Seven Exhortations To The Dead
The Fifth Sermon
VII Sermones ad Mortuos
(Seven Sermons to the Dead)
C.G. Jung, 1916
(Translation by Stephan A. Hoeller, © 1982)
Sermon-by-Sermon Analysis Authored by: Karl K. Dondaneau
July 18th 2025
The Fifth Sermon
The dead were full of mocking and cried: “Teach us, thou fool, about church and holy community!”
—The world of the gods is manifest in spirituality and sexuality. The heavenly gods appear in spirituality, the earth gods appear in sexuality. Spirituality receives and comprehends. It is feminine and therefore we call it MATER COELESTIS, the heavenly mother. Sexuality generates and creates. It is masculine and therefore we call it PHALLOS, the earthly father. The sexuality of man is more earthly, while the sexuality of woman is more heavenly. The spirituality of man is more heavenly, for it moves in the direction of the greater. On the other hand, the spirituality of woman is more earthly, for it moves in the direction of the smaller.
Deceitful and devilish is the spirituality of the man who goes toward the smaller. Deceitful and devilish is the spirituality of the woman who goes toward the greater. Each is to go to its own place.
Man and woman become a devil to each other when they do not separate their spiritual paths, for the nature of created beings is always of the nature of differentiation.
The sexuality of man goes to that which is earthly; the sexuality on woman goes to that which is spiritual. Man and woman become a devil to each other if they do not discriminate between their two forms of sexuality.
Man shall know that which is smaller, woman that which is greater. Man shall separate himself from spirituality and from sexuality alike. He shall call spirituality mother, and he shall enthrone her between heaven and earth. He shall name sexuality phallos, and shall place it between himself and the earth, for the mother and the phallos are super-human demons and manifestations of the world of the gods. They are more effective for us than the gods, because they are nearer to our own being. When you cannot distinguish between yourselves on the one hand, and sexuality and spirituality on the other, and when you cannot regard these two as being above and beside yourself, then you become victimized by them, i.e. by the qualities of the Pleroma, Spirituality and sexuality are not your qualities, they are not things which you can posses and comprehend; on the contrary, they are mighty demons, manifestations of the gods, and therefore they tower above you and they exist in themselves. One does not possess spirituality for oneself or sexuality for oneself; rather is one subject to the laws of spirituality and sexuality. Therefore no one escapes these two demons. You shall regards them as demons, as common causes and grave dangers, quite like the gods, and above all, like the terrible Abraxas.
Man is weak, therefore community is indispensable; if it is not the community in the sign of the mother, then it is in the sign of the phallus. Not to have community consists of suffering and sickness. Community brings with itself fragmentation and dissolution. Differentiation leads to solitude. Solitude is contrary to community. Because of the weakness of man’s will, as opposed to the gods and demons and their inescapable law, there is need for community.
For this reason, there shall be as much community as necessary, not for the sake of men, but for the sake of the gods. The gods force you into a community. As much community as they force upon you is necessary, but more than that is evil.
In the community each shall be subject to another, so that the community will be maintained, inasmuch as you have need of it. In the solitary state each one shall be placed above all others, so that he may know himself and avoid servitude. In community there shall be abstinence.
In solitude let there be squandering of abundance.
For community is the depth, while solitude is the height.
The true order in community purifies and preserves.
The true order in solitude purifies and increases.
Community gives us warmth, while solitude gives us the light.
Sermon V: Mater Coelestis and Phallos – Spirit and Sex, the Demonical Powers, and the Balance of Community and Solitude
With the fifth sermon, Jung (through Basilides) shifts focus to the human realm, addressing how the divine opposites and multiplicities play out in our own souls and society. The dead mockingly ask about “church and holy community”, as if to see how Basilides’ unorthodox doctrine can inform something as practical as forming a community. His answer is a nuanced teaching about the two fundamental forces guiding human life: Spirituality and Sexuality – personified as a Heavenly Mother and an Earthly Father – and about how humans must relate to each other under the influence of these forces. This sermon is deeply psychological, for it essentially describes what Jung would later formalize as the dynamics of the anima/animus, the libido, and individuation in society.
