Howdy, Stranger!

It looks like you're new here. If you want to get involved, click one of these buttons!

Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04
Welcome home! Please contact lincoln@icrontic.com if you have any difficulty logging in or using the site. New registrations must be manually approved which may take several days. Can't log in? Try clearing your browser's cookies.

How many Gnostic Christians are left in the world?

DaftChrisDaftChris Spiritually conflicted. Not of this world. Veteran
I've been researching more mystical branches of the major world religions and came across Gnostic Christianity. It seems to place more emphasis on a personal unity with the divine and not scripture or law. It can be compared to Sufism in Islam or Kabbalah in Judaism. In many ways, it can actually be compared to Buddhism in practice.

However,unlike Sufism or Kabbalah, there isn't really an organization of Christian Gnostics. Surely they do still exist? Whether under the guise of another denomination or otherwise?

Also, are there nay good books or other sources on this particular branch?

Comments

  • I would consider it more like Christian mysticism say like the monks in the Catholic church.

    Thomas Keating would be a good example of practice/gnosis over faith/scripture.
  • Didn't we have a thread where it came out that gnostics denied Jesus had a gross body? Like said that he never pinched a loaf? So Jesus seen by them is just spirit.
    Niwalen
  • CittaCitta Veteran
    edited November 2012
    I think you would gind that Thomas Keating would deny any kind of association with " Gnostic " Christianity. And DaftChris, all authentic Sufi groups base their teaching around the Qu'ran.
    Check it out.
  • Well I am definitely just lumping a complex system into "Christian Mystics".

    The basic premise is that these individuals and at times groups place emphasis on the subjective experience of the divine, rather than belief in scriptural dogma.

    A good example of this is the Desert Fathers.

    Why I include Thomas Keating into this is because he offers contemplative practices to experientially know the divine.

    The basic premise of the Gnostics is to have gnosis or direct knowledge of God. I recall they didn't have too much holistic thought beyond this because expression becomes completely different per subjective experience of God.

    This is a subject that fascinates me to no end.
  • stavros388stavros388 Explorer
    edited November 2012
    If you want a living and deep tradition of Christian mysticism, I personally wouldn't bother with the Gnostics. Pick up a copy of the Philokalia and go visit an Eastern Orthodox church, and/or a monastery if possible. Sure, there is a scriptural and ritual basis for Orthodox Christianity, but it also has nearly 2000 years of monastic and contemplative tradition at its core. I was captivated by the Gnostics for some time, too, but the new Gnostics are more like New Age western occult "christians". There really isn't an existing, long standing tradition to speak of... just new ones. One I know of is based on the writings of Samael Aun Weor. Another more ecclesiastical one is the Ecclesia Gnostica. A bishop in that church is Stephan A. Hoeller, and he has put out some insightful books on Gnosticism. For a good read, you might want to try "The Gnostic Gospels" by Elaine Pagel. I can recommend some better (orthodox) Christian mystics for you, though: try Meister Eckhart, St. Simeon the New Theologian, or St. Theophan the Recluse.
    SilouanlobsterCitta
  • Or modern writers like Thomas Merton or Robert Llewellyn.
    They have penetrated to the heart of Christianity. The " Gnostics" relate to Christianity like Osho Rajneesh does to Buddhism. ..Not at all.
  • Doesn't the EO church believe that Christ is the only way?
  • CittaCitta Veteran
    edited November 2012
    Merton had left the historical Jesus behind. He had reached the place where all language fails.
    As he said commenting on the passage where Jesus is baptised in the Jordan.." The axe is at the foot of the tree "
  • Another modern Christian, Harry Williams who was a monk. spoke at his initial sorrow at having to surrender his internal image of Jesus , which had been his object of devotion since he was a child, in order to experience God as non dual.
    He writes at length about this in his biography " Someday I'll Find You "...
    Sile
  • music said:

    Doesn't the EO church believe that Christ is the only way?

    Well, yes. But in St. John's Gospel, we are told that Christ is the Eternal Word, or Logos, and is the "light that enlightens every man", and whose "life is the light of men." Taken this way, it is not so black-and-white as Biblical literalists would claim that it is. Even one of the early church fathers - St. Athanasius, I believe - stated that while Christ the Logos was present fully in the life of Jesus, He cannot be confined only to that historical expression. Seen this way, I would say that Christ has parallels with Mahayana's Buddha-nature. Anyway, I see dogmas and doctrines forming a kind of protective contextual tunnel that preserves the practical, transformative, "mystical", salvific or saving means of a religion, not ends unto themselves. And Christians are meant to work on "removing the plank" from their own eyes, not judging who else is going to be "saved" or not. The "Spirit bloweth where it listeth", after all.

