Rite of Redemption and the Bridal Chamber in the Gospel of Philip

In the Gospel of Philip, a text written by a second-century movement of Christianity with gnostic leanings called the Valentinians, we find extensive commentary on their unique set of rituals: “baptism, chrism, eucharist, redemption, and bridechamber.” Elaine Pagels finds that “much of what we find in Philip … the author shares in common with many of his Christian contemporaries,” including that “the primary transactions of religious life taking place in the community [are] through ritual means.” However, the Valentinian Christian rituals listed in Philip go beyond the traditional Christian sacraments to include additional components, notably the rites of “redemption” and the “bridal chamber.” Irenaeus, a contemporary of these Christians, rejected the Valentinian teaching that there was a rite of redemption that had to be performed after baptism in order to bring Christians to “perfection.” He reported them as teaching that:

the baptism of the visible Jesus is for the remission of sins, but the redemption of the Christ who came down into him is for perfection. They assert that the first is psychic, but the second spiritual. Baptism was proclaimed by John for repentance, but [the rite of] redemption was introduced by Christ for perfection.

Though not every scholar is convinced that the five items listed in Philip constitute five distinct rituals, Einar Thomasson, the author of the most comprehensive work to date on the Valentinian Christians argues that there is a shared conception among the varying texts of this movement that the acts must be performed “in a progressive sequence.” Leaving out the Eucharist, which is a repeated rather than a one-time ritual, Thomassen summarizes the sequence in Philip 70:34–71:3 as follows:

Rebirth [baptism] → anointing [chrism] → redemption → the bridal chamber

Although the limited data currently available precludes any certain conclusions, Thomassen’s sequence, if understood as referring to rites that were to take place after baptism, might be conveniently compared to the sequence of Latter-day Saint ordinances:

Baptism/washing → confirmation/anointing → endowment → marriage sealing

[Caption for figure] 11-5: Conjectural Comparison of Valentinian Rituals, Israelite Temple Layout, and Temple Ordinances. As discussed previously in chapter 7, two distinct sorts of water ordinances—namely baptism by immersion and washing—seem to have become confused in the first centuries after Christ. Although we can be confident that Philip intended to associate the symbolism of the laver in the courtyard with Christian baptism, scholars disagree as to whether the Valentinian ordinances also included a second baptism, perhaps analogous to the additional washing ordinance at the entrance of the tent described in Exodus 29:4 and 40:12. In early Christianity, rituals resembling washing, anointing, and clothing were sometimes performed in conjunction with “baptism.” Drawing from another Valentinian text, Thomassen posits a period of instruction preceding the ordinances, describing, among other things, “who we were, what we have become, where we were, where we have been placed, where we are going.” In the Valentinian list of five ordinances, the eucharist (the counterpart to the Latter-day Saint sacrament of bread and water) is listed as being prior to the rite of “redemption.” Hence, I show it here, consistent with the conclusion of other scholars, as a “repeated maintenance ritual” associated symbolically with the bread and wine of the table of shewbread. Because the culminating Valentinian rites are associated both with some kind of mystical reunion of earthly and heavenly personages (perhaps symbolized by a sacred embrace?) and also “entering the heavenly temple” as well as with the union of husband and wife, the rite of redemption (perhaps roughly corresponding to the culminating steps of the endowment) is conjecturally positioned to reflect its possible role in providing a ritual preceding entrance to the bridal chamber. The rite of the bridal chamber (here shown as roughly corresponding to the Latter-day Saint marriage sealing) is shown as taking place in the bridal chamber itself.

Supporting the view that each listed Valentinian rite should be seen as separate and distinct is another passage from Philip that associates them with different areas of the temple. Old Testament scholar George W. MacRae explained:

The writer is talking about an outer court, a middle court, and the inner court which is the Holy of Holies. The allegory seems to identify these with three different sacraments in the sacramental system of the Valentinian Gnostics. But I think it is more than that. It is more than that because it builds on the concept that one moves toward the divine presence as one moves successively through the outer courts of the temple toward the inner Holy of Holies, to which only the priest has access. Consequently, the order in which the courts are identified with sacraments becomes very important. The initiatory rite of baptism is the outermost one. The rite of redemption, whatever that may have consisted of, is the second one. And it is the bridal chamber, the rite of which was the supreme rite for the Valentinian Gnostic, which is the approach into the presence of God himself.

