THE

PRACTICAL NATURE
OF THE
DOCTRINES AND ALLEGED REVELATIONS
CONTAIKED IN THE WKITIJMGS OP

TOGETHER WITH
THE PECULIAR MOTIVES TO CHRISTIAN CONDUCT THEY SUGGEST.
IK
A LETTER
TO HIS GRACE THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN,
OCCASIONED BY
HI3 OBSEEVATIONS ON THAT SUBJECT IN HI3 "ilSSATS ON SOME OF THE
Pi:CUHARITlE3 OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION,"

BY THE REV. AUGUSTUS CLISSOLD, M. A.,
Ill ' '
FORMEKLY OF EXETEK COLLEGE, OXFOKD.

" It is recommended to take a compreJiensive view of any question tliat may be
ngitated, instead of being exclusively occupied in answering every cavil tllat may
be brought forward." — JVhatcly's Bampton Lectures.
*' Our province is virtue and religion, life and manners; the science of improving
the temper and malting the heart better." — Bishop Butler^s Sermon upon the Jgnorancs
qf Man.

FIEST AMEKIOAN, FHOM THE LOjSTDON EIIITIOW.
BOSTON:
PUBLISHED BY OTIS CLAPP, 121 "WASHINGTON ST.
1839.

Manhinb and FisHEit, Printers,
8 Congress Street  Boston.

TO THE READER.

In the "Essays on some of the peculiarities of the
Christian Religion," by His Grace the present Arch
bishop of Dublin, occurs the following passage relative to
the receivers of the writings of Swedenborg: — "Though
his followers insist much on the importance of believing
in this pretended revelation, it would, I believe, be diffi
cult for them to state even aiiy one point on which a
man is called upon to alter either his conduct, his mo
tives, or his moral sentiments, in consequence of such
belief. The system furnishes abundant matter of faith
and food for curiosity, but has httle or no intelligible re
ference to practice."
In this statement there appears to be a slight obscurity.
It might not, perhaps, be easy at first to determine wheth
er the passage implied, that there was no difference be
tween the practical principles of Swedenborg and those
commonly received, or that, as a whole, his writings had
little or no intelligible reference to any practice whatever.
A gentleman, it appears, conceiving that the latter was
meant, wrote to the Archbishop to the effect, that he pre
sumed His Grace labored under some misapprehension;
for that, so far from having no intelligible reference to
practice, the writings of Swedenborg advocated princi
ples which many distinguished members of .the Church
of England themselves acknowledged to be practical. So
far as the argument went, it appears to be just and appro
priate. His Grace's answer, as appended in the note inserted
in the Fourth Edition of the Essays, seems to leave the
question where it was; except that, instead of using the
term system, and thereby implying that, as a whole, Svve-

IV

denborg's theological writings were non-practical, a dis
tinction appears to be drawn between Swedenborg's doc
trines and revelations, as though the former were practi
cal, and the latter not so. Accordingly, this is the point
of view in which His Grace's objections are considered
in the ensuing Letter; for,' whatever may have been the
intention of the Author, this I believe to be the fair mean
ing of his words. My design, however, on the present
occasion, has been rather to take a comprehensive view
of the subject, than to answer the particular statements
of any individual writer. It cannot be denied, that the
Essays regard the revelations of Swedenborg as non-
practical, and hence, so far, a delusion; that this, also, is
an opinion not unfrequently entertained by others. I have,
therefore, viewed Swedenborg's writings, with an espe
cial relation to their practical tendency; first, treating of
his Doctrine?; secondly, of his Interpretation of the
Word of God; and, lastly, of his supposed Intercourse
with the Spiritual World. With respect to ordinary
misconceptions and misrepresentations of the principles
contained in the theological works of Swedenborg, it has
been usual to pass them over unnoticed; but where any
thing like argument is advanced, and more particularly by
a person of influential opinions, the case is different; and
it may become advisable for a receiver of Swedenborg's
writings to give a reason for the hope that is in him.
May the reader peruse the following observations, with
the same spirit in which the author has endeavored to
write them; namely, with an earnest desire of that truth
which alone is able to make him wise unto salvation.
With respect to the passages in His Grace's Essays,
more or less alluding to the subject in question, to quote
them all would be to quote a considerable portion of the
Essays themselves; it cannot, therefore, be expected that
they should all be adduced on the present occasion; hence,
if the reader is desirous of being more fully acquainted
with them, he is referred to the original works. In or
der, however, to supply him with a faithful idea of the
general argument urged in the Essays, it may be well to
subjoin the following extracts, which are those which more
immediately gave rise to the present letter, and which