    Back to the matter raised by the OP... I understand that some people have issues with the claims of exclusivity made by Christians and members of other faiths. I do, also, in fact. But I maintain that, while Gnostic philosophy has an appeal, especially to those who have an aversion to organized religion, it offers little in the way of practical transformative application and tends to dabble more with magic and obe's and things that are really not fruitful to a healthy and serious spiritual life. If daftChris is interested in pursuing a Christian mysticism, based on my research and experience, that of Orthodoxy is the best I can suggest.



    Florian
  • Citta said:

    Another modern Christian, Harry Williams who was a monk. spoke at his initial sorrow at having to surrender his internal image of Jesus , which had been his object of devotion since he was a child, in order to experience God as non dual...

    Makes me think of this...

    "Jesus said to her, "Do not hold me, for I have not yet ascended to the Father; but go to my brethren and say to them, I am ascending to my Father and your Father, to my God and your God." -Gospel of St. John, 20:17
  • Bede Griffiths is another mystic worth mentioning. He was a Catholic monk in India who viewed Christ in the light of the non-dualism of Vedanta.
  • I had the honour of meeting Bede Griffiths. He had that presence which you find in high Lamas and teachers like Ajahn Sumedho...He had I suspect , hit the motherlode...
    stavros388
  • DaftChrisDaftChris Spiritually conflicted. Not of this world. Veteran
    @stavros388

    Thank you so much for the sugesstions. Quite informative.

    However, I can't be an Orthodox Christian; as, at least at face value, it states that it is the only way to "salvation". It is right and everyone else is wrong. Also my homosexuality would prevent me from taking sacrament. As homosexuality is viewed as "immoral" in Orthodoxy.

  • No..its real problem Chris..but the loss is Orthodoxies.
    You could if you so desired be Christian and orthodox with a small " o" though..lots of gay people are. There is an organisation called Inclusive Church which welcomes everyone irrespective of sexual orientation, they are quite happy to receive people of other faiths too.
  • DaftChris said:

    @stavros388
    However, I can't be an Orthodox Christian; as, at least at face value, it states that it is the only way to "salvation". It is right and everyone else is wrong. Also my homosexuality would prevent me from taking sacrament. As homosexuality is viewed as "immoral" in Orthodoxy.

    I'm sorry. It is a shame that the stone-age discrimination against homosexuals found in the Old Testament made it into Christianity and was institutionalized. Jesus Himself never says anything about homosexuality in the gospels (but He does say a whole lot about not judging others)! Orthodoxy does accommodate homosexuals who want to pursue the monastic life. Fr. Seraphim Rose, a famous American Orthodox convert and priest-monk, and former meditation student of Alan Watt, is widely believed to have been gay. That said, it still isn't fair, imo, because few people are cut out for a life of complete renunciation and celibacy. :crazy: And I understand your aversion to claims of exclusivity. FWIW, there are many Orthodox writers and thinkers that do not make such claims, and who even believe in a kind of universal salvation (e.g. Philip Sherrard, Prof. James S. Cutsinger, Kyriacos C. Markides, etc.)

    How about practicing... Buddhism? ;)

    I sincerely wish you all the best in your spiritual search.
  • To hold ideas about what is moral and what is not has a juridical or legal basis that is found in forms of Western Christianity where Orthodoxy is ontological. Human persons by their nature are not immoral but good, and homosexuality like heterosexuality is seen as a temporary condition that does not affect that innate goodness.

    The sole purpose of an Orthodox Christian is Theosis or union with God. Our actions either move us away from that union or move us closer. The Church provides spiritual guidance on what that is, and the first step towards true humility is obedience to what it prescribes. We struggle with our passions, and bear our crosses whatever they may be, and that is our road to salvation.

    Yes, only couples in heterosexual union are permitted to participate in the Holy Mystery of Marriage, but being heterosexual does not mean all one's sexual desires and passions can be fulfilled, within marriage, before marriage, and outside of marriage.