Spirit (Mater Coelestis) vs. Sex (Phallos): Basilides declares: “The world of the gods is manifest in spirituality and sexuality. The heavenly gods appear in spirituality, the earthly gods appear in sexuality”. Here, he divides the plethora of gods into two broad domains: one above (the realm of ideas, ideals, religious feelings, art – all that is of spirit), and one below (the realm of bodily instincts, passions, generative forces). He names Spirituality as Mater Coelestis (Latin for “Heavenly Mother”) and Sexuality as Phallos (the phallic father, representing the generative masculine principle). This gendered assignment is quite intentional: he calls spirituality “feminine” (a receptive, containing principle – hence Mother) and sexuality “masculine” (an assertive, creative principle – hence the Father Phallus). Notably, Jung here is drawing on ancient symbolic correspondences (the sky or upper world is often conceived as feminine in relation to a masculine God, e.g. Sophia or the Virgin Mary as heavenly figures; and the earth or fertility principle as masculine generative seed, though one might also have expected earth to be mother – Jung seems to invert that, perhaps to shake up conventional associations). The key is that these two – Mater Coelestis and Phallos – are “superhuman demons, manifestations of the world of the gods, and more effective for us than the gods” because they are so close to human life. In other words, the forces of spirit and sex are the direct, powerful intermediaries through which the distant multiplicity of gods actually influences our day-to-day existence. They are like two great currents or drives that hold sway over human behavior.
Jung then makes some observations about gendered differences in how spirituality and sexuality manifest in men and women: “The sexuality of man is more earthly, while the sexuality of woman is more heavenly. The spirituality of man is more heavenly (moving toward the greater), the spirituality of woman is more earthly (moving toward the smaller)”. This rather old-fashioned sounding view reflects Jung’s notion (typical of his time, but also of his theories of anima/animus) that men tend to emphasize the spiritual (and in doing so, aim for grand, expansive ideals – “the greater”), and neglect the personal or “small-scale”; whereas women tend to emphasize the personal, relational, concrete (earthy spirituality – caring for the “smaller”), and their sexuality carries a more emotional or “mystical” character (heavenly) vs. the man’s more instinctual earthy sexuality. Conversely, a man’s spirituality is usually conceptual or striving (upward to universals – heavenly), and a woman’s spirituality might be expressed in the details of daily life or immediate community (earth-bound). These are stereotypes to a degree, but they align with Jung’s idea that the male psyche often externalizes Eros (seeks the idea, loves the big picture) and the female psyche externalizes Logos (seeks the detail, the practical connection). Basilides warns: “Deceitful and devilish is the spirituality of the man who goes toward the smaller. Deceitful and devilish is the spirituality of the woman who goes toward the greater. Each is to go to its own place”. This suggests that when a man’s spiritual expression apes the style of a woman’s (concerned with the small, perhaps gossip or trivial piety), it’s unnatural to him and turns devilish (perhaps manifests as pedantic dogmatism or narrow-mindedness). Likewise, if a woman tries to adopt a grand, imperial spirituality (abandoning her rootedness), it can become demonic pride or abstraction. Similarly: “Man and woman become a devil to each other when they do not separate their spiritual paths”. In other words, expecting the other sex to have the same spiritual style or needs leads to mutual torment. Nature is differentiation, he reiterates, and here specifically sexual differentiation in approaches to the spirit and sex itself.
He gives parallel counsel for sexuality: “The sexuality of man goes to that which is earthly; the sexuality of woman goes to that which is spiritual. Man and woman become a devil to each other if they do not discriminate between their two forms of sexuality”. This says: men typically experience sex primarily as a physical drive toward earth (the concrete act), whereas women often experience sex entwined with emotion or meaning (a “spiritual” dimension). If they don’t understand this difference, they will torment each other (the classic “he just wants sex, she wants love/connection” mismatch). “Man shall know that which is smaller, woman that which is greater” may mean: in matters of sexuality, the man should learn intimacy (the “small,” the personal) from woman, and the woman should learn to embrace the larger, natural impulse (the “greater”) from man. Whereas in spirituality, the earlier line implied the man’s strength is aiming higher, the woman’s is bringing it down to daily life – they complement.
