What do you think?
Rate this book
The Truth of Christian Gnosis
For more than thirty years, those zealous for a certain orthodoxy in Catholicism have denounced Jean Borella as a supporter of that most pernicious of Christian “gnosis.” Here he responds to his detractors—not to refute their baseless accusations, but to set before the eyes of readers the intricacies of a very complex topic. To this end, he retrieves and contextualizes findings from the history of religious ideas that attest to the scriptural foundation and rigorous orthodoxy of what St. Paul himself calls gnosis —a gnosis, however, freed from the Gnosticism that usurped its name. He also distinguishes this truly Pauline gnosis from its various modern expressions, which latter are subjected to attentive critical examination. This book, which ultimately is about recapturing the conditions and nature of a truly sacred knowledge, comes at an opportune time, in the afterglow of Pope Benedict XVI’s recent reminder that “authentic ‘gnosis’ is a development of faith inspired by Jesus Christ in the soul united with him.”
406 pages, Paperback
First published January 1, 2007
1 person is currently reading
47 people want to read
About the author
Jean Borella
33 books28 followersJean Borella is a Christian philosopher and theologian. Borella's works are deeply inspired by Ancient and Christian Neoplatonism, but also by the Traditionalist School of René Guénon and Frithjof Schuon.
Ratings & Reviews
Friends & Following
Create a free account to discover what your friends think of this book!
Community Reviews
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews
December 6, 2023
In some ways this is a very narrow work; in its nearly 400-pages the French Roman Catholic metaphysician Jean Borella defends his body of work from various detractors over the last fifty years, and gives a close reading of the 'gnosticism' in Raymond Ruyer, Rene Guenon, and Fritjof Schuon. Yet, in other respects, it is a deep and wide-ranging work; from beginning to end Borella seeks to disentangle true, Pauline-gnosis from the many heresies of 'gnosticism' and then to lead the reader to give attention, faith, and love to the Logos of God, Christ. Jean Borella clearly has an expansive grasp of metaphysics, the history of philosophy, and Christian theology. He takes the reader from Plato to Heidegger, Clement of Alexandria to Corbin, and St Paul to Kant. He demonstrates his knowledge of ancient heretical gnosticism, Pauline/Johannine/Irenean/Clementine sacred gnosis, modern gnosticism(s) inherent in perennial philosophy, and contemporary (especially French) scholarship on gnosticism. In its width of scholarship and depth of insight, Borella clears up many pressing questions about 'gnosticism' (whatever it is) today and in the past, showing that the Christian Tradition has a particular view of gnosis (γνῶσις).
Specifically, Borella is keen to point out that sweeping claims about 'gnosticism' made by scholars such as Eric Voegelin tend to avoid (or at least grossly oversimplify) many issues behind an attempt at a definition of the word. 'Gnosticism' has become an inexact, blanket term, and many scholars that grapple with gnosticism tend to talk past one another. Yet what is it, exactly, that can allow us to group Valentinianism, Hegelianism, and the metaphysics of Guenon or Schuon together under the label of 'gnosticism'?
Borella argues that in so-many systems identified as 'gnostic' the error and heresy is the same: it's an adamic attempt attempt at making science (knowledge/gnosis) an end in itself (353). So to possess this knowledge is to be saved. Adam and Eve grasp at the forbidden fruit in the garden thinking that God's Word is not reliable, that the serpent is correct, that they shall become gods if they eat of it. The gnostic heresy is thus the sin of the garden of Eden; it is not an overreach but a breach, a breach with God and disobedience to His Word. It is not a sin to want to know more; in fact, our God-given intellect always wants to see, learn, and grow more, yet it is a sin to countermand God's order. The temptation is to think that knowledge will divinize and not that knowledge will lead to Someone; for the truth is, only God can divinize. The greatest height of gnosis to recognize that truth, to patiently wait for God.
Concepts, words, symbols all point to reality. When they usurp that reality, as in Hegelian, Guenonian, and Shuonian metaphysics, such abstract entities become gnostic idols. For Borella (as for Clement of Alexandria) gnosis is an organon which carries a person only so far. It has this subjective and experiential mode as it is the process of illumination in the intellect by the Holy Spirit. Yet, gnosis is also doctrinal; there is the holy knowledge of the Faith (the Regula Fide) confessed in the Creed by the congregation.