    I'm heterosexual, but I'm not permitted to participate in the Holy Mystery of the Priesthood. Not because I'm married, but that I had pre-marital heterosexual relations. A person with a homosexual orientation is not restricted from being a priest on the basis of their sexual orientation.

    Fr Seraphim Rose, a well loved and respected American contemporary Orthodox priest monk, who reposed in the early 80's pursued the calling of angelic monastic life of abstinence despite having a homosexual orientation. Icons depicting his image are now appearing within the Church with the nimbus. This means that there is a consensus building within the Church regarding his holiness, and probable sainthood.

    The Church body is a community of people including laity, and yes, to that community it is the only way for them, but this does not mean that it is your way too. The Church does not believe the activity of the Holy Spirit to be confined only within the Church, but is ever present and fillest all things. Truth can be found everywhere. However, Orthodox Christians believe that the fullness of truth is found participating in the life of the Church otherwise they wouldn't be there.

    Also, it isn't our place to judge that someone inside and outside the faith is condemned or not though there are certainly people in both instances that do that, but our holy task is to condemn ourselves and not others. For one to see self condemnation in a juridical light is off the mark.
  • Stephan Hoeller has proposed a summary by professor Clark Emery of the U. of Miami. Hoeller writes:

    "To understand Gnosticism, said Hans Jonas, one needs something very much like a musical ear. Such a Gnostic "musical ear" is not come by easily. One person who seemingly possesses it is Professor Clark Emery of the University of Miami. In a small work on William Blake, Emery summarizes twelve points on which Gnostics tended to agree. Nowhere in the current literature have I found anything else so concise and accurate in describing the normative characteristics of the Gnostic mythos. Hence I shall present it here as a suggested collection of criteria that one might apply in determining what Gnosticism is. The following characteristics may be considered normative for all Gnostic teachers and groups in the era of classical Gnosticism; thus one who adheres to some or all of them today might properly be called a Gnostic:

    *The Gnostics posited an original spiritual unity that came to be split into a plurality.

    *As a result of the precosmic division the universe was created. This was done by a leader possessing inferior spiritual powers and who often resembled the Old Testament Jehovah.

    *A female emanation of God was involved in the cosmic creation (albeit in a much more positive role than the leader).

    *In the cosmos, space and time have a malevolent character and may be personified as demonic beings separating man from God.

    *For man, the universe is a vast prison. He is enslaved both by the physical laws of nature and by such moral laws as the Mosaic code.

    *Mankind may be personified as Adam, who lies in the deep sleep of ignorance, his powers of spiritual self-awareness stupefied by materiality.

    *Within each natural man is an "inner man," a fallen spark of the divine substance. Since this exists in each man, we have the possibility of awakening from our stupefaction.

    *What effects the awakening is not obedience, faith, or good works, but knowledge.

    *Before the awakening, men undergo troubled dreams.

    *Man does not attain the knowledge that awakens him from these dreams by cognition but through revelatory experience, and this knowledge is not information but a modification of the sensate being.

    *The awakening (i.e., the salvation) of any individual is a cosmic event.

    *Since the effort is to restore the wholeness and unity of the Godhead, active rebellion against the moral law of the Old Testament is enjoined upon every man.
    Jeffrey
  • There is an organization of Christian neo-Gnostics; "psychic" Sylvia Browne belongs to it. But the problem with the direct communication with the Divine is that it can become difficult to differentiate between people's own imagination or personal interests and the mystical message. Some of the Gnostic groups were into some very weird stuff. On the other hand, the Orthodox Church encourages mystical union with the Divine. Maybe somehow more guidance is provided by Church elders.
  • http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=Ap7kreDRzgQ

    Romanian Orthodox mystic hermit-priests This really reminds me of Buddhism, meditating in caves.
  • As an alternative to reconstructed Gnosticism, you might look into the Mandaeans. They would seem to represent living (unbroken) Gnostic tradition.

    There's a great introduction here, including selected Mandaean texts, to which the Gnostic Society Library gives the following summary:

    "In Mandaean texts, including these short excerpted texts below, the word "Uthra" is frequently encountered -- in Mandaean, the Uthra is a "divine messenger of the light" or "angel". When read with contemplation, these nine brief Mandaean hymn and prayer texts offer stunning insights into the nature of the Mandaean Gnosis."

    http://gnosis.org/library/mand.htm
  • Thanks for that list of attributes, Sile, very useful summary.
Sign In or Register to comment.