Valentinus – Introduction I

Valentinus – Introduction I

It is interesting that the three very different ministers of the Basin Bible Church have all been moved to explore so many of the ancient extra-biblical religious texts of the Western World—I suspect that there are few if any other Christian churches in Alaska that are indulging such curiosities. Thus it is that, in keeping with this predilection for fringe Christian material, and consistent with my interest in the ancient Gnostics, and their powerful influence on the accepted Biblical Canon, we come to Valentinus. Today we will take A Brief Summary of Valentinian Theology, by David Brons, as far as the Principle of the Mother-God; next week we will examine the PROCESS of Gnosis.

Valentinus is one of those historical figures who ALMOST made it into the mainstream of theological thought—by that I mean, although his influence was deeply felt during his own life-time, his fringe philosophy was rejected by enough of a margin among the church fathers of the burgeoning Christian Church of the post-Apostolic Age, that he was eventually expelled from the mainstream and denied a lasting influence; thus Church history developed along lines that might have otherwise led to very different Catholic doctrines.

For good or ill, I think we have Paul and his disciples to thank for this. Even though, as we will read below, Valentinus is linked directly to Paul through Paul’s student, Theudas, we must remember, as we have seen quite often in the Gnostic texts, Jesus’ teaching was always on two levels—the level of the parable, (which was invented to give the layman a taste of the higher spiritual truths, but also to protect him from the truths he couldn’t handle), and the level of the secret truths, which were reserved for the initiates. In his letters, Paul dwells on the parabolic truth, to benefit the people, but, apparently, his other more esoteric teachings were passed on to a select few, the “spiritually mature”. It seems reasonable to conclude that these secret teachings were unwritten, perhaps because they COULD NOT BE WRITTEN. The Church Fathers, in choosing the accepted Biblical Canon, for reasons we have discussed several times before, favored the layman’s truth of Paul—thus consigning most of the more abstract scriptures, and scriptures of dubious authorship, to the consuming fires of time, and denying all of us the opportunity to ponder these higher level UNWRITTEN truths. If this was a good thing or a bad thing, you can decide for yourself after I read you some material on Valentinus, beginning with: 

A Brief Summary of Valentinian Theology

by David Brons

The Secret Tradition 

“According to Valentinus, there are esoteric teachings which originate from Jesus that were passed on in secret. When Jesus spoke in public, he used metaphors that did not disclose his complete teachings. He only passed them on to his disciples in private. He referred to this when he said: 

Luke 8:9-10:

"The knowledge about the secrets of the kingdom of heaven has been given to you, but to the rest it comes by means of parables so that they may look but not see and listen but not understand." 

Similarly, when Saint Paul encountered the risen Lord in a vision (2 Corinthians 12:2-4; Acts 9:9-10), he received the secret teaching from him. Valentinus claimed that he learned this secret teaching from Theudas. According to Valentinus, this secret tradition provides the key that is essential for a complete understanding of Jesus' message. One of his followers put this in the following words: 

Irenaeus Against Heresies 3:2:1:

"The scriptures are ambiguous and the truth cannot be extracted from them by those who are ignorant of tradition."  

The Valentinians claimed that the secret teachings are meaningful only to those who are spiritually mature. If a person was not ready to receive them, they seem like nonsense "because their value can be judged only on a spiritual basis".

 Corinthians 2:14-16:

“14But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. 

15But he that is spiritual judgeth all things, yet he himself is judged of no man. 16For who hath known the mind of the Lord, that he may instruct him? But we have the mind of Christ.”

According to the Valentinian tradition, Paul and the other apostles revealed these teachings only to those who were 'spiritually mature’.

1 Corinthians 2:6-8:

“6Howbeit we speak wisdom among them that are perfect: yet not the wisdom of this world, nor of the princes of this world, that come to nought: 7But we speak the wisdom of God in a mystery, even the hidden wisdom, which God ordained before the world unto our glory: 8Which none of the princes of this world knew: for had they known it, they would not have crucified the Lord of glory.”