The mystery of gnosis is spoken of by St Paul in his letter to the Galatians: "But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God..." (Gal. 4:9a). And also, to the Corinthians he writes, "[W]e know that 'all of us possess knowledge [gnosis].' This knowledge [gnosis] puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, he is known by God" (1 Cor. 8:1b-3).
Gnosis of God is a sacred participation in the mysteries of Faith, for it is recognition that one really does not know as he or she ought to know, but that one is known fully, intimately and perfectly by God. Knowledge "stops short" of attaining God because He is personal and not conceptual. As the mystics point out, knowledge actually terminates in an impenetrable 'un-knowing' where one realizes how far one is actually from God. At this point, when the human gaze is utterly blind, the Divine light then illuminates.
So, following St Paul, a believer cannot be a self-described 'gnostic' because one can never know as one ought to know. But a believer can and should pursue noble gnosis, knowledge of the sacred mysteries of God. This gnosis actually has an aromatic fragrance (2 Cor. 2:14) for it leads to God. Yet, the love of God in Christ surpasses all gnosis (Eph. 3:19), just as dwelling with God forever surpasses our sanctified life pursuing Him, and our enjoyment of God in His glory surpasses the Symbol of our confession of Him.
There are many brilliant and penetrating passages of this book that can help Christians to see gnosis in a new light, more akin to the way St Paul and Clement of Alexandria saw it. Here it's important to point out that Paul never chastises people for their knowledge, but he does warn Timothy against what is falsely called gnosis by heretics (1 Tim. 6:20). Real gnosis is an illuminated gaze at God which comes to realize that God already knows, already loves, the one who is looking.
If I have one critique of this book, it's that I don't think Borella spends enough time in the Johannine writings. He lingers with Luke 11 for a while (where the Lord speaks of a "key" to gnosis) and spends most of his time interpreting St Paul's teachings on knowledge in 1 Corinthians especially, but also in other places.
Yet John's writings are rich ground for any theology of gnosis. It is just that John doesn't use the noun 'gnosis' but favors διάνοια ("understanding"), at least in one place (1 John 5:20). Yet in his gospel, there are no less than 57 instances of the verb γινώσκω ("I know")! The Lord is often teaching His disciples various things in order "that you may know me," "that you may know the Father," "that you may know how I love you," etc. It seems that any study of gnosis is really missing something if the verb γινώσκω is left out one's New Testament investigations.
I will end this review by including some quotations or insights of Borella that I find particularly convicting, inspiring, or just brilliant. I should also add that I am looking forward to reading more of this author.
- Gnosis as "an interior and saving knowledge." Nothing more (or less) (11).
- We would be wise to remember Clement's comment in his Stromateis, Book V: "For gnosis of the divine substance is the eating and drinking of the divine Logos" (28, footnote 27).
- "Doctrinal gnosis relies, then, on a 'gnostic awareness' of the intellective act, on a sacred aesthetics of the intellect for which metaphysical Ideas are divine works of art, the icons of the Word that the Holy Spirit writes within our souls" (55-56).
- "The consummation of partial gnosis, which becomes an unknowing, conditions the realization of integral gnosis. The latter, as St Paul teaches, consists in knowing as we are known, which means that God's knowledge of the human creature is the rule and model of that knowledge which the creature has of God" (61).
- Hegelian philosophy essentially transforms itself into a "speculative recording chamber;" "it confines itself to noting what becomes, in order to save it conceptually; it represents one of the greatest degradations of thought that one can imagine; it makes the philosopher the servant and even the slave of the 'spirit of the times...'" (84).
Specifically, Borella is keen to point out that sweeping claims about 'gnosticism' made by scholars such as Eric Voegelin tend to avoid (or at least grossly oversimplify) many issues behind an attempt at a definition of the word. 'Gnosticism' has become an inexact, blanket term, and many scholars that grapple with gnosticism tend to talk past one another. Yet what is it, exactly, that can allow us to group Valentinianism, Hegelianism, and the metaphysics of Guenon or Schuon together under the label of 'gnosticism'?
