Status
Available
Call number
Call number
RS
Publication
New York : Vintage Books, 1989, c1979.
Original publication date
1979
Physical description
xxxvi, 182 p.; 21 cm
Local notes
The Gnostic Gospels is a landmark study of the long-buried roots of Christianity, a work of luminous scholarship and wide popular appeal. First published in 1979 to critical acclaim, winning the National Book Award and the National Book Critics Circle Award, The Gnostic Gospels has continued to grow in reputation and influence over the past two decades. It is now widely recognized as one of the most brilliant and accessible histories of early Christian spirituality published in our time.
In 1945 an Egyptian peasant unearthed what proved to be the Gnostic Gospels, thirteen papyrus volumes that expounded a radically different view of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ from that of the New Testament. In this spellbinding book, renowned religious scholar Elaine Pagels elucidates the mysteries and meanings of these sacred texts both in the world of the first Christians and in the context of Christianity today.
With insight and passion, Pagels explores a remarkable range of recently discovered gospels, including the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, to show how a variety of “Christianities” emerged at a time of extraordinary spiritual upheaval. Some Christians questioned the need for clergy and church doctrine, and taught that the divine could be discovered through spiritual search. Many others, like Buddhists and Hindus, sought enlightenment—and access to God—within. Such explorations raised questions: Was the resurrection to be understood symbolically and not literally? Was God to be envisioned only in masculine form, or feminine as well? Was martyrdom a necessary—or worthy—expression of faith? These early Christians dared to ask questions that orthodox Christians later suppressed—and their explorations led to profoundly different visions of Jesus and his message.
Brilliant, provocative, and stunning in its implications, The Gnostic Gospels is a radical, eloquent reconsideration of the origins of the Christian faith.
In 1945 an Egyptian peasant unearthed what proved to be the Gnostic Gospels, thirteen papyrus volumes that expounded a radically different view of the life and teachings of Jesus Christ from that of the New Testament. In this spellbinding book, renowned religious scholar Elaine Pagels elucidates the mysteries and meanings of these sacred texts both in the world of the first Christians and in the context of Christianity today.
With insight and passion, Pagels explores a remarkable range of recently discovered gospels, including the Gospel of Thomas and the Gospel of Mary Magdalene, to show how a variety of “Christianities” emerged at a time of extraordinary spiritual upheaval. Some Christians questioned the need for clergy and church doctrine, and taught that the divine could be discovered through spiritual search. Many others, like Buddhists and Hindus, sought enlightenment—and access to God—within. Such explorations raised questions: Was the resurrection to be understood symbolically and not literally? Was God to be envisioned only in masculine form, or feminine as well? Was martyrdom a necessary—or worthy—expression of faith? These early Christians dared to ask questions that orthodox Christians later suppressed—and their explorations led to profoundly different visions of Jesus and his message.
Brilliant, provocative, and stunning in its implications, The Gnostic Gospels is a radical, eloquent reconsideration of the origins of the Christian faith.
Subjects
User reviews
LibraryThing member the.ken.petersen
This must have been a very difficult book to write: I know that it was a hard one to read. The twenty-first century is hard enough on any established religion, without doubt being cast from within: on the other hand, the Gnostic Gospels were a time bomb waiting to inflict its damage from the
The Gnostic Gospels are a very strange collection of texts; some are not too disparate from their Synoptic cousins but some suggest that Jesus was not human, did not rise bodily from the grave and/or that He did not offer eternal life. These may seem to be odd arguments to make, if one believes Jesus to be the Son of God and I find it almost impossible to read these Gospels with an open mind: however, that does NOT mean that they can, or should, be easily dismissed. These books have as much right to exist as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - the latter of whom very nearly met the same fate as Thomas, Mary et al! Elaine Pagels walks the line in an admirable fashion. She gives respect to these works, but at the same time, is understanding to the orthodox view.
