3. It has been shown that the speculative tenets of Gnosticism might lead (and as a matter of fact we know that they did lead) to either of two practical extremes, to rigid asceticism or to unbridled license. The latter alternative appears to some extent in the heresy of the Pastoral Epistles[[303]], and still more plainly in those of the Catholic Epistles[[304]] and the Apocalypse[[305]]. It is constantly urged by Catholic writers as a reproach against later Gnostic sects[[306]].
Asceticism of the Colossian heresy
But the former and nobler extreme was the first impulse of the Gnostic. To escape from the infection of evil by escaping from the domination of matter was his chief anxiety. This appears very plainly in the Colossian heresy. Though the prohibitions to which the Apostle alludes might be explained in part by the ordinances of the Mosaic ritual, this explanation will not cover all the facts. Thus for instance drinks are mentioned as well as meats[[307]], though on the former the law of Moses is silent. Thus again the rigorous denunciation, ‘Touch not, taste not, handle not[[308]],’ seems to go very far beyond the Levitical enactments. And moreover the motive of these prohibitions |not explained by its Judaism.| is Essene rather than Pharisaic, Gnostic rather than Jewish. These severities of discipline were intended ‘to check indulgence of the flesh[[309]].’ They professed to treat the body with entire disregard, to ignore its cravings and to deny its wants. In short; they betray a strong ascetic tendency[[310]], of which normal Judaism, as represented by the Pharisee, offers no explanation.
St Paul’s reply shows its Gnostic bearing.
And St Paul’s answer points to the same inference. The difference will appear more plainly, if we compare it with his treatment of Pharisaic Judaism in the Galatian Church. This epistle offers nothing at all corresponding to his language on that occasion; ‘If righteousness be by law, then Christ died in vain’; ‘If ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing’; ‘Christ is nullified for you, whosoever are justified by law; ye are fallen from grace[[311]].’ The point of view in fact is wholly changed. With these Essene or Gnostic Judaizers the Mosaic law was neither the motive nor the standard, it was only the starting point, of their austerities. Hence in replying the |It is no longer the contrast of law and grace.| Apostle no longer deals with law, as law; he no longer points the contrast of grace and works; but he enters upon the moral aspects of these ascetic practices. He denounces them, as concentrating the thoughts on earthly and perishable things[[312]]. He points out that they fail in their purpose, and are found valueless against carnal indulgences[[313]]. In their place he offers the true and only remedy against sin—the elevation of the inner life in Christ, the transference of the affections into a higher sphere[[314]], where the temptations of the flesh are powerless. Thus dying with Christ, they will kill all their earthly members[[315]]. Thus rising with Christ, they will be renewed in the image of God their Creator[[316]].
The truth of the above result tested by
In attempting to draw a complete portrait of the Colossian heresy from a few features accidentally exhibited in St Paul’s epistle, it has been necessary to supply certain links; and some assurance may not unreasonably be required that this has not been done arbitrarily. Nor is this security wanting. In all such cases the test will be twofold. The result must be consistent with itself: and it must do no violence to the historical conditions under which the phenomena arose.
(1) Its inherent consistency and symmetry.
1. In the present instance the former of these tests is fully satisfied. The consistency and the symmetry of the result is its great recommendation. The postulate of a Gnostic type brings the separate parts of the representation into direct connexion. The speculative opinions and the practical tendencies of the heresy thus explain, and are explained by, each other. It is analogous to the hypothesis of the comparative anatomist, who by referring the fossil remains to their proper type restores the whole skeleton of some unknown animal from a few bones belonging to different extremities of the body, and without the intermediate and connecting parts. In the one case, as in the other, the result is the justification of the postulate.
(2) Its place in a historical sequence.