more pointedly allude to Swedenborg's doctrines and al
leged revelations.
Essays (first series) on Some- of the Peculiarities of
THE Christian Religion. Fourth Edition, Revised.
EXTRACTS.
P. 218. "Though enough is revealed to us in Scripture
to instruct us in our duty, and to incite us to the practice of
it, there is much also that is not revealed, which many, at
least, would be eagerly desirous to know. It suppresses
much of what some vainly seek to find in it, or complain of
not finding, — which all pretended revelations profess, and
might be expected to profess, to make known, — and which a
true revelation, and .none but a true one, might be expected
to omit."
P. 220. "The peculiar feature (of the Christian Reli
gion) which I allude to, consists in this; that not only of the
designs and attributes of the Almighty, there are some
which he has vouchsafed to make known to man by revela
tion, and others which he has thought fit to keep secret;
but also those which are revealed, have some relation to
man, — some reference, to human conduct, — and are, in
some way or other, of a practical. character.
"Now, since it is undeniable that there have been, and
are, many systems of false religion in the world, all of
which profess to reveal something, as to the nature of God
and his dealings with his creatures, this circumstance is
frequently dwelt upon by those who studiously endeavor to
confound all religions together, with a view to hold up all
to equal contempt, as so many various systems of impos
ture and delusion. And others, again, though they do not
absolutely reject our religion, are yet so far misled by this
fallacy, as to regard it with indifference. It will be worth
while, therefore, to examine attentively the point above
mentioned; I mean, the exclusively practical character
which I have attributed to our revelation; and to inquire
more fully, whether it is likely to constitute an important
and distinguishing feature in any professed revelation which
may possess it; in other words, whether the abstaining from
points of mere curiosity, be a probable mark oj" a iru^ revela'
tion. "This inquiry falls naturally under two heads; first,
whether or not a pretended revelation is likely to contain
any matters which are interesting to curiosity alone, and
1*

have no reference to practice; and, secondly, whether this
is likely to be the case with a trtie revelation.
" The former of these questions we need not hesitate, I
think, to answer in the affirmative.
"That the desire of knowledge, for its own sake, is apart
of our nature, is a truth so obvious, as hardly to need being
insisted on. For though it is common to hear men imply the
contrary, by asking contemptuously, in the case of some
pursuit" for which they happen to have no relish, — 'What i^
the itse of learning this or that.' — What advantage is to be
derived from such and such a branch of knowledge?' — yet
the very same persons, if some discovery be the next mo
ment announced to them, of a different kind, which may
happen to fall in with their own taste, will probably be found
to manifest the liveliest interest, and the most eager curios
ity, even where they would be at a loss to point out what
practical benefit they are likely to derive from it. So far,
indeed, is utility from being the sole standard of value in
men's minds, that even such knowledge as is useful, is in
general sought more for its own sake, than with a view to
utility;, nor are men ever more eager in the pursuit of it,
than when they have no further object to occupy them.
'Accordingly,' as is justly observed by an ancient writer,
who well understood human nature, 'when we are at leisure
from the cares of necessary business, then are we eager to
see, to hear, to learn something; regarding the knowledge
of what is hidden, or of what is admirable, as an essential
ingredient of happiness.'* He is quite right in the cir
cumstances fixed on as most exciting our interest; things
hidden, and things admirable, being what men especially
covet to know. Now, nothing can be more hidden, nothing
more admirable, than the nature, and the works, of God, —
the origin and constitution of the world we inhabit — of the
rest of that vast system of which it forms a part — and of
man himself — the nature of various orders of beings which
may exist, superior to man, and of the Supreme Being
Himself Each of these subjects suggests innumerable mat
ters of inquiry, whose grandeur fills the most exalted, and
whose difficulty baffles the most intelligent, mind. Is it not,
then, natural, that men should eagerly seek for some su
perhuman means of information, on subjects so interesting
to their curiosity, and so much beyond their unaided pow°
era? And is it not, consequently, to be expected, that both
* Cicero de OfiSciis, b. I.

the devices of an impostor, and the visions of an enthusi
ast, should abound in food for this curiosity.' — that the one
should seek for proselytes by professing to communicate
what men are so desirous of knowing; and that the other
should be altogether occupied whh those questions to Which
the imagination of men is so naturally turned, till a diseas
ed fancy mistakes its day-dreams for a revelation.'
" Such, I say, is what we might be prepared, from the
nature of man, to expect: and, if we cons^ik history, we
shall find our conjecture fully borne out by facts. In all
those other religions, and in all those modifications! of our
own, vchich we attribute to the imagination or to the arti-
fi3e of man, the pretended revelations not only abound with
matters of speculative curiosity, unconnected with practice,
but are sometimes even principally made up of them, so as
to appear to have for their chief object the communication
of knowledge concerning heavenly things, for its own
sake. "To illustrate this by a full examination of. all the vari
ous systems of false revelation, would be manifestly both
tedious and unnecessary: tedious j inasmuch as even abiief
sketch of them would occupy a considerable volume; and
unnecessary, for most readers, since a few moments' re
collection will enable them to recall, from their previous
knowledge, enough to confirm, to a great degree at least,
the remark which has just been made. And the conclusion
will be more strengthened, the further the inquiry is pur
sued." After speaking of the mythologies of the Greeks, Ro
mans, and Hindoos, and of the imposture practised by
Mahomed, His Grace observes, with regard to the Ko
ran, p. 227, —
"It would be weariseme and disgusting to introduce such
specimens as would fully illustrate what has been asserted;
though it is scarcely possible adequately to describe in
words how forcibly it will be impressed on the mind, on ac
tual perusal, that the prevailing character of the book in
question is such as has been described. But those who
will be at the pains to examine this and other pretended
revelations, with an express view to the subject of our pres
ent inquiry, will meet with abundant instances to confirm
what has been here advanced; more than they, perhaps,
are aware of, if they have a mere general acquaintance
with those systemSj but have never considered them with