The chief reason for the cognoscenti to cull the Gospels was to make a credible, flowing text with everyone pulling in a single direction. Almost inevitably, the chance was taken to remove Mary (a woman claiming to be Christ's favoured disciple, what ever next?) and to hone the life of this maverick prophet into a form acceptable to people of the age. It is undoubtedly true that this sanitised version allowed Christianity to flourish and, with one more compromise (selecting Constantine as leader of the church on earth), Christianity spread to the four corners of the planet. Times change, and views that were normal become staid, it is no longer stretching credulity to think that a woman might have been a significant disciple, to question Christ's status is not punishable by death and, perhaps we need to address these issues.
This is a very good book for someone, such as myself, who knew next to nothing about the Gnostic Gospels. It introduces them, gives an historical backdrop and leaves the reader to make the final decision as to whether these texts have anything to offer. I believe, that anyone believing in God, or with an interest in religion should read both the Gnostic Gospels and also, this excellent explanation of them.
Show More
moment, around 400 A.D., when a group of "leading Christians" made the decision to crop the texts to be included within the Bible.The Gnostic Gospels are a very strange collection of texts; some are not too disparate from their Synoptic cousins but some suggest that Jesus was not human, did not rise bodily from the grave and/or that He did not offer eternal life. These may seem to be odd arguments to make, if one believes Jesus to be the Son of God and I find it almost impossible to read these Gospels with an open mind: however, that does NOT mean that they can, or should, be easily dismissed. These books have as much right to exist as the Gospels of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John - the latter of whom very nearly met the same fate as Thomas, Mary et al! Elaine Pagels walks the line in an admirable fashion. She gives respect to these works, but at the same time, is understanding to the orthodox view.
The chief reason for the cognoscenti to cull the Gospels was to make a credible, flowing text with everyone pulling in a single direction. Almost inevitably, the chance was taken to remove Mary (a woman claiming to be Christ's favoured disciple, what ever next?) and to hone the life of this maverick prophet into a form acceptable to people of the age. It is undoubtedly true that this sanitised version allowed Christianity to flourish and, with one more compromise (selecting Constantine as leader of the church on earth), Christianity spread to the four corners of the planet. Times change, and views that were normal become staid, it is no longer stretching credulity to think that a woman might have been a significant disciple, to question Christ's status is not punishable by death and, perhaps we need to address these issues.
This is a very good book for someone, such as myself, who knew next to nothing about the Gnostic Gospels. It introduces them, gives an historical backdrop and leaves the reader to make the final decision as to whether these texts have anything to offer. I believe, that anyone believing in God, or with an interest in religion should read both the Gnostic Gospels and also, this excellent explanation of them.
Show Less
LibraryThing member The_Hibernator
Pagels objectively introduces the subject of the Gnostic Gospels—she describes the history of the texts, some basic differences between Gnostic beliefs and Orthodox beliefs, and then summarizes by saying that Christianity would have developed quite differently (or perhaps even fizzled out like
Show More
other mystic fad religions) if Gnosticism had survived. She supports neither Orthodoxy or Gnosticism in this book, but provides an objective historian’s view on the two faiths. This is a fantastic introduction to Gnosticism, and it lacks the sensationalism of many Gnostic scholars today. Highly recommended. Show Less
LibraryThing member Arctic-Stranger
With all the fuss that the Da Vinci Code code raised, this should be required reading. Pagels places the gnostic texts in their theological and historical context, without sensationalizing them. (Jesus Marries Mary! Read It Here!) Good scholarly work, yet very accessible for the lay reader who is
Show More
not schooled in first century studies. Show Less
LibraryThing member prismcat
This classic book provides an overview of the gnostic gospels and the historical evolution of the early church. It reveals how the early "organized" church dealt with the differing views of Christ and how the religious elite silenced any dissenting voices to strengthen the structure that ensured
Show More
their power base. Ms. Pagels elicits a sympathetic tone towards those rebels who were more concerned with following Christ than those in seeking power in His name. Ms. Pagels makes a scholarly subject accessible to the average reader. For all that, her conclusion is rather startling. As a Catholic, Ms. Pagels explicitly argues that the ends justified the means. In this early edition, her inner-conflict is apparent at the end. Regardless, if this is the only edition you can get hold of, it is absolutely worth your time. Show Less
LibraryThing member annbury
This is an exciting read for a work of scholarship. In this book Ms Pagels
does not side with the gnostics, which she manages to define properly, but she devastates the catholic church's abuse of people that disagreed with them, especially on the resurrection and the role of women in the church. She
does not side with the gnostics, which she manages to define properly, but she devastates the catholic church's abuse of people that disagreed with them, especially on the resurrection and the role of women in the church. She
Show More
is doubtless correct that the church would not have survived as a gnostic institution, because it needed form and simplicity and structure, which it could only get by destroying all of its enemies. Show Less
LibraryThing member HadriantheBlind
Reread.