With this, we return to our often-broached conversation concerning parables and the Unforgiveable Sin; remember that Jesus spoke in parables to protect the uninitiated from themselves. For a warning, we have this passage from Hebrews to recall:

Hebrews 6:4-6:

“4 It is impossible for those who have once been enlightened, who have tasted the heavenly gift, who have shared in the Holy Spirit, 

5 who have tasted the goodness of the word of God and the powers of the coming age, 6 if they fall away, to be brought back to repentance, because to their loss they are crucifying the Son of God all over again and subjecting him to public disgrace.”

Continuing with this subject, I now turn to Swedenborg and his Heavenly Secrets: Whenever I read Swedenborg, the mad 18^th Century Mystic, I am struck by the use of archaic language mixed in with perfectly contemporary, very clear and very simply expressed thoughts, quite readily accessible to the modern mind. Remember the section of Heavenly Secrets I am reading is concerned with interpreting the very first passages in Genesis. Related to Original Sin and the Expulsion from the Garden, Swedenborg has this to say on the subject of the parable, secret knowledge, and their relationship to the Unforgiveable Sin:

“The other secret is that if they had learned the mysteries of faith, they would have been destroyed forever. Such is the meaning of the words:

now perhaps people will put out their hand and take from the tree of lives as well, and eat, and live forever. “

[Sidebar: For the sake of clarity, I must insert a little word of explanation, an explanation which Swedenborg supplies himself, later on, but which I think deserves some attention right now—otherwise what follows immediately may not make any sense. The point here is that, when Swedenborg points out that a sinner may live forever, this is NOT a good thing. Souls unprepared for enlightenment will profane the divine and thus permanently bar themselves from Heaven.]

“The situation is this:

People can reach a point where the structure of their life is turned upside down; they have no interest in receiving life or wisdom from any other source than themselves and their own powers. Under these circumstances,

when they hear anything about faith, no matter what it is, they debate in their minds whether it is true or not. Because they make

themselves—their sense impressions and the facts they have learned—their authority, they cannot help denying; and when they deny, they blaspheme and profane. They end up with no concern about whether they are intermingling profane and holy things.

If this is what we become, we are so utterly damned when we enter the other life that no hope of salvation remains; and this is because things that are mingled together through profanation cling to each other in their mixed condition. 

As soon as an image of something holy comes to our minds, the attached image of something profane appears, preventing us from keeping company with any but the damned. 

(People in the next life—even the spirits in the world of spirits, and more so the angelic spirits—keenly perceive what is present in, and linked with, the ideas that make up our thinking. Their perception is so keen that from a single thought they can tell what we are like.)

Profane things attached in this way to holy things cannot be wrenched apart from them without the tortures of hell—tortures so intense that if

we knew about them, we would stay as far away from profanation as we would from hell itself.

That is why the mysteries of faith were never revealed to the Jews, who were like this. So little was revealed to them that they were not even told plainly that they would live on after death or that the Lord was

going to come into the world to save them. They were (as they continue to be) kept so deeply ignorant and oblivious that they had no idea (nor do they yet) that we have an inner being or that an inner plane even

exists. If they had known it (and if they knew it now), to the point of acknowledging its truth, they are such that they would have profaned it, removing forever any hope of salvation in the next life.

These are the things the Lord meant when he said in John 12:40:

“He has blinded their eyes and closed off their heart to prevent them from seeing with their eyes and understanding at heart and turning and being healed by me.”

The Lord also spoke to them in parables without explaining a single one to them “so that seeing, they would not see, and hearing, they would not hear and understand,” as he himself says in Matthew 13:13.

For the same reason, all religious mysteries were hidden away from them and veiled in the representative acts and objects of their religion. For

the same reason again, that is what the Word’s prophetic mode is like, too. But it is one thing to know and another to acknowledge. When we know but do not acknowledge, it is as if we do not know. If we do acknowledge and then we blaspheme and profane, we are the people the Lord refers to.

We build a life through all the things whose truth we persuade ourselves of, that is, the things we acknowledge and believe. What we are not

persuaded of—what we do not acknowledge and believe—has no effect on our mind. As a result, we cannot profane holy things unless we are persuaded to the point of acknowledgment and yet deny them. . . . .