reference to the particular point now before us. Such an
inquiry, it may be safely affirmed, would be profitable and
satisfactory, if fully pursued; and would communicate a
lively interest to the perusal even of the most absurd reve
ries of heathen mythology, and of the Koran. But it will
be sufficient in this place to have suggested some of the
principal points, towards which the inquiry should be di
rected." After alluding to the fables of the Talmud, and the le
gends of the Greek and Romish churches, His Grace
observes, p. 229, —
"Lastly, to advert to a more recent instance, look to the
visions of the pretended prophet Swedenborg; himself the
dupe, as is generally supposed, of his own distempered fan
cy. It is well known, that he professed to have been fa
vored with most copious and distinct revelations, — to have
visited the celestial abodes, and to have conversed with va
rious orders of beings; of all which he gives minute de
scriptions. Yet, though. his followers insist much on the
importance of believing in this pretended revelation, it
would, I believe, be difficult for them to state even any one
point, in which a man is called upon to alter either'his con
duct, his motives, or his moral sentiments, in consequence
of such belief The system furnishes abundant matter of
faith, and food for curiosity; but has little or no intelligible
reference to practice."
(Note. "I received, some time ago, a friendly communica
tion from a person of this persuasion, referring to the above
passage, and complaining of the current misrepresenta
tions respecting the doctrines of the Swedenborgians. He
set forth, in a brief outline, their fundamental points of
faith, and principles of duty; which were, as he studious
ly pointed out to me, — essentially irf agreement with what
is held by our own church.
"From his own account, therefore, it appears, (as I point
ed out in reply) that the point ^tcu/inr to that sect, — the
supposed revelation to their founder, in which they believe,
is entirely of a non-practical character. Now this is pre
cisely what I was maintaining.
"I was not designing any attack on that, or on- any other
religious persuasion; nor do I deny its including the fun
damentals of Christianity. I had in view only what dislin-
gidshea the followers of Swedenbofg from the rest of the

IX
Christian world, viz: their faith in a revelation, which the
rest hold to be a delusion. The truth or falsity of that rev
elation, — a question on which, of course, I must differ from
them, — is one which I had no intention of discussing. But
that, whether true or false, it is at least distinguished from
the revelation contained in the Gospel, by leading to no
practical conclusions, is a point it seems on which both
parties are agreed. And this is the only point I had in
view.") "Such, then, being the character of false revelations,
what may we expect from a true one? Since both reason
and experience show, that it is the obvious policy of an im
postor, and the most natural delusion of a visionary, to treat
much of curious and hidden matters, relative to the Divine
operations, beyond what is conducive to practical instruc
tion, it should next be considered, whether the case is like
ly to be the same with a real revelation; whether that also
is likely to be much occupied in ministering to speculative
curiosity. Now, this question we may, on good grounds,
answer in the negative: for the general rule of Providence
evidently is, that man should be left to supply his own wants,
and seek knowledge, both practical and speculative, by the
aid of those faculties which have "been originally bestowed
on him, A revelation is an extraordinary and miraculous
exception to this general rule; and it seems, therefore, rea
sonable to conclude, that it should be bestowed for some
very important purpose. Now the knowledge of our duty,
beyond what is discoverable by unaided reason, — instruc
tion how we are to serve God, and obtain his favor, — does
seem a sufficiently important purpose; but not so, the more
gratification of curiosity. The desire of knowledge is, in
deed, implanted in us by our Creator; and the pursuit of
it is an innocent, and honorable, and highly pleasurable
employment of our faculties: but there is a sufficiently wide
field of investigation within the reach of our natural facul
ties. There seems no reason why the Almighty should work
a miracle for the increase of our mere speculative knowl
edge; not to mention that our gratification consists more
in the pursuit and acquirement, by our own efforts, of such
knowledge, than in the possession of it.
"Whatever, therefore, it concerns us practically to
know, with a view to the regulation of the heart and con
duct, — whatever God requires us to be, and to do, in order
to become acceptable in his sight — this, it seems consonant
to his justice and goodness to declare to us by revelation^

