Stratford+ Extracts

Several Extracts from Jordan Stratford’s+ Blog about Definition

10 Steps Toward a Gnostic Communion: A Call for Dialogue

Jordan Stratford+ (from his Blog, April 10, 2005)

 

It seems to me that the Gnostic Restoration since 1890 has been largely characterized by personality rather than theology. We desperately need a dialogue among the vital contributors of the Restoration: the big G Gnostics, the Theosophists, the Thomasine, Johannite and Primitive Christians, the Thelemites, the Liberal Catholics, the Jungians, the SAW people, the Masons, everybody with a stake and voice.

I would like to offer this analysis as an acting spine of Ecclesiastical Gnosticism through which we may move forward as a greater community.

What is a Gnostic Communion? It would seem that each gathering and Eucharist would be open and flexible enough to recognize that we each to come to gnosis through our own, unique path, and that we each have a point. The points below are not a suggestion of or for orthodoxy, but rather as explorations for common ground, and starting points for a sound debate. What I hope to see in the next decade is something greater than a concordat between Latin Johannites and Haitian Thelemites – but a respecting of territorial Bishops, a sharing of resources, the continued exchange of successions, and a more accessible Ekklesia. Okay and maybe a seminary.

To my mind, a Gnostic Communion would hold to:

1) A superrational, supernatural, superpersonal Divinity

The Big, BIG God model. I subscribe to the idea that any idea of God we can conceive rationally is a kind of idolatry. As Gnostics, we *must* have direct, firsthand experience of how Divinity relates to each of us before we can move forward and share our ideas with the world. This experience *cannot* be academic, or safely contained in language. God is not Yahweh or Osiris or Gaia; each of these are crude caricatures of God. The Pleroma can be Known, but cannot be grasped.

2) The idea of agency and and personal responsibility

a) Tag, you’re it. The Kingdom of God is within you. The Logos is not getting off a plane or manifesting as anybody you’ll see on CNN. Christ is something that happens to you, the anointing of the spark of Divinity within, and giving THAT authority over your life.

b) Gnosticism is NOT initiatory in the traditional sense. I cannot conduct a ritual making you a Gnostic and imparting the secret wisdom of the Gnostics. You have the exclusive ability and obligation to Gnosticize yourself. There are forces at work in the world to prevent this, but there are also forces in the world to enable it.

c) It’s obvious that the agents of the Archons are everywhere – but less obvious about the signals we receive from the Divine. Sophia is everywhere – everywhere, sometimes within the mechanism of the Archons themselves.

3) Ownership of terms (gnosis, pleroma, pneuma, logos)

We really need a strong, solid language as a starting point, and we need to sign off on these terms. What do we mean by Pleroma? I would love to see not just a lexicon (there are a few out there) but a real theological examination of these words in a Gnostic context.

4) Distinction between Ecclesiastical Gnosticism and philosophical “small-g” gnosticism, and a rejection of the idea of neo-gnosticism

Neo-gnosticism means anything a critic wants it to. The term is meaningless, meant to be mildly insulting, and we need to banish it from the radar. If we see an article employing the term, we need to be contacting the authors and asking them to clarify. Gnosis is the birthright of all humanity. GnosticISM is a religion for a few that at its core honours the experience of gnosis.

5) Recognition of our pre-Christian roots

Gnosticism is not an heretical branch of Christianity. We need a critical, objective look our history, its nature and syncretism – and then to be more proactive and less retroactive. What of our pre-Christian roots needs to survive? What needs to be put in the attic?

6) Rejection of literalism (esp. literalist dualism) , fundamentalism, and historical revisionism through iconoclasm, wit, humour, and joy

To my mind the single worst thing that could happen is the development of a Gnostic Fundamentalism, or a claim that Thomas (apostle and/or brother of Jesus) actually wrote Thomas, or that the events of Poimandres happened on a certain Wednesday in Damascus. We cannot be “about” dusty old codices from a jar, but rather a living, breathing religion that asks questions about domestic violence, about poverty, about media and democracy. We must fervently renounce the slanderous label of dualism, and point to how lovingly Gnostic scripture refers to natural forces. We reject the system, not the earth.

7) Communication of our rich cultural heritage

No, The Matrix doesn’t count. We need to read Blake, sponsor a tour of Roerich, publish tranlations of Soloviev. Actually we need a Blake Year.

“Valentinus, Basilides and the Logos walk into a bar…” – why are there no Gnostic jokes?

Centralize the purpose of Eucharist in our practice, not the form

Who will be the first to declare their liturgy Open Source? How about a core structure of the Mass, with a more modular approach? Insert your creed here. Regardless, we need stronger, more coherent Gnostic RE to explain what’s going on up there with the little white crackers.