This is one of the most fascinating books on the history of early Christianity. Although it does contain just quotes and selections from the texts themselves, Pagels does a remarkable job analyzing and giving them a greater historical context.
The Gnostic texts also gave a radical
On a side note, it also gives an insight into the rewriting of history. Most of these texts were scrubbed from early religious history, as they may have been incompatible with the power structure of the time and the hierarchical church as we know it today.
Fascinating stuff. I'll have to give the gospels themselves a reread.
This is one of the most fascinating books on the history of early Christianity. Although it does contain just quotes and selections from the texts themselves, Pagels does a remarkable job analyzing and giving them a greater historical context.
The Gnostic texts also gave a radical
Show More
re-evaluation of the history of early Christianity, the nature of God, the figure Jesus, the resurrection, the role of women and whether or not a 'Church' as it exists in the Catholic tradition, was always extant. Some aspects of the Gospels also resemble Eastern traditions of self-knowledge.On a side note, it also gives an insight into the rewriting of history. Most of these texts were scrubbed from early religious history, as they may have been incompatible with the power structure of the time and the hierarchical church as we know it today.
Fascinating stuff. I'll have to give the gospels themselves a reread.
Show Less
LibraryThing member NateJordon
A brief and poignant investigation into the origins of Christianity (Organized Christianity) . . . and its tragic evolution. It can be summed up by the following passage from the "Dialogue of the Savior":
". . . If one does not [understand] how the fire came to be, he will burn in it, because he
". . . If one does not [understand] how the fire came to be, he will burn in it, because he
Show More
does not know his root. If one does not first understand the water, he does not know anything. . . . If one does not understand how the wind that blows came to be, he will run with it. If one does not understand how the body that he wears came to be, he will perish with it. . . . Whoever does not understand how he came will not understand how he will go . . . " Show Less
LibraryThing member Devil_llama
Probably the best known work on the gnostics. The author approaches her topic with enthusiasm, and does a good job of explaining the state of knowledge about gnostic Christians. A good introductory work.
LibraryThing member mldavis2
The author uses the 1945 Nag Hammadi library find to examine the historical significance of the orthodox Catholic church's success as compared to the gnostics whose view of God failed to survive.
LibraryThing member GTTexas
A change of pace read that turned out to be even more interesting than I expected. Being in Rome during the time I read it seemed to make it even more interesting. One of a dozen or so I read on a Mediterranean cruise.
LibraryThing member EliseP
In December 1945 and Arab peasant made an astonishing discovery in Upper Egypt. In this jar were scrolls that scholars found to be some of the gnostic writings from the early church. The Gnostics were crushed by the Orthodox church. This book explains how orthodoxy won out over gnosticism. First,
Show More
the gnostics denied the fact of Christ's resurrection. They considered jesus completely spirit, not human (symbol, not historical event). Second, they denied the idea of one God, one bishop, because they didn't like the idea of hierarchy. The gnostics also saw a greater role of women in their beliefs, even calling the Holy Spirit a woman. They allowed women to participate in liturgy. Next they denied the concept of martyrdom as automatically allowing someone into heaven. Orthodox christians "insisted that humanity needs a way beyond its own power - divine- to approach god." The gostics also felt that they could only depend on inner knowledge, or light, to mean communion with god. They believe men invented God, and thus are greater than God. Interesting note: the New Testament term for sin, hamartia, comes from the sport of archery -- means "missing the mark." Show Less
LibraryThing member daniesq
So far, so good. I am currently listening to the Audible unabridged version of this book, and have to agree with the reader who said that the first part of this book is very academic. However, I didn't feel it was dry, although the endless citations of sources is probably more suited to the print
Show More
edition. (Will post more as I "read".) Show Less
LibraryThing member abirdman
One of the most important and read books of theology ever published. Perhaps the seminal work on Gnosticism, it sheds an interesting light on where Christianity could have gone.