when, of ourselves, we are incompetent to discover it; but
that He should miraculously reveal any thing besides this,
for the gratification of an inquisitive mind, there seema no
good reason to expect.
"It may be said, indeed, that the trial of our faith, hu
mility, and candor, in assenting, on suflicient authority, to
mysterious doctrines, is a worthy and fit purpose, for
which such doctrines may be revealed. This is, undoubt
edly, true; and the purpose may even be fairly reckoned a.
practical one, since so good a moral effect results from such
belief If, therefore, none of the doctrines necessary to
be revealed for other practical purposes, were of such a mys
terious character, as to serve for trials of faith also, we
might, perhaps, expect that some things should be propos
ed to our belief, solely and singly for this latter purpose.
But if both objects can be fully accomplished by the same
revelation, — if our faith be sufficiently tried by the admis
sion of such mysterious doctrines as are important for oth
er practical ends also, — then, the revelation of any further
mysteries which lead to no such practical end, is the less
necessary, and, consequently, the less to be expected.
"What then is, in this respect, the character of our re
ligion? It may safely be asserted, that it is precisely such
as we have seen a true revelation might be expected to be:
that it teaches us what is needful for us to know, but little
or nothing besides; that the information it imparts is such,
as concerns the regulation of our character and practice,
but leaves our curiosity unsatisfied.
"Those who are sufficiently conversant with the Scrip
tures, will at once recognize this as a characteristic fea
ture of them.
"To prove the'point in question as fully as might be done,
would require a detailed examination of the whole Bible;
and such an examination, diligently conducted with a view
to the particular point before us, is one which may be re
commended, not merely to professed theological students,
but (since it calls for no great ingenuity or learning) to
Christian readers in general; as neither an unprofitable
nor unpleasing inquiry, to him who dehghts in contrasting
the wisdom, and the dignified simplicity of God's Word, with
the idle and arrogant pretensions of human fraud and folly."
P. 250, "He (the infidel) may ask them (Christians,)
how it came to pass, that no one of our sacred writers has
- given a full, minute, and engaging account of all that is
(according to him) to take place at the end of the world-

XI
of all the interesting particulars of the day of judgment;
of the new bodies with which men will arise; and of 'the
glories that shall be revealed' in heaven; or has given any
account at all (or at least any from which a decisive con
clusion can be drawn,) of the condition in which men are to
remain during the interval between death and the resurrec
tion? It is plain, that nothing could have been more grati
fying to the curiosity of all who had an interest in the sub
ject; nothing more likely even to allure fresh converts,
than a glowing description of the joys of heaven. It would
have been easily believed, too, by those who gave credit to
the writer, as it is plain Paul supposed the Corinthians did;
— it would have been very easy, again, for an impostor to
give a loose to his fancy, in inventing such a description;
and to an* enthusiast it would have been unavoidable: he
who was passing off his day-dreams for revelations, on him
self as well as on others, would have been sure to dream
largely on such a subject. Why, then, did not Paul do any
thing of the kind? I answer, because he was not an impos
tor, nor an enthusiast, but taught only what had been ac
tually revealed to him, and what he was commissioned to
reveal to others."
P. 256, "In this present life we should carefully guard
against the too prevailing error of presumptuous inquiries,
and attempts to explain unrevealed mysteries; an error
which generally leaves men the more bewildered and mis
taken, the greater their ingenuity and diligence.
"Little as there is revealed to us of the condition of our
first parents in paradise, thus- much (and let Christians
never forget it) is plainly taught us, that they fell from their
happy state through the desire of forbidden knowledge. It
was by seeking from men to become 'as gods, knowing good
and evil,' that they incurred that loss, to retrieve which
God was made Man, in Christ Jesus; who 'took upon him
the form of a servant, and humbled himself unto death, even
the death of the cross, to redeem us, the children of
Adam,' whom want of humility had ruined; and to open to
us the gates of eternal life, which presumptuous transgres
sion had shut. How, then, can we hope to enter in, if we
repeat the very transgression of Adam, in seeking to be
wise above that which is written? By inquisitive pride was
immortal happiness forfeited; and the path by which we
» In this Essay, Mahomed is the only impostor, and Swedenboi'g the only
enthusiast — specified by name.

must travel back to its recovery, is that of patient and re
signed humility."
A few extracts are taken, in the course of the present
Letter, from other parts of the Essays; also from His
Grace's Sermons, and Bampton Lectures, to which the
reader is referred. It may be desirable to add, with re
gard to the extracts, not only from these works, but from
all which are quoted in the course of the ensuing Letter,
that there has been every desire to represent faithfully the
meaning of the respective authors, and carefully to guard
against every possibility of their arguments being misun
derstood. Should the slightest error in this respect have
been committed, the reader may be assured it has been
committed inadvertently, and will be rectified on the first
opportunity which occurs after it is pointed out, as the
only design of the ensuing pages is — the truth.

CONTENTS.