Genesis 3:24. And he threw the humans out. And he caused guardian beings to live on the east of the Garden of Eden, and the flame of a sword

turning itself, to guard the way to the tree of lives.

Throwing the humans out is completely depriving us of all the will to

do good and all comprehension of truth—so completely that those faculties

are withheld from us and we cease to be human. 

Causing guardian beings to live on the east is making sure that we cannot enter into any of the hidden wisdom of faith; the east of the Garden of Eden is a heavenly quality from which an intelligent understanding comes. The guardian beings symbolize the Lord’s providence making sure that if we are like this we do not pry into the ideas that compose faith. 

The flame of a sword turning itself symbolizes self-love with its mad desires and the delusions that grow out of them. These desires and delusions are such

that although we want to enter there, we are carried in the opposite

direction, toward bodily and earthly preoccupations. This is done to

guard the way to the tree of lives, or in other words, to prevent us from

profaning holy things. Several passages in the Word mentioning the guardian beings, though, show that they symbolize the Lord’s providence making sure we do not incur death by profaning the mysteries of faith, through an

insane exploration of them that relies on our own powers, empiricism, or mere facts.

Those who do not acknowledge are capable of knowing, but it is as if they do not know. They are like people who know things but whose

knowledge amounts to nothing.

Now, back the Brons Valentinius summary:

“God

Valentinians believed that God is incomprehensible and cannot be known directly. Therefore he defies accurate description. He is infinite, without beginning or end and is the ultimate origin of all things. He encompasses all things without being encompassed. Everything including the world lies within the deity and continues to be part of it. The Godhead manifests itself through a process of self-unfolding in the subsequent multiplicity of being while maintaining its unity.” 

[Sidebar: Here we get into one of the more fascinating details of Gnosticism—the Father/Mother God of the Pre-Christian, (probably Pre-Judaic) Period. Our own Creation myth includes the idea of male and female being created in God’s image:

“[1:26] Then God said, "Let us make humankind in our image, according to our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the birds of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the wild animals of the earth, and over every creeping thing that creeps upon the earth."

[1:27] So God created humankind in his image, in the image of God he created them; male and female he created them.”

It was suggested to me, when I was in Jr. High, that the use of the “Royal We” in “Let us make humankind in OUR image,” is not confusing, if you only understand 18^th century English grammar; but if you are looking to argue about a scriptural reference to a plural, or Male/Female, creator— there it is: male and female were created in God’s image—male and female images intertwined and inter-dependent.

Swedenborg has a completely different interpretation of the expression “PLURAL GOD”:

“Genesis 3:22. And Jehovah God said, “Here, the human has been like one of us, knowing good and evil, and now perhaps people will put out their hand and take from the tree of lives as well, and eat, and live forever.”

The reason Jehovah God speaks at first in the singular and then in the plural is that Jehovah God means the Lord and at the same time heaven with its angels. The fact that the human knew good and evil means that people became heavenly and so became wise and understanding. . . . 

In Genesis 1, for instance, the only name used is God, and he speaks in the plural there as well—“let us make a human in our image.” Not until the next chapter, which treats of heavenly people, is he called Jehovah God.

He is called Jehovah because he alone is, he alone lives; the name comes from his beingness.

Human beings are also called gods by virtue of their power, as in Psalms 82:6; John 10:34, 35. Moses was called a “God to Pharaoh” (Exodus 7:1). For the same reason, the [Hebrew] word for God, Elohim, is plural. Angels have no power at all on their own, however (as they themselves

confess), but only receive it from the Lord. Because of this, and since there is only one God, Jehovah God in the Word means the Lord alone. But when anything occurs through the ministry of angels, as in Genesis 1[:26], then the plural is used.”

So much for the “Royal WE”:

Back to Valentinus:]

“Valentinians believed that God is androgynous and frequently depicted him as a male-female dyad. This is related to the notion that God provides the universe with both form and substance. The feminine aspect of the deity is called Silence, Grace and Thought. Silence is God's primordial state of tranquillity and self-awareness. She is also the active creative Thought that makes all subsequent states of being (or "Aeons") substantial. The masculine aspect of God is Depth, also called Ineffable and First Father. Depth is the profoundly incomprehensible, all-encompassing aspect of the deity. He is essentially passive, yet when moved to action by his Feminine Thought, he gives the universe form.” 