LibraryThing member jburlinson
Tragic irony of cosmic proportions is the theme of this book. Lovingly preserved texts written two millennia ago were found in 1945 by an Arab peasant near the town of Nag Hammadi. The documents were written in an attempt to communicate the incommunicable: the nature of the kingdom of heaven and
Show More
the wisdom of the Christ. The person who found them was soon to murder a man as part of a vendetta. After killing his victim, he and his brothers ""hacked off his limbs . . . ripped out his heart, and devoured it among them, as the ultimate act of blood revenge." Shortly afterwards, the killers' mother would burn most of the texts in the family's oven; perhaps to sauté the leftovers? The fate of these documents at the dawn of the Common Era wasn't much better; for they served as the occasion for furious controversy between, on the one hand, the community that came to be called "the orthodox" and, on the other, every other follower of Jesus who considered a different spiritual path. Pagel's pioneering book chronicles the sociopolitical (which went under the name of "theological") struggles that characterized the first centuries of Christian history. The tale ends with the triumph of the Roman Church and the burial of the sacred texts of the losers, in the vain hope that these precious documents would resurface in a more enlightened era. Show Less
LibraryThing member madamejeanie
If I had to sum up this slim volume in one word, that word would be "dry."
I think this very possibly was Ms. Pagels dissertation for a degree in
religious history. My curiosity was piqued by "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" to
want to learn more about these documents discovered at Qumran, and commonly
known
"heresy" by the Catholic Church in the second and third centuries and were
ordered destroyed. But a small group of monks who studied these heretic
teachings managed to hide them away, hiding them so well, in fact, that they
were not "discovered" until the middle of last century. The timing might
well be considered divine providence because had they been unearthed in any
other time or in any other way, they likely would have been destroyed and
lost forever.
This book is an exhaustive study of exactly why they were considered
heretical and why they were banned. The documents themselves were written
in the same time period and very likely by some of the same people as the
texts that were chosen to be part of what we know today as The Holy Bible.
Why, then, were these rejected and the others included? Many of them are
gospels, telling basically the same story of Christ's life, death, and
resurrection as the four gospels we are all familiar with, yet they reveal a
side of Christ and His teachings that went against orthodox theology.
The main reason I purchased this book in the first place was that I wanted
to read these documents for myself, see what they said, and frankly, see if
they "spoke" to me. Alas, the documents themselves are not included in this
work, so I was disappointed in that. (I have since discovered that some of
them can be found online and hope to spend some time doing some deep reading
when I find myself alone at home again shortly.) But I must say that, dry
as this tome was, it was enlightening.
I would never recommend this particular book as light reading. It is hardly
that. It took me nearly two weeks to finish this slender volume because I
found myself reading and rereading passages so that I was positive I
understood them. But, if you are interested in the history of religion,
this would be a great place to start or to further your understanding of
early Christianity when it was finding its legs and learning to stand alone
as a viable life philosophy. In this book, I came to understand a little
better exactly what Christ was all about and how he inspired people in very
different ways. It didn't slake my thirst for such knowledge, but it did
serve as a good overview for the actual documents themselves.
I'd give this book a 3.5.
I think this very possibly was Ms. Pagels dissertation for a degree in
religious history. My curiosity was piqued by "Holy Blood, Holy Grail" to
want to learn more about these documents discovered at Qumran, and commonly
known
Show More
as the Nag Hammadi library. These texts were determined to be"heresy" by the Catholic Church in the second and third centuries and were
ordered destroyed. But a small group of monks who studied these heretic
teachings managed to hide them away, hiding them so well, in fact, that they
were not "discovered" until the middle of last century. The timing might
well be considered divine providence because had they been unearthed in any
other time or in any other way, they likely would have been destroyed and
lost forever.