Next, Basilides instructs how humans should relate to these two powerful forces: “Man shall separate himself from spirituality and from sexuality alike. He shall call spirituality Mother, and enthrone her between heaven and earth. He shall name sexuality Phallos, and place it between himself and the earth”. This is crucial: rather than identifying with either his spirituality or his sexuality, a person (the instruction addresses “Man” but in context it means humans, though the pronouns follow male) should objectify them – see them as autonomous principles (a Mother goddess, a Phallic daemon) that operate between the worlds. By enthroning the Mother between heaven and earth, one gives spirituality a respected place, but not within the ego; by erecting Phallos between oneself and earth, one honours sexuality as a sacred mediator to earthly life, not merely one’s personal urge. Basilides emphasizes these are “superhuman demons” – transpersonal forces, not personal qualities. “They are not your qualities… One does not possess spirituality for oneself or sexuality for oneself; rather one is subject to their laws… Therefore no one escapes these two demons”. This is a very Jungian view: libido (sexual energy) and spiritual aspiration are fundamental forces that govern us, not things our ego can take credit for or completely control. They are archetypal, in other words. By personifying them as the Mater Coelestis and Phallos, Jung encourages an attitude of active relationship to these forces, rather than identity or repression. He advises a kind of psychological polytheism: recognize that your lust is not “you” but the trickster/animal in you (the serpent, as we’ll see in Sermon VI), and your religious or intellectual zeal is not “you” but the muse or mother moving through you (the bird, in Sermon VI). If you confuse these as your ego (“cannot distinguish between yourselves on the one hand, and spirituality and sexuality on the other”), then you become possessed by them – “victimized by them, i.e. by the qualities of the Pleroma.” The result can be fanaticism, nymphomania, impotent intellectualism, or any number of one-sided pathologies. Jung often noted that those who identify wholly with spirit (inflation) or wholly with instinct (giving oneself over) end up in trouble. “Spirituality and sexuality are not your qualities… they exist in themselves… tower above you.” This perspective encourages humility and careful navigation: treat these like gods/demons to be propitiated, not personal toys.
Furthermore, Basilides ties this directly back to Abraxas: “Regard them as demons, as common causes and grave dangers, quite like the gods, and above all, like the terrible Abraxas”. So Mater Coelestis and Phallos are expressions of Abraxas in our personal sphere – potent, ambivalent, capable of enlightenment or destruction. Abraxas was activity itself; here we have the two fundamental activities of human life: creating meaning (spirit) and creating life/pleasure (sex). Both can build or burn.
Community and Solitude: Having set the inner stage, Basilides turns to the social question: humans are weak, so community is indispensable. But interestingly, he says community comes “if not in the sign of the mother, then in the sign of the phallus.” – meaning human groups form either around spiritual commonality (church, shared ideals – Mater-based community) or around earthly ties (family, tribe, shared material interests – Phallos-based community). Without some form of belonging, individuals suffer and fall ill. “Not to have community consists of suffering and sickness.” (Isolation can cause pathology). Yet, “Community brings with itself fragmentation and dissolution. Differentiation leads to solitude. Solitude is contrary to community”. Here is the eternal tension: to individuate (differentiate), one must step out of the mass and often be alone; yet too much aloneness is harmful, and we crave togetherness. Because our will is weak against gods/demons, we need the support (and limitation) of community to survive their onslaught – e.g. social mores help channel sexuality, religious rituals help channel spirituality. Basilides pragmatically advises: “As much community as the gods force upon you is necessary, but more than that is evil”. In modern terms: find the optimal balance – participate in society to the extent needed to not be overwhelmed by nature or lost in the chaos, but do not submerge yourself so much that you lose your individuality (for that would be “evil” – a sin against your Self). Over-socialization is just as bad as under-socialization. This is extremely Jungian: he believed one should individuate (become one’s own person) and not totally sever from the collective, maintaining a necessary relatedness. “In the community each shall be subject to another, so that the community will be maintained, insofar as you need it. In the solitary state, each one shall be placed above all others, so that he may know himself and avoid servitude”. This essentially sets two different modes: in society, practice humility and cooperation (you are one part of a larger whole); in solitude, practice sovereignty and self-exploration (you are a whole unto yourself). One might recall Jung’s advice that a person should do their inner work in private (solitude) but also remain grounded by duty or relationships in real life (community).