The idea of Feminine Thought giving form to the universe reeks of hidden mystery; indeed, the idea of a Mother-God, in some ways, contradicts the whole Monotheistic-Patriarchal paradigm that dominates the Judeo-Christian image of the Divine. I quote below a selection of previously presented comments on the subject of the Male/Female God. 

My favorite is this one from The Gnostic Account of the Fall and the Creation of the Material World. It gives an account of the “Little Wisdom”, a very heavy wisdom indeed, because it suggests that the wisdom of death is the impulse behind material creation:

“As a result of the new harmony established by "Christos and Holy Spirit", a new, unpaired Aeon, Jesus, is created, who is the "perfect fruit of the Pleroma", and expresses in his being the attributes of all the other Aeons.

The Christ-Aeon meanwhile shapes the "formless entity" into a new Aeon, called Achamoth (from the Hebrew Hokhmah, "Wisdom"), who becomes a kind of lower Sophia.

Achamoth, realising she is outside the Pleroma and unable to return, experiences emotions such as grief, fear, etc. Jesus then descends from the Pleroma and separates her from these emotions, which then become the substance or primal matter of the Cosmos, i.e. Psyche (Soul/Mind) and Hyle (Matter/Darkness). 

The material world is thus derived ultimately from a projection of the sufferings of Achamoth.  Inasmuch as Achamoth (like Sophia above her, and the Demiurge below her), is in many respects a mythological macrocosmic counterpart of the human ego, she is tormented by the longing for ultimate truth only able to produce a sort of bastard rationalism that has to be "crucified away" before she can be redeemed [E.R.Dodds, Pagan and Christian in an Age of Anxiety, pp.19-20]”

The next excerpt is from The Nazarene Way of Essenic Studies.

It defines the Holy Spirit in its Feminine form:

Shekhina; The Feminine Aspect of God ~
The Esoteric Teachings of Jesus and the Nazarene Essenes:

“The Shekinah is held by many to represent the feminine attributes of the presence of God (shekhinah being a feminine word in Hebrew), based especially on readings of the Talmud and the Kabbalah. The word 'Matronit' is also employed to represent this usage. Comparative Religionists suggest a comparison to shakti, the female energy of Hindu gods, and to the Christian concept of the Holy Spirit.

Judaism and Christianity are both monotheistic religions, strongly connected to a patriarchal God - Yahweh. However, it may surprise many to discover that a goddess was associated with Judaism from its conception, and continued to play an important part, in various forms, to the present. The goddess is best known as Shekhina, a Talmudic term describing the manifestation of God's presence on earth. 

While the Bible does not mention the name Shekhina, she is nevertheless bound to extremely old traditions, and closely relates to the ancient goddesses. Particularly significant is the Canaanite goddess Ashera who, at the beginning of the Israelites' settlement in the land of Canaan, was often referred to as Yahweh's Consort. 

The literature also calls her the "Holy Spirit" which, in Hebrew, is also a feminine form.”

This next one tells another of the many creation stories that swell our world mythologies:

The Babylonian Creation Story (Enuma elish) 

“Like the Greek Theogony, the creation of the world in the Enuma elish begins with the universe in a formless state, from which emerge two primary gods, male and female: 

“When the skies above were not yet named Nor earth below pronounced by name, Apsu, the first one, their begetter, And maker Tiamat, who bore them all, Had mixed their waters together, But had not formed pastures, nor discovered reed-beds; When yet no gods were manifest, Nor names pronounced, nor destinies decreed, Then gods were born within them. (Dalley 233)”

Apsu, the male "begetter," is the sweet waters, while Tiamat, the female "maker," is the bitter, salt waters. Sweet and salt water mingle together at the mouths of the Tigris and Euphrates rivers, site of the origins of Mesopotamian civilization.”

[Sidebar: When I read these myths (including Eve’s disastrous interview with the serpent) I can’t help thinking of Pandora’s Box—that box that contained all evil and suffering, which she inadvertently released into the world; somehow these stories all have a female doing something bad that, nevertheless, sets the world in motion. Surely life in Paradise must have been a very quiet, still, timeless experience, and it took original sin to get the clock ticking. Much to think about.