This book is an exhaustive study of exactly why they were considered
heretical and why they were banned. The documents themselves were written
in the same time period and very likely by some of the same people as the
texts that were chosen to be part of what we know today as The Holy Bible.
Why, then, were these rejected and the others included? Many of them are
gospels, telling basically the same story of Christ's life, death, and
resurrection as the four gospels we are all familiar with, yet they reveal a
side of Christ and His teachings that went against orthodox theology.
The main reason I purchased this book in the first place was that I wanted
to read these documents for myself, see what they said, and frankly, see if
they "spoke" to me. Alas, the documents themselves are not included in this
work, so I was disappointed in that. (I have since discovered that some of
them can be found online and hope to spend some time doing some deep reading
when I find myself alone at home again shortly.) But I must say that, dry
as this tome was, it was enlightening.
I would never recommend this particular book as light reading. It is hardly
that. It took me nearly two weeks to finish this slender volume because I
found myself reading and rereading passages so that I was positive I
understood them. But, if you are interested in the history of religion,
this would be a great place to start or to further your understanding of
early Christianity when it was finding its legs and learning to stand alone
as a viable life philosophy. In this book, I came to understand a little
better exactly what Christ was all about and how he inspired people in very
different ways. It didn't slake my thirst for such knowledge, but it did
serve as a good overview for the actual documents themselves.
I'd give this book a 3.5.
Show Less
LibraryThing member riverwillow
Interesting and scholarly analysis of the Gnostic texts discovered at Nag Hammadi. Pagels tries to keep her analysis of these texts as objective as possible as she explores the conflict between the orthodox christians, who eventually triumphed, and the followers of Gnosticism. This is an insightful
Show More
read which puts the development of the early Christian church into context. This is a 'must' read for anyone interested in Christianity. Show Less
LibraryThing member jguidry
I checked this audiobook out thinking it would give a description of the gospels discovered in Egypt that weren't included in the Bible. It actually ended up being a history of the Catholic Church and a comparison between the Orthodox Church and the Gnostic beliefs. The comparisons were very
Show More
interesting, but the audiobook did drag at points. I found myself "tuning out" periodically. I mostly enjoyed the history and the research done in the text, but I should have tried the print version. I probably would have focused more and gotten more from my reading. Show Less
LibraryThing member redswirl3
Excellent intro into the gnostic gospels. The book was engaging and full (FULL) of information. Pagels writing style and topic kept me interested from cover to cover. I recommend the book to anyone interested in early christian history.
LibraryThing member Brasidas
The so-called apocryphal gospels, discovered by a farmer in 1975 at Nag Hammedi, are here explained in the context of late second-century Church history. The gnostics Christians did not believe that human intermediaries (bishops, priests, etc.) were necessary for an individual to find God. For the
Show More
gnostics enlightenment was an entirely inner and self-determined process. Late in the book some of the techniques for achieving gnosis are reviewed and they are surprisingly close to those used by modern Buddhists. I could not find a place for myself in the Christian church for reasons that were never clear to me until a book by Karen Armstrong called THE CASE FOR GOD came into my hands. What Elaine Pagels' books show us is that Christianity could have developed far differently if these writings had been accepted by the Church, instead of being purged, as they were, so that someone, perhaps the members of a monastery near Nag Hammedi, buried them for 1600 years. Show Less
LibraryThing member SLuce
Very interesting. New learning for me. I know nothing about early stages of bible.
LibraryThing member kranbollin
Extremely lucid and to the point, and speaks clearly to the general reader. Pagels is the only author you need to read on this topic, and is a superb antedote to all this DaVinci nonsense. The MacArthur Foundation is to be lauded for supporting her work.
