Discussion about this post

User's avatar
Virgin Monk Boy's avatar

Author's Note: Clarifying Terms and Shadows

Since writing this, I’ve come to appreciate Karen King’s critique that “Gnosticism” is not a coherent historical movement, but a label created by the early Church to define and dismiss certain streams of mystical and nonconforming thought. In that sense, “Gnosticism” is more of a polemical shadow than a real tradition.

What I’m pointing to in this essay isn’t allegiance to that later-defined, dualistic system of “Gnosticism” that sets spirit against matter. I’m not defending a demiurge cosmology. What I am naming is something deeper: the mystical core of early Christianity that the Orthodox Church preserved—sometimes in spite of itself.

What I now prefer to call “the Wisdom path” (drawing on the Gospel of Thomas, Gospel of Mary, Gospel of Philip, etc.) is not Gnostic in the pejorative or dualistic sense. It’s a path of inner transformation, divine union, and direct experience—a lineage that was silenced, distorted, or absorbed depending on the century and the council. This Gnostic path is radically NON-Dual

So when I say Orthodoxy is “closer to Gnosticism,” understand that as shorthand for: closer to the mystical fire that Rome tried to extinguish and that the East tried to regulate. This isn’t about reviving ancient heresies. It’s about recognizing the underground river of sacred knowing that’s been flowing all along, beneath the vestments and creeds.

Expand full comment
Alana Wilson's avatar

Have you written anything on the Desert Fathers? If so where would I find it? Thank you for your work.

Expand full comment
4 more comments...

No posts