He continues with a series of beautifully aphoristic contrasts, which we can list for clarity:
“In community there shall be abstinence. In solitude let there be squandering of abundance.” – Among others, restrain yourself (don’t hog resources or attention; self-control is a virtue). Alone, let yourself be extravagant (pour out your soul, be creative, fully express your richness internally). This could mean, e.g. don’t overshare or impose your whole self on the group, but in private journaling or thought, explore wildly.
“Community is the depth, while solitude is the height.” – Community roots you (depth of feeling, warmth, tradition), solitude elevates you (height of insight, perspective, enlightenment). Both dimensions are needed.
“The true order in community purifies and preserves. The true order in solitude purifies and increases.” – When you have the right structure in society (rules, roles, ethics), it keeps people morally clean and maintains what is. When you have a discipline in your solitary life (self-reflection, perhaps meditation or creative practice), it purges you of illusions and it helps your inner growth (increase).
“Community gives us warmth, while solitude gives us the light.” – In community, one feels belonging, love, and emotional support (warmth). In solitude, one gains understanding, enlightenment, and creativity (light). As humans, we need both. Warmth without light can be a comfortable stagnation; light without warmth can be a cold brilliance with no love.
This is an exquisite encapsulation of Jung’s belief that a person must balance Eros (relatedness) and Logos (individuation) in life. The Mater Coelestis sign of community might emphasize love-binding (Eros), and the solitary Phallic sign might emphasize generative creativity (Logos); or vice versa – either way, integration of social and individual needs is key.
Psychological Perspective: Sermon V, in Jungian terms is practically therapeutic advice. It addresses the need to acknowledge the Anima/Animus (Mater Coelestis as the inner feminine divine for man, Phallos as the inner masculine divine for woman) by treating them as autonomous and making a conscious relationship. Jung developed the anima/animus concept in the 1920s, but here in 1916 we see a clear forerunner: the idea that a man’s soul (psyche) has a feminine spiritual component (his inspirational guide, Mater Coelestis) that he should not identify with (or he becomes effeminate in a bad way or possessed by moods), but honour (enthrone) and listen to. Similarly, a woman’s soul has a masculine spirit (Phallos could be seen as analogous to animus, the source of initiative and reason) which she likewise must not be overtaken by (or she becomes obstinate or tyrannical), but acknowledge as a mediator with earth. Jung later said the man projects his anima (feminine soul-image) on women and must withdraw that projection to find her inside; similarly, the woman projects her animus on men and must withdraw it. Basilides telling each to separate from spirituality/sexuality and name it Mother/Phallos is exactly this process of withdrawal of projection and objectification: see these forces as not “me” but a Thou*. This fosters a dialogical relationship – Jung often had patients engage in active imagination conversations with personifications of their anima or animus, which is foreshadowed by this instruction to enthrone the Mother and place the Phallos between self and earth (almost like setting up their icons).
In terms of libido theory, Jung in 1916 was breaking from Freud by seeing libido (sexual energy) as not just a personal biological urge but something symbolic, “demonic,” linked to creativity and spirituality. Here he essentially says sexuality is a daimon that can take you over – which aligns with his idea that libido can transform into religious or creative energy and vice versa. Spirituality, too, is a psychic drive (not merely a cultural construct or rational choice). Both are irrepressible – “no one escapes” them. This is key in therapy: many neuroses come from mismanaging these two forces (e.g., sexual repression or spiritual nihilism). The remedy is to consciously give each its due. Jung might advise a patient who is overly intellectual (one possessed by the “mater spiritualis”) to go get in touch with their body and instincts; or someone who is hedonistically lost (possessed by phallic drive) to seek something transcendent or creative to balance.
The section on community vs solitude reflects Jung’s understanding that individuation is not isolation. One must find the necessary minimum of conformity (hold a job, have relationships) to not fall into despair, but also not lose one’s distinct self by blindly following the crowd. Jung himself balanced being a family man and respectable citizen in Küsnacht with retreating into his Bollingen tower for solitary reflection. He wrote in The Red Book: “Thank God I am Jung and not a Jungian” and maintained a certain solitude of spirit even among his followers. So Basilides enjoins that “true order” in community and solitude are both needed – which might be interpreted as developing good adaptation to outer life (orderly community involvement) and good self-discipline in inner life (order in solitude). Analytical psychology frequently deals with patients overly identified with collective roles (needing solitude to find themselves) or overly isolated (needing community to ground themselves). This sermon offers a prescription for mental health: integration of opposites between relational life and inner life.
