New Old Faces (Part 2): The New Face of Gnosticism

Photo by Divya Agrawal on Unsplash

The Catholic Weekly recently published part two of my focus on the Theological Reflection of the Instrumentum Laboris, with a particular focus on paragraph 73. In my previous column, I focused on what Pope Francis called the ‘New Pelagianism’ and why its resultant posture of activism undercuts the drive for renewal, which by right is a divine initiative.

In this piece, I will focus on the counter-tendency identified in that paragraph which is just as inimical to genuine renewal, namely the ‘New Gnosticism’.

Etymologically, Gnosticism means “having knowledge”, a name that fitted well with the heresy bearing its name. In its original form, Gnosticism emphasised salvation through the obtaining of secret knowledge that is not available to all. In its new form, the Instrumentum speaks of a drive towards “doctrinal purity” and “ideological correctness”. (73)

There are a number of ways in which this Gnostic tendency is insidious, and also inimical to the kind of genuine reform sought by the Instrumentum.

In the first instance, as it is with all heresies, the New Gnosticism works off something that is true. Our inhabiting the body of Christ does require right belief. The need for clarity of what is believed is the reason why the Church has had ecumenical councils from Ephesus to Vatican II. This need for right belief goes by the unfashionable term of “orthodoxy”.

To abide with anyone, Christ included, it is necessary to know that person rightly, so right belief or orthodoxy is necessary for anyone to encounter the face and abide in the Body of Christ. What makes Gnosticism, both new and old, a heresy is…

Read the full column on The Catholic Weekly

Support Awkward Asian Theologian on Patreon, and help make a change to the theological web.