Here are a few lines from Eric Voegelin's The New Science of Politics: an Introduction. I've just begun to read Voegelin, but his thesis seems to be that in post-Christian Europe political theorists brought to bear a metaphysical interpretation regarding history and political systems, and that, collectively characterized, these theories reflect the Gnostic heresy regarding the nature of the universe and human history, and the role and character of God in that universe and in that history. Political scientists (philosophers and politicians) in Europe removed the anthropomorphic deity from the Gnostic formulation while retaining the heretical identification of metaphysical forces within the universe, within individuals, and as expressed through history and political and social activity. Orthodox Christianity secularized the universe, while Gnosticism brought God back into it. With that, I'll let Voeglin speak for himself:
The attempt at immanentizing the meaning of
existence is fundamentally an attempt at bringing our knowledge of
transcendence into a firmer grip than the cognitio
fidei, the cognition of faith, will afford; and Gnostic experiences offer
this firmer grip in so far as they are an expansion of the soul to the point
where God is drawn into the existence of man. This expansion will engage the
various human faculties; and, hence, it is possible to distinguish a range of
Gnostic varieties according to the faculty which predominates in the operation
of getting this grip on God. Gnosis may
be primarily intellectual and assume the form of speculative penetration of the
mystery of creation and existence, as, for instance, in the contemplative
gnosis of Hegel or Schelling. Or it may
be primarily emotional and assume the form of an indwelling of divine substance
in the human soul, as, for instance, in paracletic sectarian leaders. Or it may
be primarily volitional and assume the form of activist redemption of man and
society, as in the instance of revolutionary activists like Comte, Marx, or
Hitler. These gnostic experiences, in
the amplitude of their variety, are the core of the redivinization of society,
for men who fall into these experiences divinize themselves by substituting more
massive modes of participation in divinity for faith in the Christian sense.
As I suggested above, orthodox Christianity secularized the universe, while Gnosticism brought God back into it. Philip K. Dick--who is often wrongly described as a "Gnostic"--was very keen on rejecting the mystical project of Gnosticism, and sought through his novels to illustrate the shortcomings of such fantasias and the people who live in, or who otherwise believe in, such artificial worlds, or who see themselves playing roles in the histories of such worlds--see, for example, The Three Stigmata of Palmer Eldritch and The Transmigration of Timothy Archer.
 |
| Eric Voegelin |
02.jpg)