Borella argues that in so-many systems identified as 'gnostic' the error and heresy is the same: it's an adamic attempt attempt at making science (knowledge/gnosis) an end in itself (353). So to possess this knowledge is to be saved. Adam and Eve grasp at the forbidden fruit in the garden thinking that God's Word is not reliable, that the serpent is correct, that they shall become gods if they eat of it. The gnostic heresy is thus the sin of the garden of Eden; it is not an overreach but a breach, a breach with God and disobedience to His Word. It is not a sin to want to know more; in fact, our God-given intellect always wants to see, learn, and grow more, yet it is a sin to countermand God's order. The temptation is to think that knowledge will divinize and not that knowledge will lead to Someone; for the truth is, only God can divinize. The greatest height of gnosis to recognize that truth, to patiently wait for God.
Concepts, words, symbols all point to reality. When they usurp that reality, as in Hegelian, Guenonian, and Shuonian metaphysics, such abstract entities become gnostic idols. For Borella (as for Clement of Alexandria) gnosis is an organon which carries a person only so far. It has this subjective and experiential mode as it is the process of illumination in the intellect by the Holy Spirit. Yet, gnosis is also doctrinal; there is the holy knowledge of the Faith (the Regula Fide) confessed in the Creed by the congregation.
The mystery of gnosis is spoken of by St Paul in his letter to the Galatians: "But now that you have come to know God, or rather to be known by God..." (Gal. 4:9a). And also, to the Corinthians he writes, "[W]e know that 'all of us possess knowledge [gnosis].' This knowledge [gnosis] puffs up, but love builds up. If anyone imagines that he knows something, he does not yet know as he ought to know. But if anyone loves God, he is known by God" (1 Cor. 8:1b-3).
Gnosis of God is a sacred participation in the mysteries of Faith, for it is recognition that one really does not know as he or she ought to know, but that one is known fully, intimately and perfectly by God. Knowledge "stops short" of attaining God because He is personal and not conceptual. As the mystics point out, knowledge actually terminates in an impenetrable 'un-knowing' where one realizes how far one is actually from God. At this point, when the human gaze is utterly blind, the Divine light then illuminates.
So, following St Paul, a believer cannot be a self-described 'gnostic' because one can never know as one ought to know. But a believer can and should pursue noble gnosis, knowledge of the sacred mysteries of God. This gnosis actually has an aromatic fragrance (2 Cor. 2:14) for it leads to God. Yet, the love of God in Christ surpasses all gnosis (Eph. 3:19), just as dwelling with God forever surpasses our sanctified life pursuing Him, and our enjoyment of God in His glory surpasses the Symbol of our confession of Him.
There are many brilliant and penetrating passages of this book that can help Christians to see gnosis in a new light, more akin to the way St Paul and Clement of Alexandria saw it. Here it's important to point out that Paul never chastises people for their knowledge, but he does warn Timothy against what is falsely called gnosis by heretics (1 Tim. 6:20). Real gnosis is an illuminated gaze at God which comes to realize that God already knows, already loves, the one who is looking.
If I have one critique of this book, it's that I don't think Borella spends enough time in the Johannine writings. He lingers with Luke 11 for a while (where the Lord speaks of a "key" to gnosis) and spends most of his time interpreting St Paul's teachings on knowledge in 1 Corinthians especially, but also in other places.
Yet John's writings are rich ground for any theology of gnosis. It is just that John doesn't use the noun 'gnosis' but favors διάνοια ("understanding"), at least in one place (1 John 5:20). Yet in his gospel, there are no less than 57 instances of the verb γινώσκω ("I know")! The Lord is often teaching His disciples various things in order "that you may know me," "that you may know the Father," "that you may know how I love you," etc. It seems that any study of gnosis is really missing something if the verb γινώσκω is left out one's New Testament investigations.
I will end this review by including some quotations or insights of Borella that I find particularly convicting, inspiring, or just brilliant. I should also add that I am looking forward to reading more of this author.
- Gnosis as "an interior and saving knowledge." Nothing more (or less) (11).