Pkeliminakt Kemakks.
Division of the subject into the two questions of Doctrines and Reve
lations. Docteines of Swedesbokg.
Swedenborg's doctrines of The Trinity, The Atonement, The Divine
Humanity o the Lord, Intercession, Mediation, Regeneration, ^c,
practically considered and compared with the popular views.
Alleged Revelations of Swedenborg.
Two kinds of alleged revelations. 1st. The revelation of the Inter
nal Sense of the Word of God. - 2d. Intercourse with the Spiritual
World. Internal Sense of the, Woed of God.
Antecedent objections to further revelations considered.
1. That we have already sufficient light.
2. That God never designed to make us prophets.
3. That we ought not to be wise above that which is written.
' 4. That man has no faculties adequate to such mysteries.
5. That inquiry into them proceeds from a love of novelty.
6. That there ma/ be new discoveries in science, but not in reli
gion. V
On uniformity of reception of the doctrines and interpretations of
Scripture.
On the Scriptures as a finalRevelation.
No uniformly received principles of Inspiration.
No uniformly received principles of Interpretation.
Consequent state of the Christian community.
Nature and design of the Internal Sense of the Word of God as un-
folded by Swedenborg.
Extracts from his works.
InTEKOOUESE with the SriKITtJAL Woeld.
Antecedent objections considered.
1. That Swedenborg's narratives tend to indulge the imagination,
gratify curiosity, and minister to credulity. Examination of
his narratives in reference to this objection. St. Paul's eleva
tion to the third heaven considered.
2

14 CONTENTS.
2. That such narratives gratify a spirit of presumption. The case
of the fall of our first parents considered.
3. That such narratives leave no room for the exercise of faith.
4. That were such knowledge useful, God would have long since
revealed it.
5. That, on this subject, we are not warranted by Scripture to ex
pect any further revelation.
Obstacles to the reception of Swedenborg's alleged revelations.
1. Selfish and worldly principles.
2. Ignorance of the state of our hearts.
3. Ignorance of the nature of the intermediate state.
4. Unbelief in the proximity of the spiritual world.
5. Erroneous ideas of Divine operations.
6. False philosophy.
On the true principles of analogy.
Application of the foregoing principles to the reconstitution of the hu
man mind.
Intercourse of the mind, thus reconstituted, with the spiritual world.
The nature of this intercourse.
Archdeacon Paley's objections considered.
Internal evidence of the tiuth of Swedenborg's narratives, arising
from the prineiples of his philosophy.
Application of the foregoing arguments to the question, whether Swe
denborg was a visionary, and whether his revelations are practical.
Folly of prejudice.
Author's apology.
Final success of Swedenborg's principles.
APPENDIX.
Remarks of Archbishop Whately on the Trinity.
Popular views of the Trinity, Atonement, and Intercession exempli-
, fied by extracts.

A
LETTER TO
HIS GRACE THE LORD ARCHBISHOP OF DUBLIN.

My Lord Archbishop, —
If ever there were a period, in which the members of the
Christian church were called upon "to believe not every
spirit, but to try the spirits whether they be of God," "to
prove all things, and to hold fast that which is good," the
present assuredly is one. The disposition to inquiry which
has been awakened, the spread of education, the increasing
desire of knowledge, and the extraordinary progress of
the sciences, however sometimes exaggerated, have bpen
sufficient to lead many sober and reflecting minds to con
template, as not improbable, a new aspect in the history
of the world; and, when we connect these circumstances
with the disregard of human authority in matters of reli
gion, the asserted right of private judgment, the conflict
ing views which are entertained, even upon the most im
portant principles of Christianity, it will be granted, I pre
sume, that, if ever learning, sound judgment, piety and
diligence were required in the clerg/, they are assuredly
most requisite now. When to this we add, that, among
a considerable portion of the i Christian community, there
prevails a variety of expectations, with respect to prophecies
in Scripture, the fulfilment of which many believe to be
not far distant, there is, assuredly, the more particular rea
son, why the Christian community should be on its guard,
lest any enthusiast should avail himself of these expecta
tions, and delude both himself and his followers; more
especially as, under the circumstances we have mentioned,

16 preliminary REMARKS.
the probability is that enthusiasts would arise, and that
many, consequently, would be deluded. It is remarkable
that the introduction of new dispensations by the Almighty
seems, in general, to have given occasion for opposite and
rival claims to the truth. When Moses wrought miracles
before Pharaoh, counter miracles were said to be wrought
by the magi. W~hen Christ cast out devils from the pos
sessed, similar claims to miraculous power were asserted
to exist among the Pharisees. When Christ assumed the
character of King of the Jews, rival pretensions were
made by others. "Before these days rose up Theudas,
boasting himself to be somebody, to whom a number of
men, about four hundred, joined themselves, who was
slain; and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and
brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of
Galilee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much
people after him; he also perished, and all, as many as
obeyed him, were dispersed." (Acts v. 36.) At the second
coming of Christ into the world, we are told, it shall be
the same; "for there shall arise false Christs and false
prophets, and shall shew great signs and wonders, inso
much that, if it were possible, they shall deceive the
very elect." (Matt. xxiv. 24.) Thus, at the end of the
old and the beginning of new dispensations, arise false and
true prophets in every direction; whence pretensions of
both kinds become so mixed up one with the other, that,
unless possessed of a clear spiritual discernment, a person
runs the risk of receiving the false as the true, or the true
as the false, or of rejecting indiscriminately both together;
and so, in order to avoid the snare of enthusiasm, of falling
into the pit of infidelity.
In all cases of this kind, whether we believe in a further
revelation or not. Your Grace has referred us to an excel
lent guide, namely, that of practical utility. Whatever
has a tendency to lead men to repent of their sins, and to
love God and their neighbor, may safely be pronounced to
be of God; whateyer has no such tendency, when under
stood, may safely be pronounced to be of man. This test
of truth, then, I am willing to receive as the best possible,
because, although there are mysteries in the Bible, which,
as Your Grace observes, at present have no other tendency
than that of exercising our faith, yet, when once their na
ture IS revealed, we are ready to admit, for the sake of the
argument, they will be seen to be in some manner still fur
ther practically useful. This test of truth seems also to be