Existential-Philosophical Reflection: Sermon V has a very practical existential message: it grapples with how to live a meaningful life given the potent, often conflicting demands of our bodily nature and our spiritual nature, as well as our need for belonging vs. selfhood. Philosophically, it acknowledges a kind of dualism in human existence (akin to many religious or philosophical traditions separating flesh and spirit), but instead of privileging one and despising the other, it insists on honouring both through conscious differentiation. This is similar to the idea in some Eastern philosophies (Tantra, for instance) that one must respect and harness sexual energy rather than simply renounce it, and also similar to Aristotelian virtue of the mean – find the balance between extremes of asceticism and indulgence.
The portrayal of spirit and sex as “demons” could be read existentially as saying: the human condition is to be driven by forces beyond our rational control – call them Eros and Thanatos (Freud), or Dionysus and Apollo (Nietzsche, though Nietzsche’s Apollo is more reason than spirit, but still). Basilides stands in an ancient tradition (the Gnostics) that saw the world as ruled by cosmic powers beyond humans. Existentially, one might translate “demons” to “the givens of human nature” – we cannot choose not to have a body that desires, nor can we choose not to have a mind that seeks meaning. We must deal with these “givens,” or they will undo us (the “grave dangers”). Jung’s solution is awareness and measured fulfillment – give each its space, name them, don’t let them operate unconsciously. The religious and the erotic both require attention and a sort of ritualization (enthroning, placing) rather than naive indulgence or total suppression.
The counsel on community and solitude addresses the existential dialectic of freedom vs. solidarity. Humans are both individuals and social animals, and our search for meaning happens both in relationship and in aloneness. Basilides says: find meaning in love/warmth with others and in insight/light with yourself; too much togetherness or too much isolation, and you lose part of meaning. It reminds one of existential therapists like Irvin Yalom, who talk about the twin concerns of isolation and connection.
The dialectic between opposites continues here in multiple forms: male-female, spiritual-sexual, individual-collective. The sermon ties them together: often, the difference between sexes in Jung’s view is that men lean toward the individual (going alone on heroic quests) and women toward the collective (building community); whether or not that stereotype is universally true, Basilides seems to use it to illustrate how opposites complement. The notion that man and woman “become a devil to each other” when not understanding their differences underscores that the failure to respect polarity leads to conflict. We can also extract a broader humanistic point: any two people (or cultures) will become demons to each other if they don’t allow for differences in perspective or nature. There’s a call for differentiation between self and other as well as within self.
Thematic Cross-Link: Sermon V connects back to Sermon II/III by bringing Abraxas’s principle into the personal emotional level – sexuality and spirituality are like the first pair of God/Devil but now reframed in human psychological terms. In fact, Basilides explicitly links Mater/Phallos to Helios/Devil by calling them demons of gods. It also sets up Sermon VI: the mention of “serpent” and “white bird” as forms these demons take shows that Sermon VI will elaborate on Mater Coelestis and Phallos in imagistic form (serpent = sexuality demon, bird = spirit demon). The idea “no one escapes these two demons” was followed by the dead saying “we know this in essence,” prompting the specific descriptions in VI. So V is conceptual, VI will be a mythopoetic dramatization of the same.
Additionally, the theme of finding one’s personal guiding star (to come in VII) requires accomplishing what’s laid out in V: balancing one’s inner forces and social duties to become a whole individual capable of recognizing that star. Without the preparation of mastering spirit vs sex and solitude vs society, one likely couldn’t reach the clarity of Sermon VII’s insight. So Sermon V is like a practical guide on the path to individuation, which culminates in Sermon VII’s revelation about one’s personal god.
In summary, Sermon V invites us to live in the tension between our loftiest aspirations and our earthly needs, to respect the autonomous reality of both, and to negotiate the tension between fitting in and standing apart. It’s a call to maturity: to neither be a slavish ascetic nor a slave of lust, neither a hermit nor a herd-follower, but to consciously dance with both spirit and flesh, both self and others. This conscious, dynamic equilibrium is at the heart of Jung’s vision of a fully developed person.