- We would be wise to remember Clement's comment in his Stromateis, Book V: "For gnosis of the divine substance is the eating and drinking of the divine Logos" (28, footnote 27).
- "Doctrinal gnosis relies, then, on a 'gnostic awareness' of the intellective act, on a sacred aesthetics of the intellect for which metaphysical Ideas are divine works of art, the icons of the Word that the Holy Spirit writes within our souls" (55-56).
- "The consummation of partial gnosis, which becomes an unknowing, conditions the realization of integral gnosis. The latter, as St Paul teaches, consists in knowing as we are known, which means that God's knowledge of the human creature is the rule and model of that knowledge which the creature has of God" (61).
- Hegelian philosophy essentially transforms itself into a "speculative recording chamber;" "it confines itself to noting what becomes, in order to save it conceptually; it represents one of the greatest degradations of thought that one can imagine; it makes the philosopher the servant and even the slave of the 'spirit of the times...'" (84).
July 21, 2024
Indispensable for any Trinitarian Christian philosopher.
This work also delineates a Christian gnosis from Evagrius, St. Dionysius and St. John of the Cross for what it is, and what it is not. Also, how we have completely lost our way of knowledge.
Thomism for Borella is radically different from the rationalist Thomism found nearly everywhere.
The work of René Guénon takes as its standing point the concept of union of knower and known -that is found absolutely everywhere-, in India in Adi Shankara, in the far East in Lao-Tzu, in the West in St. Dionysius, in the near-East in Ibn' Arabi and in Egypt in Hermes Trismegistius, to mention only some, so he takes as his standing point the traditional knowledge against contemporary sophistry. Hence he speaks of metaphysical realization, a concept that had been completely forgotten in the West, but was known in all truly traditional peoples, which is a proof of the nonhuman origin of this teaching. His work demolishes to the ground what contemporary thinking has become, we can see this especially in the Symbolism of the Cross, The Multiple States of the Being and the Reign of Quantity. There’s actually, as Borella demonstrates, much agreement between Guenon and St. Thomas, but with some cautions.
There is no question: for those seeking a comprehensive understanding of religion and tradition, the restoration of the contemplative spirit, the works of Guénon act as a catalyst - they allow one to realize one’s own prejudices and doubt assumptions almost taken for granted - as much as this is true and helpful-, following Guenon strictly can lead to denial of dogma.
But the loyal Christian will never admit one iota of heresy or any denial of the smallest dogma, and here is why this work is indispensable for this kind of reader: Borella makes corrections of Guénon's thought, defending Catholic Christian dogma, preserving everything to it’s core, just as every Christian gnostic did (St. Dionysius, st. John of the Cross, Meister Eckhart), while showing understanding and appreciation for Guénon’s insights, and critiquing him with the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas.
It is not an easy book and people who know nothing of the history philosophy would not be able to follow. An easier book of Borella would be The Sense of the Supernatural.
Quoting bellow from: https://europeanconservative.com/arti...
“
Speaking of these as one of the “sacred mysteries,” St. Bonaventure says that “the one who only seeks knowledge tastes of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Collationes in Hexaemeron, XVII, 27). Thus, by seeking only what can be called “the exterior science,” they will become the slaves of the “Assyrians”—one of the biblically-inspired appellations by which St. Bonaventure designates the fallen angels (i.e., demons). The consequence represents the most remarkable part of the entire interpretation. It is a prophecy concerning the end of history, which will reproduce, on the mystical body of Christ—the Ecclesia militans—what happened to the Divine Teacher at the end of His earthly life:
Believe me, a time will come when the ‘gold and silver vessels’ (Exod 3:22; 12:36) i.e. rational arguments, will no longer be of value. There will no longer be any justification of faith by reason, but only by auctoritas. As an indication of this, in His temptation the Redeemer defended Himself not with rational arguments but with arguments from authority, even though He certainly must have known the arguments of reason well. In this way He predicted what would take place in His Mystical Body in the coming trial.