9) Ecumenism, not proselytization

a) No more schisms. Please. Enough with all the schisming. Our tradition holds for independent Bishops – we don’t need a new set of incorporation documents and logos and websites with every ordination.

b) The model is not that of an hierarchical Church, but a non-resident monastery. Clergy serves those who have chosen to show up, by listening, counselling, teaching and cheerleading.

c) Unlike many religious communities in the West, we are growing. Others are disappearing. We need to build a bridge to lapsed Catholics, the Liberal Catholic Tradition, and to Reform Judaism. The latter has a lot to teach us about encoded wisdom, and surviving as a minority religion.

10) Praxis and Caritas

What do we DO, exactly, other than read and pray and argue on listservs? Each Parish needs to dedicate itself to social action by adopting one or two local, on the ground charities. It’s not enough to donate a copy of The Jesus Mysteries to your local library – that’s self-serving. I mean hot meals to elderly shut ins, the animal shelter, clean socks to the homeless. Tithe. Hours if not money. Make it a condition for membership. Nobody does a better job of this than Bishop del Campo’s folks, and they are to be lauded.

There are few enough of us to build rapid consensus and to sign off on something like this in the next ten years.

Saturday, April 22, 2006

10 Things Religious Pundits Need To Know About Gnosticism

“We don’t need to take the Gospel of Judas / Thomas / Mary seriously, because unlike Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, it wasn’t written in the first century, wasn’t written by eyewitnesses and is not historically true. It was written by an elitist world-hating sect called the Gnostics who were rejected by early Christians as heretics. Gnostics preached that the flesh was evil, and salvation was only available to a select few who had secret magical knowledge, or gnosis.”

– Every bible “expert” in the western world in the last three weeks.

 

 

I’ve read variations on this spiel at least twenty times this month. The problem is that this summation of Gnosticism is entirely false, and in many cases known by its proponents as false; this is bearing false witness.

1) Gnosticism is not a heretical sect of Christianity

Gnosticism is a distinct, pre-Christian religion. Its roots are in Alexandria in Egypt, about 2200 years ago, where a “café-society” of Greek-speaking and -educated Jews were syncretizing the myths of the ancient world with Judaism and classical Greek philosophy.

These communities and their ideas greatly influenced Christianity as it later emerged. As Christianity struggled in its first four centuries to distinguish itself from the pagan world, it slowly began to reject some of these Gnostic influences. But most of the people who still favoured these ideas considered themselves devout Christians, not heretics.

Let us not forget that the most common topic in the New Testament – more common than the power of love or redemption or the sacrfice of the cross or even the divinity of Jesus – is that “other Christians are getting it wrong”. Paul condemns James as a heretic. Jesus refers to Peter as “Satan”.

2) Gnosticism is a lot like Buddhism

Because of Gnosticism’s insistence on personal responsibility and ethics, its emphasis on singular prayer, the practice of compassion, detachment from materialism and the striving for enlightenment, it has been called “the Buddhism of the West”. The similarities between Gnosticism and Mahayana Buddhism are so strong it has been speculated that there may have been ongoing contact between the two religions.

3) The Gnostic Scriptures are, for the most part, contemporary with Christian canon

None of the four canonical Gospels were written in the first century. Mark was not written by Mark, nor Luke written by Luke. John was written in two distinct phases, the first of which showed significant Gnostic elements, and the latter a retraction and condemnation of those elements. These were based on first century oral traditions which varied greatly from region to region, but did not exist in written form until at least 100 years after the events they describe. Paul is the only first century Christian writer we have, and much of his writings were edited centuries later into the form we have today.

The Gospel of Thomas, for example, is contemporary with the later half of John, and there is some evidence to support that John’s later editors were familiar with Thomas. The scriptural authors of the second century were reaching for meaning, using their interpretation what they had heard, their intuition, their creativity, and their yearning for G@d.

4) Gnostics do not hate the physical world

Gnostic scripture frequently invokes favourably the beauty and power of the natural world; the symbolism of pregnancy, midwifery, childbirth, newborns, storms and ripe crops are frequently employed by Gnostic authors. Gnostics do not view the flesh as evil, but rather as temporary when contrasted with the immortality of the soul – a view shared by most if not all Christians.

What Gnostics reject is not the earth, but they system: the artificial world of injustice, prejudice, institutionalization and materialism.

5) Gnostics do not repudiate salvation through Grace

The role of Grace, and of the Holy Spirit, is of paramount importance to the Gnostics. Where Gnosticism differs from Christianity is that Gnosticism says that “blind faith” does not grant salvation. To be saved from the forces of deception and ignorance (maya in Buddhist parlance) one must attain enlightenment: the direct experiential intimacy with G@d that is gnosis. This experience is the birthright of every aware human person.