preliminary remarks.* 17
the one which St. John, in his Epistle, 1. c. iii. v. 18, point
ed out, when he says, "My little children, let us not love
in word, neither in tongue, but in deed and in truth; and
hereby we know that we are of the truth, and shall assure
our hearts before him." The love of God and of our
neighbor, therefore, as the fruit of our doctrines, being
considered an evidence of their truth, the test, in order for
it to be used impartially, should be applied, not only to the
principles of those whom we may consider to be enthusi-
" asts and impostors, but also to our own.; since, if we do
not examine x)ur own principles by this test, as well as those
of others, we may be in the situation of one who, in secur
ing his house against an enemy, may be shutting him in,
while he imagines he is shutting him out. It is a tendency
of human nature to apply to others what we forget to apply
to ourselves, and it is one which deserves more particular
notice on the present occasion, because, when it is said that
the system of Swebenborg, if tried by this test, is found to
have little or no reference to practice; so, on the other hand,
Swedenborg mamtains that the system commonly received,
when tried by the same test, is found, in too many cases, not
only to have no intelligible reference to practice, but, what is
far worse, one that is highly pernicious. The ground, there
fore, upon which the distinguished author of the Essays
has rejected the system of Swedenborg, is the ground upon
which Swedenborg himself has rejected the system com
monly received. Which of the two is right, is the ques
tion at issue.
While, however, there are some who are equitable
enough to apply the test we have mentioned, to the princi
ples of Swedenborg, however they niay forget to apply it
to their Own, yet it must be admitted, that by far the great
er class neglect the application altogether, and hence, amid
the multiplicity of exhortations which are given by well-
meaning persons to " try the spirits," and "to prove all
things," there is nothing which they and their hearers are,
in general, more sure to omit than the thing which they
recommend, namely, the trial and the proof; the one haV-
ing given the exhortation, and the other having listened to
it, the question is considered as fairly decided, and the
whole matter to be at an end. Besides, many regard an
inquiry of this kind as unnecessary; for, believing them
selves to be already in possession of the truth, whatever
does not happen to conform to their views, they think they
have nothing to do but to reject, and hence, simple rejec-
2*

18 preliminary remarks.
tion they consider as constituting the whole of their duty.
The examination, therefore, if they ever commence any, is
not, whether their principles are conformable to the truth,
but whether the views of. others are conformable to their
principles. They profess, indeed, that works are the evi
dence of faith; but they regard a man's faith as the evi
dence of his works, for, however holy he may be in his
life, however full of good offices towards his fellow-crea
tures, yet, if this be the consequence of his reception of the
principles of Swedenborg, he is looked upon as a deceiver
and as self-deceived. There are few, my Lord, whc^ now
adopt those principles, who did not once oppose them, and
many, perhaps, conscientiously; The recollection, therefore,
of their own errors inclines them to, look upon those of
others with a spirit of forbearance and f6rgiveness; for they
see in their opponents only the same misapprehensions, the
same prepossessions, or, it may be, the same natural and
carnal ideas, 'which once, perhaps, were their own. Al
though, therefore, there are many, who, from a variety of
causes, have been led to regard Swedenborg as merely "a
pretended prophet," "the dupe of a distempered fancy,"
and, consequently, the receivers of his writings as the
victims of a religious delusion, and the credulous readers
of "pretended revelations," which have "little or no intel
ligible reference to practice;" we feel ourselves bound, in
all Christian charity, to give them credit for what; to them,
may be conscientious convictions; although, if it be not
demonstrated, yet it will, I think, be rendered highly prob
able, in the ensuing letter, that they know not what they are
rejecting. In consequence of the general ignorance which
prevails with respect to the writings of Swedenborg, we
have not only to disclaim principles which others would im
pute to us, but, as in the present instance, to communicate
true ideas of that which it is their design to oppose; sure
ly they should reflect, that though the arrow may be good,
as also the bow, and the archer the first of his race, yet if
he does not know what or where is the mark, it is not like
ly he will hit it. Although, therefore, for this reason, I
cannot but consider the observations in the Essays, with
regard to Swedenborg, to be erroneous, yet it is with plea
sure I acknowledge the courtesy with which the subject is
noticed ,.the apparent disposition of the author to do justice
to the question, and his practical exemphfication of some
of the Christian precepts inculcated in his Bampton lec
tures; for, notwithstanding -he seems to designate Sweden-