Back to Valentinus:]

The Son

“The origin of the universe is described as a process of emanation from the Godhead. The male and female aspects of the Father, acting in conjunction, manifested themselves in the Son. The Son is also often depicted by Valentinians as a male-female dyad. The Son manifests himself in twenty-six spiritual entities or Aeons arranged into male-female pairs. The arrangement and names of the Aeons will not be discussed here. They represent the energies immanent within Son and were seen as part of his personality. Together they constitute the Fullness (pleroma) of the Godhead. 

The Fall

The Aeons who are manifested by the Son are conceived as having some degree of psychological independence. They lie within God but are separated from him by a Limit or boundary. As a result, they do not know the one who brought them into being. The Aeons sensed that they were incomplete and longed to know their origin. 

This longing passed to Sophia (Wisdom), the youngest of the Aoens. On behalf of the whole Fullness, she took up the quest to know the supreme Parent. She attempted to know him by thinking alone, something that is impossible. As a result, she became separated from her consort and fell into a state of deficiency and suffering. Through the power of Limit, Sophia was divided in two. Her higher part was returned to her consort but her lower part was separated from the Fullness into a lower realm along with the deficiency and suffering. This lower realm is identical with the physical world.”

[Sidebar: This account of the Fall is identical to the one I read just a few minutes ago: I particularly like this summary:

“Sophia was divided in two. Her higher part was returned to her consort but her lower part was separated from the Fullness into a lower realm along with the deficiency and suffering. This lower realm is identical with the physical world.”

[Sidebar: It took a while for me to realize the blatantly obvious connection between the story of Sophia divided in two, and the story of Adam and Eve. When you think of the Garden of Eden as INSIDE the Pleroma, and their expulsion from it as OUSIDE the Pleroma, (an expulsion, by the way, motivated by the FEMALE), it is easy to see the analogy, as Adam, having been evicted from Paradise, spends the rest of his days trying to return Home. It is almost as if he was expelled from the Garden and THEN ate of the tree of knowledge. Ha! Parenthetically, the idea that the material world was generated from deficiency and suffering is in accord with the description of the physical world as a ‘veil of tears’. ]

St. Augustine makes some relevant comments about the Male/Female dichotomy in Book 14 of The City of God:

“But we, for our part, have no manner of doubt that to increase and multiply and replenish the earth in virtue of the blessing of God, is a gift of marriage as God instituted it from the beginning before man sinned, when He created them male and female — in other words, two sexes manifestly distinct. And it was this work of God on which His blessing was pronounced. For no sooner had Scripture said, “Male and female created He them,” Genesis 1:27-28 than it immediately continues, “And God blessed them, and God said to them, Increase, and multiply, and replenish the earth, and subdue it,” etc. And though all these things may not unsuitably be interpreted in a spiritual sense, yet “male and female” cannot be understood of two things in one man, as if there were in him one thing which rules, another which is ruled; but it is quite clear that they were created male and female, with bodies of different sexes, for the very purpose of begetting offspring, and so increasing, multiplying, and replenishing the earth; and it is great folly to oppose so plain a fact. 

It was not of the spirit which commands and the body which obeys, nor of the rational soul which rules and the irrational desire which is ruled, nor of the contemplative virtue which is supreme and the active which is subject, nor of the understanding of the mind and the sense of the body, but plainly of the matrimonial union by which the sexes are mutually bound together. . .”

Notice the dichotomous pairs:

spirit — body

rational soul — irrational desire 

contemplative —  active 

understanding of the mind — sense of the body;

In each case, the element of mind (spirit, rational, contemplative, understanding) are to be viewed as feminine, and each physical element (body, irrational, active, sense) is to be viewed as masculine. More on this below.