6) Gnosticism is not elitist

Do Christians distinguish between the saved and the unsaved? Is this elitism? Gnostic teachings frequently reinforce the idea that liberation via gnosis is available to everyone; that such distinction is a matter of reclaiming birthright, of intent, choice, and effort. In fact, Gnostic theology tends to support the idea of apokatastasis, of universal salvation.

7) Gnosticism is not Utopian.

There is nothing in Gnostic scripture to support the idea that Gnostics wish to make “heaven on earth” from human efforts, and no connection whatsoever between Gnosticism and the reshaping of society; neither from fascism nor socialism. There is no “immanentizing the eschaton” in Gnosticism: Rather, this idea is the hallmark of millennialist Christianity.

Most basic tenets of Gnosticism are supported by Christian scripture

In fact there is a litany of Christian saints who are blatantly Gnostic; St. Francis of Assisi, St. Teresa of Avila, St. John of the Cross, St. Hildegard of Bingen and St. Joan of Arc all described in detail the integrity of their experience of gnosis.

Paul says “The Kingdom of G@d is within you” which is probably the best single summation of Gnostic theology. Jesus says “My kingdom is not of this world” (Jn 18:36).

9) Gnosticism serves as a bridge between world religions

Gnosticism stands at the crossroads of Judaism, Christianity, and Islam, representing a common ground. Historically Gnosticism influenced Judaism in the development of Kabala, and Islam in the development of Sufism; it both encouraged and challenged Christianity through its early centuries and contributed profoundly to Christian theology and identity.

10) Gnostic churches are thriving

Gnostics across North America and Europe gather weekly for prayer and Eucharist in forms very similar to orthodox liturgy. We derive inspiration from the Old and New Testaments, and also from Nag Hammadi scripture such as The Gospel of Thomas and The Thunder: Perfect Mind. A vital and growing Gnostic ekklesia is serving in charities, missions and hospitals; writing, crafting, debating and working in coffeehouses and dozens of parishes around the world. Most Gnostics consider themselves Christian, their churches constituting the Body of Christ. Other Gnostics gravitate to the symbolism and traditions of the Divine Feminine in her aspect as Sophia (“wisdom”), the Shekhina (“presence”), and the Holy Spirit.

Despite book-burnings, despite the Albigensian Crusade and the Inquisition, despite schlock-populism, and despite inane castigations from self-appointed pundits, we are still here; still praying, celebrating, exploring, and asking. Still Knowing.

Wednesday, December 08, 2004

Gnosticism 101

 

Two thousand years ago, in Northern Egypt, a religious culture existed that embraced early Christianity, Qabalistic Judaism, Roman State Religion, Egyptian Mystery cults, Mithraism, and Greek philosophy. Because this religion emphasized personal revelatory experience and rejected Faith, it was a threat to the conformist orthodoxy which was taking shape in the Christian Church. Gnosticism’s adherents were first ostracized, then persecuted, then slaughtered. But Gnosticism’s ideas speak to a basic truth, and Gnosticism itself resurfaced countless times in the intervening centuries.

- In the beginning, there is only the Pleroma (the “empty fullness”), a state of infinite potential, unity, nothingness, and totality. For the Gnostic, this is God – without gender, personality, or human characteristics. The Pleroma is the Primal Source, and every universe, and the potential for every universe, is an emanation of the Pleroma.

- At some point, the Pleroma conceives of the “something” as opposed to “nothing”. There is a sudden and significant division between these two poles, a fundamental one and zero. As yin and yang, positive and negative, male and female – all Diads are a reflection of these two “magnetic poles of God”.

- These two poles, yearning for the unity of the pre-existing Pleroma, again come together. The result of that union is a daughter, Sophia (“Wisdom”). Sophia is as close as a Gnostic comes to ascribing a human personality to God.

- In one myth, Sophia, jealous of Her parents ability to create, creates in turn Her own children. These children, however, do not contain the spark of the Divine, as they do not come from the Pleroma.

- These children – known as the Archons, or rulers – are a huge problem. They are in turn jealous of their Mother’s ability to create, and they create an entire universe over which to rule. The set themselves up as gods over their creation, but as they are imperfect their creation is flawed, cruel, and grotesque. This is the universe in which we live, and we are their creatures. It is a caricature of the Real World of union with the Pleroma.

- The early part of human history relates to our imprisonment and the injustice of the created world. A critical part of the Archon’s agenda is to hide the truth of the Pleroma from their pawns. The chief of the Archons, the Demiurge, is particularly megalomaniacal and sadistic. He wants the world to worship him as the one true god.