preliminary remarks. 19
borg as a visionary and enthusiast, as well as to imply that
his followers are similarly deluded, yet, if a person comes
to this conclusion, in consequence of argument conducted
in a fair spirit, he is perfectly at liberty to use the expres
sions, because, however we may regret the mistake under
which he labors, the error, if any, does not consist in the
use of the terms, but in the principles which led to their use.
These principles it will be my object to examine; and, in
so doing, Your Grace will, I doubt not, concede that free
dom of expression which is willingly granted to those who
oppose us, and which is necessary to the fair and full ex
position of our sentiments. A candid examination of prin
ciples, with a view to prove all things, and to hold fast that
which is good. Your GraCe will not confound with a spirit
of controversy; more especially as this is a spirit which
you have justly deprecated, and, at the same time, did not
conceive it to be inconsistent to undertake a proof, though
indirect * that the alleged" revelations of Swedenborg are
untrue. Of those general principles, from which the Essays have
arrived at their several conclusions, I have great pleasure
in admitting some to be true, though I cannot but consider,
that, with respect to Swedenborg, they prove the reverse
of what the Essays have stated; a great portion of these
principles, however, I humbly conceive to be mistaken.
Nevertheless, inasmuch as they are not unfrequently held,
they are arranged, in the following remarks, under the
head of popular objections; which is done the more willing
ly, because it enables me to consider them rather as the
sentiments of a class of sotiiety, than merely as those of a
single individual; and if I quote Your Grace's particular
statements, it is only because, proceeding from so eminent
a qaarter, they may be considered as the more authentic
and tangible expositions of the opinions maintained by oth-
* It is said an indirect proof, because this appears to be all that is meant by
the wol-ds "llie truth or falsity of that revelation 1 had no intention of discuss
ing;" since it would seem the only object of the Essay was to distinguish 'a
true from a false revelation, by the circumstance of the former having relation
to practice, and the latter having none; in illustration of which, are instanced
the alleged revelations of Swedenborg, of which, it is observed, "the system
furnishes abundant matter of failh and food for curiosity, but has little or no in
telligible reference to practice;" and it is immediately added, "such being the
character of false revelations, what may we expect from a true one'?" It is con
cluded, therefore, that one object of the Essays was to discuss the truth or fal
sity of Swedenborg's revelations, and that all that the author means by the ex
pression above alluded to, is, that he did not undertake any direct proof of the
revelations of Swedenborg being untrue, which indeed is the case.

20 preliminary remarks."
ers. The reader is, therefore, requested to bear in mind,
that, in the following remarks, I am not answering particu
lar objections urged only by some particular author, but
objections founded on general principles not unfrequently
entertained. Before proceeding to the consideration of the subject,
allow me to express my sense of its awful importance; for if
it be not a delusion, many are the deluded. Could learning
and attainments decide the question, I must, in the present
case, bow with respectful deference to my opponent. , Noth
ing but a persuasion, that these qualifications, however ad
mirable, are not those which are only or even chiefly requi
site to decide the question, induces me io take a part in
the discussion. Besides, even if they were, I cannot but
recollect that many of the receivers of Swedenborg's writ
ings have, in these respects, been perfectly equal to those
who differed from them, while Swedenborg himself was a
man of most distinguished attainments. All to which I can
venture to lay claim, is, an impartial desire of the truth,
and a willingness, wherever I think I see it, if necessary,
to forsake all in order to follow it. If the receivers of the
writings of Swedenborg be in error, and if the error be
that of the understanding, rather than of the heart, the di
vine meVcy will, doubtles,s, not allow them finally to fail in
their salvation; while, on the other hand, if the opponents
of those writings be in error, the same mercy awaits them
with open arms, if, hke St. Paul, they have erred ignorant-
ly in unbelief My conviction is, that such is the fact; and,
in stating some few of the reasons for which I have been
led to this conclusion, I sincerely trust that I may be guid
ed by the Spirit of Truth, that the reader will sufl'er him
self to be led by the same Spirit, and not feel ofl^ended, if,
on a subject of so great importance, I speak plainly, and,
without hesitation, endeavor to lay the axe to the root of
the tree.*
Before touching upon the general question, I would ob
serve, that there are a few points, perhaps, peculiar to
Your Grace's view of the argument, one of which I will
briefly notice. Having admitted the practical character
of the doctrines, mention is made of the non-practical
character of the revelations. The doctrines of Sweden-
» I beg leave to say, once for all, that if, in explaining the views of Swe
denborg, i have any wliere expressed myself incorrcctlv, or not with sufficient
clearness, the reader will uot do Justice to the subject without referring to the

