A brief interview with Fr. Probolé, one of whose sermons I posted here. I've added Wikipedia links to the technical terms.
You self-identify as a
“Neo-Sethian”. Could you explain this a bit?
Of course. The Sethians were a Gnostic sect whose theology
we know fairly clearly from the heresiologists and some of the Nag Hammadi texts. They believed that the material
universe—the Cosmos—was imperfect, if not evil, and the True God was totally separate from the
Cosmos. The phrase “true god” is an awkward term, and I use the word Pneute, which
means “the god” in Coptic for the one god who is separate from the Cosmos. Pneute
didn’t create the physical world. That was done by a lesser god or demigod, the
Demiurge. Since he was imperfect, the Cosmos is itself imperfect, since an
imperfect being could hardly create something perfect. The story is too complicated for me to give a brief
retelling here. You can find a good summary in Bentley Layton’s The Gnostic Scriptures.
But the major difference between the Sethian and orthodox
forms of Christianity is in the person of Christ. Christ, because he came from
Pneute, is completely a spiritual being, and there is no part of him which is
material. Literally, it is not possible that he entered into matter as
described in the orthodox belief in the Incarnation. The Jesus whom the
apostles know was a completely spiritual being and he came to us to teach us
how to transcend the material world. He did not enter into a physical body but
assumed the apparent form of a man so as to be able to discourse with the
apostles and other people.
In the Gospel of John
the idea that Jesus was a human sacrifice is always in the foreground. He is
the “lamb of God”, a sacrifice for the sins of humans.
Correct. The belief that Jesus’ death was a human sacrifice “for
the remission of sins” is really evil. It amazes me that more orthodox
Christians don’t overtly reject this belief. The German theologian Rudolf Bultmann believed that the Fourth Gospel was written in response to a Gnostic
teaching. We don’t know if this is true or not, but it seems reasonable to me. In
the other gospels the crucifixion is an event inn Jesus’ life. In John’s Gospel
it is the primary reason for his life.
Is there any way to
get any good out of the bloody story of the crucifixion?
Yes. What is teaches us is that it is possible to transcend
the material world, the “slings and arrows of outrageous fortune”, as
Shakespeare puts it, and enter into the spiritual world. All the sufferings of Jesus,
the public humiliation, the flogging, the hanging out in the hot sun, all are
symbolic of the trials and work one has to do to transcend the limitations of
the physical world. The apparition of Jesus at Pentecost showed the apostles
the form of someone who had transcended the physical Cosmos by crucifying the
world.
By “crucifying the
world” do you mean physical austerities?
Yes and no. If by “physical austerities” you mean hair shirts
and self-flagellation, that’s certainly been done in the past. But walking down
a street whipping yourself will get you thrown in a mental hospital these days.
There are, however, less abusive ways. The physical desires are controllable through
self-discipline, prayer, and meditation. Most people have to live in society as
a whole, and not in a monastery.
The thing that one has to realize is that that there is an
existence beyond the physical, that attaining this is possible, and that this
is what we mean by “salvation”, and that it is, in theory, attainable by all.
You don’t have a
regular communion service like orthodox Christians, do you?
Correct. We had a yearly celebration that is similar to
Pentecost of other Christians. It is a celebration of Jesus’ coming to us to
show that we are not prisoners of the material world, and that we can free
ourselves and return to Pneute. There is normal foodstuffs and wine, but it is
still a religious celebration with hymns and rituals.
And you don’t have a Eucharist
service like you find in orthodox Christian churches?
No, we don’t. Hannibal Lecter’s culinary tastes aren’t a part
of the means of salvation.
That’s a witty but
extremely harsh criticism of the Christian Eucharist.
Thanks. We’re living in the 21st century, not the
Bronze Age, and human sacrifice and ritual cannibalism should not be a part of
our rituals, not even symbolically.
In orthodox Christianity guilt is the Archons means of controlling
people. They believe that people must be controlled because they—that is the
Archons spiritual and temporal—only want to have power over others. This desire
for power comes from the Demiurge, who wants to rule the entire Cosmos. The teaching
that humans are basically sinful, perhaps evil, is the greatest means that have
to keep humans impure. We become impure, however, by our actions, and not because
we are humans. We begin with the handicap that we are spiritual beings living
in material bodies, but we are able to overcome that handicap. The Archons,
however, teach us that we are imperfect, and that there is nothing that we can
do about it.
That is what the
French theologian John Calvin thought.
Calvin was an extremist of this line of thought. This belief,
however, is a basic part of Christian theology, and has been since Augustine of Hippo, from whom Calvin got this belief. There is no salvation that only comes
through belief. One makes the soul pure through various exercises. It is only
important to believe that salvation is possible, and that Jesus came to us a
model of the means of salvation. The rest comes from one’s own efforts.
Is there salvation
outside of your church?
Yes. One is able to find salvation in other organizations
and churches—or on one’s own. Jesus is a model and key who came in a certain
time and place. Only the arcontic churches say, “outside of us there is no
salvation.”
I thank you for your
time. Please come again.
Thank you. I will.