- Sophia discovers the scheme of the Archons and their creation, and is horrified. She returns to the Pleroma and repents for Her error. She then carries a “spark” of Divinity, slips down through the complex hierarchies of the Archons, and conceals a splinter of God into everything and everyone.

- In some traditions, Sophia incarnates as Eve within the garden. Other stories have Her assume the role of Serpent. When the Demiurge appears before Adam and Eve and declares “There is no God but me”, Sophia reveals Her True Self and states “You are wrong!” and shames Her monstrous offspring.

- Things start to get paranoid here. A small number of the Archons realize their error, and wish to return with Sophia to the Pleroma. She commands that they remain in their creation to act secretly as her agents, and encourage the spark in humanity.

- Christian Gnostics subscribe to the tradition which implies that Sophia is thereafter trapped in the created world and separated from the Pleroma. One aspect of the Pleroma, the Logos (“Word”) is sent down through the Archons to rescue Her. The Logos is incarnated as Jesus, and his mission is to awaken the spark of God among humankind in order to generate a kind of “critical mass” of Divinity. The idea is that this would function as a kind of rocket fuel to return both the Logos and Sophia to the Pleroma. Some traditions state that this was successful, others not.

- Where this leaves us, as Gnostics, is to kindle the inner spark in order to escape the cruelty of the Demiurge and his agents, and light the way home to Divinity. This awakening is called gnosis (“knowledge” – spiritual enlightenment), a first-hand certainty of their relationship with the divine. This also involves a rejection of faith, and of third-party salvation. The Gnostic must personally negotiate with the Archons, and debate, argue, and define the nature of that relationship.

- I’ve never met a Gnostic who feels this is anything other than a metaphor, a powerful and transformative myth. But it does describe an almost universal sense of “this is not the deal”, that the SYSTEM (“kosmos”) of time, decay, disease, ignorance, jealousy, pettiness – does not reflect the “true” world, and that the god in charge of this creation must be cruel, insane, or both.

- Gnostics tend to come in one of three main varieties: Christian (about 70%), Hermetic (about 25%) and Sophianic (5%).

- The main sources for Gnostic thought, written between 200 BCE and 200 CE, were narrowly circulated, and hidden from mainstream or orthodox authorities. A large collection of these texts, the Nag Hammadi library, was unearthed in 1945. Among these is the Christian Gospel of Thomas, believed by many biblical scholars to be the oldest and most accurate account of the real teachings of Jesus.

- Hermetic Gnostics study the writings of the semi-mythical Hermes Trimegistus, an Egyptian priest (actually a nom-de-plume for up to a dozen philosophers over a few centuries). It is the discipline of magic, of alchemy and metaphysics, the “yoga of the west”. The renaissance humanists, the Rosicrucians and early Freemasons were of these.

- Sophian Gnostics hold the idea of the Divine Feminine, inherent in the world and advocating for our enlightenment. She is the Queen of Heaven, Holy Wisdom, the Celestial Bride. Similarly, the Magdalene is also a central figure as an aspect of Sophia, as is the Egyptian goddess Aset, more commonly known as Isis.

Wednesday, December 08, 2004

Gnosticism 102

The myth from the previous post explains the setup, but it has very little bearing on human experience. What follows is sometimes called “The Gnostic Road”, and relates to the personal process of becoming a Gnostic.

1) Aporia (“roadlessness”). A feeling of disorientation or exclusion from the accepted conventions of the world, and a sense that “this is not the deal”. The certainty that something is wrong with the universe, and creeping paranoia that a) this is not the real world and b) that the forces in charge of this world are hiding something secret, something powerful.

2) Epiphany (“shining above”). The big light bulb over the head, the primal “Aha!” that reveals the glowing spark of divinity in all things. A perception of real and immediate and undeniable TRUTH in art and life and joy and beauty and the sacred real.

3)Agon (“struggle”). This is where things get ugly. The problem is, the Opposition is real, organized, and thoroughly pissed off at your recent epiphany. You’re suddenly a lightning rod for “bad luck” in the form of THE SYSTEM – parking tickets, tax audits, bank charges, mechanical failures, illness, miscommunication. People are “worried about you”. This is where most people either give up and deny their epiphany, or go crazy and talk to themselves on the bus.

The real struggle is in finding equilibrium – knowing what you know, and continuing to live in the world. Rendering unto Caesar. Sitting down with the Archons and negotiating some kind of truce.

4) Gnosis (“knowledge”). Equivalent to the satori of Zen or the nirvana of Hinduism, this is personally-negotiated spiritual enlightenment. A first-hand experience of divinity as real and present. Tag, you’re it.

5) Charis (“grace”). This is Sainthood, the ability to radiate your own gnosis to others, and overcome the limitations imposed on you by the Archons.

Ah, light in the darkness of discernment–Parzifal