LibraryThing member wickenden
A very interesting read. Though the information is somewhat dated now, this work sheds light on the diversity found in the early christian community based on translations of texts found at Nag-Hammadi, Egypt and other places. The early gospels reveal a wide range of beliefs that only distill later
Show More
into the councils and creeds of orthodoxy. More on this in her "The Gospel of Thomas". Show Less
LibraryThing member deckla
Elaine Pagels writes here a lucid and fascinating historical study of the Gnostic Gospels, among them 52 texts discovered by accident at Nag Hammadi, including the Gospel of Thomas, the Gospel of Philip, the Apocalypse of Peter and more.
She argues that Gnostic Christianity was overtaken by Roman
Essentially, orthodox Catholic leaders, attempting inclusion, created a simple framework of doctrine, ritual and political structure that proved amazingly effective. Gnostics, on the other hand were more concerned with personal enlightenment. Gnostics tended to regard all doctrines as approaches to the truth, rather than the orthodox, which viewed their specific doctrines as the truth and the sole legitimate form of Christian faith. Self-knowledge is knowledge of God, to the Gnostics: "Why do you pursue the darkness, though the light is available to you within?" This does not lend itself to religion for the masses, for, Pagels says, "ideas alone do not make a religion powerful, although it cannot succeed without them; equally important are social and political structures that unite people into a common affiliation."
Although occasionally I experienced a twitch of unease about the Gnostics ideas of redemption and initiation resembling the excesses of evangelical fundamentalists, most of their ideas were so far afield from mainstream Christianity as to be incredibly refreshing, not to mention poetic. Gnostics seem to be more about questions than answers. As Pagels says near the end of the book, “All the old questions are being reopened--what is the resurrection, the role of women, who was Christ, what are the similarities with other religions.” The crucial question for Pagels is "what is the relationship between the authority of one’s own experience and that claimed for the scriptures, the ritual and the clergy?" An important question among many intriguing questions raised in this astounding read.
She argues that Gnostic Christianity was overtaken by Roman
Show More
Catholicism because Roman Catholicism was organized, and codified and open to everyone. It was more "social." Gnostic Christianity is a lot more open. She depicts the Gnostics as, in some sense, artists, creators, who express their own insights (their gnosis) by creating new myths, poems, rituals, "dialogues" with Christ, revelations, and accounts of their visions. Women are much more active in the Gnostic traditions. There's a lot of unorthodoxy. Some typical Gnostic conjectures: Eve is not from Adam's rib, but Sophia's daughter, sent to prod the cast-down Adam to life and knowledge. The resurrection is seen metaphorically. Mary Magdalene perhaps married to Christ, and was one of only two or three people to whom Christ explained the secrets of the universe. There are conceptions of the Creator as both male and female, and Creators before the Old Testament God.Essentially, orthodox Catholic leaders, attempting inclusion, created a simple framework of doctrine, ritual and political structure that proved amazingly effective. Gnostics, on the other hand were more concerned with personal enlightenment. Gnostics tended to regard all doctrines as approaches to the truth, rather than the orthodox, which viewed their specific doctrines as the truth and the sole legitimate form of Christian faith. Self-knowledge is knowledge of God, to the Gnostics: "Why do you pursue the darkness, though the light is available to you within?" This does not lend itself to religion for the masses, for, Pagels says, "ideas alone do not make a religion powerful, although it cannot succeed without them; equally important are social and political structures that unite people into a common affiliation."
Although occasionally I experienced a twitch of unease about the Gnostics ideas of redemption and initiation resembling the excesses of evangelical fundamentalists, most of their ideas were so far afield from mainstream Christianity as to be incredibly refreshing, not to mention poetic. Gnostics seem to be more about questions than answers. As Pagels says near the end of the book, “All the old questions are being reopened--what is the resurrection, the role of women, who was Christ, what are the similarities with other religions.” The crucial question for Pagels is "what is the relationship between the authority of one’s own experience and that claimed for the scriptures, the ritual and the clergy?" An important question among many intriguing questions raised in this astounding read.
Show Less
LibraryThing member tuckerresearch
Decades ago now, I read in the ol' Intercollegiate Review about Elaine Pagels's The Gnostic Gospels: "Bored with the real Gospels and real Christianity, professors of religion were thrilled to find out how important—not to mention feminist and pre-Socratic—these fragments were."
