, p. 295. "Ptolomy's Version of the Gnostic Myth."

21 Elaine Pagels, The Gnostic Gospels (New York: Vintage/Random House, 1979), p. 111.

22 Layton, p. 20.

23 Ibid., p. 19.

24 Hoeller, Jung... pp. 204-205.

25 Layton, p. 336. "The Gospel of Philip."

26 Ibid., p. 121.

27 The Liturgy According to the use of the Liberal Catholic Church (London: St. Alban Press, 1983), p. 287.

28 Layton, p. 117. "The Holy Book of the Great Invisible Spirit."

29 Ibid., p. 348. "The Gospel of Philip."

30 Ibid.

31 Ibid., p. 97. "First Thought in Three Forms."

32 Ibid., p. 345. "The Gospel of Philip."

33 Ibid., p. 343.

34 Charlesworth, p. 183. "2 Enoch."

35 Hoeller, Jung... p. 205.

36 John A. Hardon, SJ, The Catholic Catechism (Garden City: Doubleday & Co, Inc., 1975), 518.

37 Layton, p. 346. "The Gospel of Philip."

38 Rt. Rev. C.W. Leadbeater, The Science of the Sacraments (Wheaton: Theosophical Publishing House, 1967), 304.

39 Layton, p. 341. "The Gospel of Philip."

40 Ibid., 346.

41 Hardon, p. 460.

42 Geddes MacGregor, Gnosis: A Renaissance in Christian Thought (Wheaton: Quest/Theosophical Publishing House, 1979), p. 103.

43 Leadbeater, p. 209.

44 Layton, p. 347.

45 Ibid., p. 338.

46 Ibid., p. 333.

47 Hoeller, Jung... p. 206.

48 Pagels, p. 37.

49 Hoeller, p. 206.

50 Layton, p. 289.

51 Hans Jonas, The Gnostic Religion (Boston: Beacon Press, 1958), p. 79.

52 Layton, p. 344.

53 Hoeller, "Valentinus," p. 26.

54 Layton, p. 342.

55 Matthew Fox, OP, Original Blessing (Santa Fe: Bear & Co, 1983), p. 244.

56 Layton, p. 344.

57 Hoeller, "Valentinus", p. 26.

58 Pagels, p. 22.

59 Hoeller, Jung... p. 210.

60 Ibid., p. 209.

61 Jacques Lacariere, The Gnostics (San Francisco: City Lights Books, 1989), p. 68.

62 The Gospel of Matthew, 27:50.

63 Layton, p. 341.

64 Layton, p. 384. "The Gospel of Thomas."

65 Layton, p. 340. "The Gospel of Philip."

66 June Singer, "Jung's Gnosticism and Contemporary Gnosis." in Jung's Challeng to Contemporary Religion, ed. by Murray Stein and Rober L. Moore (Wilmette: Chiron Publications, 1987), p. 86.

67 Layton, p. 353. "The Gospel of Philip."

68 Ibid., p. 340.

69 Hoeller, "Valentinus..." p. 25.

70 Ibid., 26.

71 David Fideler, "The Passion of Sophia," Gnosis, Vol. 1, No. 1, p. 22.

72 Rossner, p. 92-93.

73 M. Scott Peck, M.D. The Different Drum: Community Making and Peace (New York: Simon and Schuster, 1987), p. 155.

74 MacGregor, p. 96.

75 Rossner, p. 84