Back to Valentinus:]

“Valentinians envisioned the universe as a series of concentric spheres. The innermost sphere is the world or deficiency where the lower Sophia was exiled. Enclosing this is the Fullness (pleroma) where the Aeons are. The Aeons are enclosed within the Son. The outermost sphere which encompasses the Son is where the Father (Depth and Silence) is. There is a boundary or Limit between God and the Fullness. There is a second boundary or Limit between the Fullness and the deficiency. Just as the Fullness is a product of the Godhead and lies within it, so also the realm of deficiency is a product of the Fullness and lies within it. The deficiency arose as result of ignorance and it will be dissolved through knowledge (gnosis). 

[Sidebar: The image of the universe as a series of concentric spheres appears in a number of ancient scriptures. For instance in Ezekial: 

Ezekiel 1:15-21: 

¹⁵As I looked at the living creatures, I saw a wheel on the ground beside each creature with its four faces. ¹⁶This was the appearance and structure of the wheels: They sparkled like topaz, and all four looked alike. Each appeared to be made like a wheel intersecting a wheel. ¹⁷As they moved, they would go in any one of the four directions the creatures faced; the wheels did not change direction as the creatures went. ¹⁸Their rims were high and awesome, and all four rims were full of eyes all around. ¹⁹When the living creatures moved, the wheels beside them moved; and when the living creatures rose from the ground, the wheels also rose. ²⁰Wherever the spirit would go, they would go, and the wheels would rise along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels. ²¹When the creatures moved, they also moved; when the creatures stood still, they also stood still; and when the creatures rose from the ground, the wheels rose along with them, because the spirit of the living creatures was in the wheels.

Ezekiel 10:1-14:

“1 Then I looked, and, behold, in the firmament that was above the head of the cherubims there appeared over them as it were a sapphire stone, as the appearance of the likeness of a throne.

2 And he spake unto the man clothed with linen, and said, Go in between the wheels, even under the cherub, and fill thine hand with coals of fire from between the cherubims, and scatter them over the city. And he went in in my sight.

3 Now the cherubims stood on the right side of the house, when the man went in; and the cloud filled the inner court.

4 Then the glory of the Lord went up from the cherub, and stood over the threshold of the house; and the house was filled with the cloud, and the court was full of the brightness of the Lord's glory.

5 And the sound of the cherubims' wings was heard even to the outer court, as the voice of the Almighty God when he speaketh.

6 And it came to pass, that when he had commanded the man clothed with linen, saying, Take fire from between the wheels, from between the cherubims; then he went in, and stood beside the wheels.

7 And one cherub stretched forth his hand from between the cherubims unto the fire that was between the cherubims, and took thereof, and put it into the hands of him that was clothed with linen: who took it, and went out.

8 And there appeared in the cherubims the form of a man's hand under their wings.

9 And when I looked, behold the four wheels by the cherubims, one wheel by one cherub, and another wheel by another cherub: and the appearance of the wheels was as the colour of a beryl stone.

10 And as for their appearances, they four had one likeness, as if a wheel had been in the midst of a wheel.

11 When they went, they went upon their four sides; they turned not as they went, but to the place whither the head looked they followed it; they turned not as they went.

12 And their whole body, and their backs, and their hands, and their wings, and the wheels, were full of eyes round about, even the wheels that they four had.

13 As for the wheels, it was cried unto them in my hearing, O wheel.

14 And every one had four faces: the first face was the face of a cherub, and the second face was the face of a man, and the third the face of a lion, and the fourth the face of an eagle.”

This scripture is packed with archetypal symbols which resonate in our unconscious minds; it is referenced in C.S. Lewis’ Perelandra: (chapter 16 p227): in this scene, the Gods of Mars and Venus are preparing to show themselves to the new King and Queen of Perelandra; they are trying out various physicalizations, on the hero Dr. Ransom, to try and get the right shape; one of the forms they tried looked like this:

“And he looked with some reluctance, and far off between the peaks on the other side of the little valley there came rolling wheels. There was nothing but that—concentric wheels, moving with a rather sickening slowness one inside the other.”

“This vision had to be inspired by Ezekiel Chap. 1 vs. 15-21, where the prophet writes of oddly designed wheels beneath the "living creatures" (angelic beings). Lewis wrote elsewhere that this "wheel within a wheel" vision closely resembles a modern dynamo, an electric generator. Although Ransom is impressed by the hugeness of the wheels, the vision has no meaning to him. It might as well be the biggest ferris wheel as far as he is concerned. 