It's a biting
And Elaine Pagels is of that era of scholars, and people, in the 1960s who would hold such views. She hides it in her scholarly focus on psychoanalysis (Freud and Jung and all that), which was all the rage in the era of her upbringing (with the right psychology we could solve society's ills!). See just the title of her chapter six "Gnosis: Self-Knowledge as Knowledge of God," which sounds as new agey as you can get. In this chapter she compares many gnostic teachings approvingly to modern psychology. Find yourself, fix yourself, and you'll find true happiness.
Pagels also focuses intently on the power structure, another thing (this time Marxian) that scholars of her era believed in, looked for, and discussed. Materialism of ideas. Pagels maintains that orthodox Christianity survived and thrived only because it created a power structure of bishop-priest-deacon that had to be adhered to by congregants. (The gnostics did not.) This power structure mimicked a political power structure. Thus standard catholic Christian church could become the stolid, solid Catholic Christian Church. This is the thrust of her whole second chapter, which she concludes (p. 47): "As the doctrine of Christ’s bodily resurrection established the initial framework for clerical authority [that was chapter one], so the doctrine of the ‘one God’ confirms, for orthodox Christians, the emerging institution of the ‘one bishop’ as monarch (‘sole ruler’) of the church. We may not be surprised, then, to discover next how the orthodox description of God (as ‘Father Almighty’, for example) serves to define who is included—and who excluded—from participation in the power of priests and bishops."
For Pagels and scholars of her ilk, it is impossible for Christians to be attracted to the ideals of Christian teachings over, say, Gnostic teachings. There must be some power structure at work. She even chides any scholars who may think in terms of ideals, ideas, and beliefs. Pagels writes (p. 143): "Furthermore, since historians themselves tend to be intellectuals, it is, again, no surprise that most have interpreted the controversy between orthodox and gnostic Christians in terms of the 'history of ideas,' as if ideas, themselves assumed to be the essential mainspring of human action, battled (presumably in some disembodied state) for supremacy."
No, Pagels says, orthodox Christianity did not thrive and survive due to its ideas, as the Gnostics had better ideas, it had to be useful and beneficial to the power structure, the powers-that-be (pp. 142-143): "We need not be surprised, then, that the religious ideas enshrined in the creed (from 'I believe in one God,' who is 'Father Almighty,' and Christ's incarnation, death, and bodily resurrection 'on the third day,' to faith in the 'holy, catholic, and apostolic church') coincide with social and political issues in the formation of orthodox Christianity."
Pagels, of course, by focusing on materialist structure and not the power and force of ideas, can only see it this way. But wouldn't it have been easier for the first Christians to worship the Roman gods? No beef with the power structure there and you don't get thrown to the lions. Would not gnostic Christianity have been the better option here, as most brands of Gnosticism allowed you to lie when the Roman authorities wanted to arrest you? In fact, Pagels claims in her chapter four, that most Gnostics disdained martyrdom and martyrs. Would not Gnosticism offer a better fit to the power structure? But I digress.
By making orthodox Christianity about the power structure rather than ideas and ideals, she implies that gnostic ideas and ideals were superior in some way (Think for yourself! Women can lead congregations too! That nasty Old Testament god isn't really God!)—and that is Pagels's error.
What does Pagels do right? This is a short, easy-to-read, yet scholarly introduction to the various gnostic groups and the gnostic scriptures. It still is, more than forty years after its writing, the best such intro I think you can read on the subject. She talks of gnostic cosmology, gnostic views of Christ, gnostic ritual, gnostic scripture, gnostic attitudes to women, authority, and life, et cetera. It is all good, even though she then shunts her theory about structure and psychology into the book. So, still all-in-all four stars: a good book. It would have been nice if the endnotes were footnotes at the bottom of the page, so you could see what text or scripture she is quoting easily. But that is a scholar's quibble. No bibliography, but there is an index.
