« words, metawords, and scripture | main | romance/pornography »
The Gnostic Gospels
17 Apr 06
Pagels, Elaine. The Gnostic Gospels. New York: Random House, 1979.
Pagels identifies a number of threads in Gnostic thinking that led to the Gnostics being judged heretical by the early Church. The Gnostics posited themselves as an elite within Christianity. Gnosticism is characterized above all else by a belief that the individual, through direct access to mystical knowledge, could come to know Jesus’s true message—a message that was not revealed to all Christians. While the early Church was busy organizing itself around an ecclesiastical structure involving bishops, priests, and laity, the Gnostics were emphasizing the existence of a higher, hidden truth that could only be perceived by an enlightened individual. Once enlightened (perhaps “knowledgeable” would be better), the individual had no need for the organized Church as such. Naturally, the Gnostics found themselves at odds with the Church’s coalescing power structure.
A number of the specific beliefs embedded in that higher knowledge placed the Gnostics in direct opposition to orthodox Christianity. Pagels uses as her primary text The Nag Hammadi Library (Robinson, James M. ed. New York: Harper & Row, 1977), occasionally adding or editing the translation based on her own work on the library discovered at Nag Hammadi. As expressed in these gospels, the Gnostics believed (although not universally) that the resurrection of Jesus was a spiritual rather than a physical event. Equally importantly, they appear to have believed that the god of the Jews, hence the god of non-Gnostic Christians, was not in fact the true God, but only one of a number of lesser deities who had somehow become confused about his own uniqueness.
Pagels admits in her conclusion that she is “powerfully attracted to Christianity” (142), so it might not be wise to reject Gnosticism based on her work, but it is difficult not to sympathise with the hierarchy of the early Church, whose vision of the Church as the Body of Christ in which all were welcome was in marked contrast to the individualist elitism of the Gnostics. The early Church insisted on apostolic succession, that the fundamental basis for Christianity must be the authority of those who knew Jesus (Paul notwithstanding). In the first couple centuries after the life of Jesus, knowledge passed down by those who knew him would have seemed a solid basis for the notion of apostolic succession (unlike today, when the idea that Benedict XVI might receive any direct knowledge from Peter is absurd).
In the context of Pagels’ exploration of Gnostic thought, the recent “discovery” of the Gospel of Judas, while exciting for scholars of early Christianity, should hardly be earth shattering in its revelations. It has long been understood that the Gnostics claimed a number of sources for the alternative knowledge to which they ascribed (Mary Magdelene, most notably). Irenaeus (ca. 130-202 CE) knew of the existence of the Gospel of Judas, so it should come as no shock that this Gospel suggests Judas as an alternate source of knowledge; his role would need to be rewritten to portray him as a “true” disciple.
Posted by pzed on April 17, 2006 at 1.35pm
Categories: scripture