On the third try Malacandra and Perelandra get it right. They assume humanlike form. Giant and sexless, but human shaped. Yet even without sexual characteristics, Malacandra appears masculine and Perelandra seems feminine:” 

[Sidebar: this commentary mentions not only the concentric circle idea, but the opposition of Male and Female modalities of cosmic structure. Notice that the commentary mentions, “Yet even without sexual characteristics, Malacandra appears masculine and Perelandra seems feminine.” By sexual characteristics this author must mean PHYSICAL characteristics; as you know I have been making a case for masculine and feminine attributes that have nothing to do with physicality. To me male and female are qualities of spirit more than body, and thus, when it is necessary to use the word “sex” I prefer to use the more non-specific term “gender”. Here is the section from Perelandra:

“Both the bodies were naked, and both were free from any sexual characteristics, either primary or secondary. That, one would have expected. But whence came this curious difference between them? He found that he could point to no single feature wherein the difference resided, yet it was impossible to ignore. 

One could try-Ransom has tried a hundred times- to put it into words. He has said that Malacandra was like rhythm and Perelandra like melody. He has said that Malacandra affected him like a quantitative, Perelandra like an accentual, metre. He thinks that the first held in his hand something like a spear, but the hands of the other were open, with the palms towards him. But I don't know that any of these attempts has helped me much. 

At all events what Ransom saw at that moment was the real meaning of gender. Everyone must sometimes have wondered why in nearly all tongues certain inanimate objects are masculine and others feminine. What is masculine about a mountain or feminine about certain trees? Ransom has cured me of believing that this is a purely morphological phenomenon, depending on the form of the word. Still less is gender an imaginative extension of sex. 

Our ancestors did not make mountains masculine because they projected male characteristics into them. The real process is the reverse. Gender is a reality, and a more fundamental reality than sex. Sex is, in fact, merely the adaptation to organic life of a fundamental polarity which divides all created beings. Female sex is simply one of the things that have feminine gender, there are many others, and Masculine and Feminine meet us on planes of reality where male and female would be simply meaningless. Masculine is not attenuated male, nor feminine attenuated female. On the contrary, the male and female of organic creatures are rather faint and blurred reflections of masculine and feminine. Their reproductive functions, their differences in strength and size, partly exhibit, but partly also confuse and misrepresent, the real polarity. 

All this Ransom saw, as it were, with his own eyes. The two white creatures were sexless. But he of Malacandra was masculine (not male); she of Perelandra was feminine (not female). Malacandra seemed to him to have the look of one standing armed, at the ramparts of his own remote archaic world, in ceaseless vigilance, his eyes ever roaming the earthward horizon whence his danger came long ago.”

The concept of masculine-vs-feminine is one to which C.S.Lewis often returns; here is a deep section from That Hideous Strength:

“She took it for granted, half-unconsciously, that the Director was the most virginal of his sex; but she had not realised that this would leave his masculinity still on the other side of the stream from herself and even steeper, more emphatic, than that of common men. Some knowledge of a world beyond Nature she had already gained from living in his house, and more from fear of death that night in the dingle. But she had been conceiving this world as "spiritual" in the negative sense--as some neutral, or democratic, vacuum where differences disappeared, where sex and sense were not transcended but simply taken away. Now the suspicion dawned upon her that there might be differences and contrasts all the way up, richer, sharper, even fiercer, at every rung of the ascent. How if this invasion of her own being in marriage from which she had recoiled, often in the very teeth of instincts, were not, as she had supposed, merely a relic of animal life or patriarchal barbarism, but rather the lowest, the first, and the easiest form of some shocking contact with reality which would have to be repeated-- but in ever larger and more disturbing modes-- on the highest levels of all?”

That does it for today. Next week we will continue with the Brons article; at that time we will reprise some of the information about the Male/Female God because it leads directly to the SON, and the Gnostic sacraments that help reveal His presence to Man.

Let us pray: Jesus we thank you for the promise of Wholeness which we find, and find, and find in the closeness of your warm embrace. Amen.