It's a biting
Show More
critique of many moderns, scholars included, who disdain Western civilization and orthodox Christianity. European society has been class-based economically, patriarchal socially, and militaristic diplomatically, right? So the underpinnings of that society must be warped and wrong, right?And Elaine Pagels is of that era of scholars, and people, in the 1960s who would hold such views. She hides it in her scholarly focus on psychoanalysis (Freud and Jung and all that), which was all the rage in the era of her upbringing (with the right psychology we could solve society's ills!). See just the title of her chapter six "Gnosis: Self-Knowledge as Knowledge of God," which sounds as new agey as you can get. In this chapter she compares many gnostic teachings approvingly to modern psychology. Find yourself, fix yourself, and you'll find true happiness.
Pagels also focuses intently on the power structure, another thing (this time Marxian) that scholars of her era believed in, looked for, and discussed. Materialism of ideas. Pagels maintains that orthodox Christianity survived and thrived only because it created a power structure of bishop-priest-deacon that had to be adhered to by congregants. (The gnostics did not.) This power structure mimicked a political power structure. Thus standard catholic Christian church could become the stolid, solid Catholic Christian Church. This is the thrust of her whole second chapter, which she concludes (p. 47): "As the doctrine of Christ’s bodily resurrection established the initial framework for clerical authority [that was chapter one], so the doctrine of the ‘one God’ confirms, for orthodox Christians, the emerging institution of the ‘one bishop’ as monarch (‘sole ruler’) of the church. We may not be surprised, then, to discover next how the orthodox description of God (as ‘Father Almighty’, for example) serves to define who is included—and who excluded—from participation in the power of priests and bishops."
For Pagels and scholars of her ilk, it is impossible for Christians to be attracted to the ideals of Christian teachings over, say, Gnostic teachings. There must be some power structure at work. She even chides any scholars who may think in terms of ideals, ideas, and beliefs. Pagels writes (p. 143): "Furthermore, since historians themselves tend to be intellectuals, it is, again, no surprise that most have interpreted the controversy between orthodox and gnostic Christians in terms of the 'history of ideas,' as if ideas, themselves assumed to be the essential mainspring of human action, battled (presumably in some disembodied state) for supremacy."
No, Pagels says, orthodox Christianity did not thrive and survive due to its ideas, as the Gnostics had better ideas, it had to be useful and beneficial to the power structure, the powers-that-be (pp. 142-143): "We need not be surprised, then, that the religious ideas enshrined in the creed (from 'I believe in one God,' who is 'Father Almighty,' and Christ's incarnation, death, and bodily resurrection 'on the third day,' to faith in the 'holy, catholic, and apostolic church') coincide with social and political issues in the formation of orthodox Christianity."
Pagels, of course, by focusing on materialist structure and not the power and force of ideas, can only see it this way. But wouldn't it have been easier for the first Christians to worship the Roman gods? No beef with the power structure there and you don't get thrown to the lions. Would not gnostic Christianity have been the better option here, as most brands of Gnosticism allowed you to lie when the Roman authorities wanted to arrest you? In fact, Pagels claims in her chapter four, that most Gnostics disdained martyrdom and martyrs. Would not Gnosticism offer a better fit to the power structure? But I digress.
By making orthodox Christianity about the power structure rather than ideas and ideals, she implies that gnostic ideas and ideals were superior in some way (Think for yourself! Women can lead congregations too! That nasty Old Testament god isn't really God!)—and that is Pagels's error.
What does Pagels do right? This is a short, easy-to-read, yet scholarly introduction to the various gnostic groups and the gnostic scriptures. It still is, more than forty years after its writing, the best such intro I think you can read on the subject. She talks of gnostic cosmology, gnostic views of Christ, gnostic ritual, gnostic scripture, gnostic attitudes to women, authority, and life, et cetera. It is all good, even though she then shunts her theory about structure and psychology into the book. So, still all-in-all four stars: a good book. It would have been nice if the endnotes were footnotes at the bottom of the page, so you could see what text or scripture she is quoting easily. But that is a scholar's quibble. No bibliography, but there is an index.
Show Less
Awards
National Book Award (Finalist — 1980)
National Book Critics Circle Award (Finalist — 1979)
David Bowie's Top 100 (1979)