[…]
Pope Leo XIII had already begun, as Jean Borella points out, the revitalization of Thomistic studies through his encyclical Aeterni Patris (1879). However, a major mistake was made due to the desire to react against fashionable intellectual currents, led by Kantianism, from the perspective of a neo-Scholastic, rationalistic Thomism in which the mystical dimension of reality was marginalized. In other words, a metaphysical and epistemological system based on an excessive emphasis on speculative-rational thought was favored over a mystical/mystagogical theology inspired by the works of St. Dionysius the Areopagite and St. Bonaventure (to name just a few), despite the fact that St. Thomas himself quotes the former more than any other authority throughout his works, and the latter was one of his closest friends and collaborators. “
This work also delineates a Christian gnosis from Evagrius, St. Dionysius and St. John of the Cross for what it is, and what it is not. Also, how we have completely lost our way of knowledge.
Thomism for Borella is radically different from the rationalist Thomism found nearly everywhere.
The work of René Guénon takes as its standing point the concept of union of knower and known -that is found absolutely everywhere-, in India in Adi Shankara, in the far East in Lao-Tzu, in the West in St. Dionysius, in the near-East in Ibn' Arabi and in Egypt in Hermes Trismegistius, to mention only some, so he takes as his standing point the traditional knowledge against contemporary sophistry. Hence he speaks of metaphysical realization, a concept that had been completely forgotten in the West, but was known in all truly traditional peoples, which is a proof of the nonhuman origin of this teaching. His work demolishes to the ground what contemporary thinking has become, we can see this especially in the Symbolism of the Cross, The Multiple States of the Being and the Reign of Quantity. There’s actually, as Borella demonstrates, much agreement between Guenon and St. Thomas, but with some cautions.
There is no question: for those seeking a comprehensive understanding of religion and tradition, the restoration of the contemplative spirit, the works of Guénon act as a catalyst - they allow one to realize one’s own prejudices and doubt assumptions almost taken for granted - as much as this is true and helpful-, following Guenon strictly can lead to denial of dogma.
But the loyal Christian will never admit one iota of heresy or any denial of the smallest dogma, and here is why this work is indispensable for this kind of reader: Borella makes corrections of Guénon's thought, defending Catholic Christian dogma, preserving everything to it’s core, just as every Christian gnostic did (St. Dionysius, st. John of the Cross, Meister Eckhart), while showing understanding and appreciation for Guénon’s insights, and critiquing him with the philosophy of St. Thomas Aquinas.
It is not an easy book and people who know nothing of the history philosophy would not be able to follow. An easier book of Borella would be The Sense of the Supernatural.
Quoting bellow from: https://europeanconservative.com/arti...
“
Speaking of these as one of the “sacred mysteries,” St. Bonaventure says that “the one who only seeks knowledge tastes of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil” (Collationes in Hexaemeron, XVII, 27). Thus, by seeking only what can be called “the exterior science,” they will become the slaves of the “Assyrians”—one of the biblically-inspired appellations by which St. Bonaventure designates the fallen angels (i.e., demons). The consequence represents the most remarkable part of the entire interpretation. It is a prophecy concerning the end of history, which will reproduce, on the mystical body of Christ—the Ecclesia militans—what happened to the Divine Teacher at the end of His earthly life:
Believe me, a time will come when the ‘gold and silver vessels’ (Exod 3:22; 12:36) i.e. rational arguments, will no longer be of value. There will no longer be any justification of faith by reason, but only by auctoritas. As an indication of this, in His temptation the Redeemer defended Himself not with rational arguments but with arguments from authority, even though He certainly must have known the arguments of reason well. In this way He predicted what would take place in His Mystical Body in the coming trial.
[…]
Pope Leo XIII had already begun, as Jean Borella points out, the revitalization of Thomistic studies through his encyclical Aeterni Patris (1879). However, a major mistake was made due to the desire to react against fashionable intellectual currents, led by Kantianism, from the perspective of a neo-Scholastic, rationalistic Thomism in which the mystical dimension of reality was marginalized. In other words, a metaphysical and epistemological system based on an excessive emphasis on speculative-rational thought was favored over a mystical/mystagogical theology inspired by the works of St. Dionysius the Areopagite and St. Bonaventure (to name just a few), despite the fact that St. Thomas himself quotes the former more than any other authority throughout his works, and the latter was one of his closest friends and collaborators. “
Displaying 1 - 2 of 2 reviews