The interpretation of the term “bridal chamber” is especially complex and disputed. Lance S. Owens, a scholar of Gnosticism, writes:

Whether this ultimate sacrament of the bridal chamber was a ritual enacted by a man and women, an allegorical term for a mystical experience, or a union of both, we do not know. Only hints are given in Gnostic texts about what this sacrament might be:

Christ came to rectify the separation … and join the two components; and to give life unto those who had died by separation and join them together. Now a woman joins with her husband in the bridal [chamber], and those who have joined in the bridal [chamber] will not reseparate.

BYU professor Gaye Strathearn provides reasons to believe that the Valentinian bridal chamber, identified with the Holy of Holies, was thought of as “a place where individuals were united with their divine self, their angel.” That said, she also points out that “certain passages in the Gospel of Philip use the language of a man and a woman being united in the bridal chamber.” Could the rites of the bridal chamber have included both the union of mortal and heavenly personages (perhaps an entrance ritual symbolized by a sacred embrace?) as well as the union of a man and a woman (a marriage ritual), in line with the possibility that Owens has conjectured? Strathearn’s findings suggest that this possibility is well worth our consideration:

According to the Gospel of Philip, the separation of Adam and Eve in the Garden of Eden resulted in two adverse consequences, both of which are rectified in the bridal chamber. The first consequence is paralleled in the Bible: it brought death into the world. “When Eve was still in Adam death did not exist. When she was separated from him death came into being” (68.22–26). Likewise, “If the woman had not separated from the man, she should not die with the man. His separation became the beginning of death” (70.9–12. Compare Genesis 3:19). If, however, “he enters again and attains his former self, death will be no more” (68.25–26). This reunification takes place in the bridal chamber. “Therefore, Christ came that he might correct again the separation that happened from the beginning [that is, the division of Adam and Eve] and unite the two and give life to those who died in the separation and unite them. But the woman is always united with her husband in the bridal chamber. Indeed, those who are united in the bridal chamber will no longer be divided. Thus, Eve separated from Adam because she was not united with him in the bridal chamber” (70.13–22).

The second adverse consequence of Adam and Eve’s separation was that it made their descendants vulnerable to the attacks of evil spirits. This scenario is based on the Valentinian belief that the Pleroma is balanced by the series of divinely paired male/female emanations mentioned above. Before Adam and Eve were separated, they represented the male/female emanations of the Pleroma, but when they separated, not only was death introduced but the separated beings became exposed. “The forms of evil spirit include male ones and female ones. The males are they that unite with the souls which inhabit a female form, but the females are they which are mingled with those in a male form. … When the wanton women see a male sitting alone, they leap down on him and play with him and defile him. So also, the lecherous men, when they see a beautiful woman sitting alone, they persuade her and compel her, wishing to defile her” (65.1–7, 12–19).

The only way to counteract these attacks, according to the Gospel of Philip, is to “receive a male power and a female.” This power is described as “the bridegroom and the bride” (65.9–11). Williams argues that this power comes from an “actual social joining of man and woman” and understands that joining to be a “spiritual marriage.” Yet in coming to this conclusion, he follows Isenberg’s translation that an individual must receive “a male power or a female power.” The Coptic, however, reads [“and” instead of “or”].

Therefore, I have chosen to translate the phrase as “receive a male power and a female.” Jean-Marie Sevrin is probably correct to interpret the power as coming from the combined androgynous power of a male and a female. This reading not only makes better sense of the Coptic, it also fits better with the idea that the malevolent spirits have power because of the separation of male and female. It seems reasonable to assert that the power to overcome the separation would be a unified power.

The Gospel of Philip teaches that this unifying power is received in the eikonikos (bridal chamber) (65.12).