DOOTRPNES. 21
borg, it is admitted, are fundamentally the same with those
commonly received; therefore, there is nothing practical
in his alleged revelations. I confess I am at a loss to per
ceive the sequence of the conclusion, and, though unable
to deduce from the observation any other meaning, yet I
can scarcely bring myself to believe that I have rightly
apprehended the argument; for, even supposing the doc
trines were precisely the same with those which are com
monly received, and that these doctrines were true, why
might there not be revelations, perfectly in accordance
with tjiera, developing their nature to a much greater ex
tent than was previously known, and supplying us with
principles of much greater purity, than those we previously
possessed? Do we not see the possibility of this circum
stance illustrated in the case of those whose general or
thodoxy has not been doubted by their respective followers,
and who yet have, looked forward to a period upon earth,
when the mysteries of the divine dispensations will be
more fully revealed, and the doctrines which are consid
ered to be practical, and yet inscrutable, will be better
understood? Now, if they arc better understood, why
should a revelation to this effect, be considered as non-
practical; and why, therefore, even if the doctrines of
Swedenborg were the same with those generally received,
must it follow that an alleged revelation, which might be a
further development of these doctrines, would necessarily
be of a non-practical character? This observation is
made, the rather, because it is admitted, that the doctrines
of Swedenborg are of a practical character; and it will be
shewn how his alleged revelations are in a great part, only
a further development of his doctrines.
Previous, therefore, to any remarks upon the alleged rev
elations, it will be necessary to make a few observations on
the subject of these doctrines.
That there are writers in the Established Church, who
occasionally deliver sentiments in perfect accordance with
sonieof those of Swedenborg, is acknowledged with pleasure^
whether a person would hence be at liberty to infer, that
there was no essential difference between the doctrines of
Swedenborg and those which are commonly professed,
seems to be another question. A receiver of the writings of
Swedenborg often imagines that there is this difference, —
the imagination, if such it be, is often to him the source of
great regret; and it is no little relief to his feelings, to be
able to point out, in the ' different authors for which the

22 DOCTRINES.
church is distinguished, principles in which he is happy- to
coincide. For what pleasure can he take in excluding
himself from the social interchange of sentiment with his
fellow-creatures? In pursuing this course, however, he is
immediately liable to this inconvenience: it is replied, your
professed revelation cannot be true, because it pretendsto
be new, whereas, its principles are old, or fundamentally
the same with those which are generally received. On the
other hand, if peculiarities in those principles are pointed
out, they are, for this reason, presumed to be erroneous,
being considered to be only the distinctions of a sect.*
Now, nothing is more remarkable to an observant mind,
than the contradictory views which are taken of the doc
trines of Swedenborg, even by learned and eminent men.
A late prelate of the Church of England denounced
them as preposterous and heretical, and in so doing
was countenanced by other members of the church; yet
the late Bishop Porteus, who was distinguished for both
his piety and learning, publicly sanctioned the preach
ing of these doctrines in his own diocese; and, in the
following words, encouraged a clergyman to continue to
disseminate them: "I see no particular objection to the
ideas which you have stated, and which come recommend
ed to my own mind by the consideration, that they were
the ideas of an intimate and learned friend of mine, for
whose opinion and sound judgment I must ever entertain
the highest respect. "| The author of the continuation of
Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, after giving a, summary
of Swedenborg's doctrines of the Trinity and Atonement,
remarks, — "In substance, perhaps, there is no great differ
ence between this and the ordinary doctrine of the Trinity."
* Swedenborg did not profess to be the founder of any sect, nor do the re
ceivers of his writings regard him as such; indeed, there is. nothing to be
faund in his works upon thesubject. The consequence is, that Swedenborgians,
as tliey are improperly nailed, have not yet all formed themselves into a distinct
body, but pursue cacli the guidance of his own conscience ; some- belonging to
a distinct religious class, others remaining in external communion with the
church of which they had previously been members; the fundamental article of
their religion being love, npt fiith separate from love.
t This observation is extracted from a work, entitled, "Pure Evangelical
Religion restored," by the late Rev. John Clowes, M. A., Rector of St. John's
Church, Manchester, and, formerly, fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge.
In this ti-act an account is given of an interview between a clergyraan and a
bishop, on the subject of Swedenborg's writings, tlie names of the parties not
being meniioned. It is known, however, that tlie clergyman was Mr. Clowes
himself, and the bishop the late Dr. Porteus; -Mr. Clowes' living being in the
diocese of Chester, of which Dr. Porteus was ilien the bishop.

DOCTRINES. 23
Your Grace also observes, — "Nor do I deny its including
the fundamentals of Christianity;" indeed, so far from op
posing the doctrines, a portion of Your Grace's argument
is founded upon the presumption, of their being essentially
in agreement with those of the Established Church.*
Whether or not such be the fact, we shall afterwards see ;
at present I only observe, that all who entertain tritheisti-
cal notions of the Trinity, have naturally felt great aversion
to Swedenborg's views of the subject; and all who contem
plate the Lord as one God, find their sentiments to be more
in accordance with the doctrines of Swedenborg. Now it
gives me great pleasure to see that Your Grace is one of
this number. To no person in the present day, so far as I
am aware, is the Christian community more indebted, for
pointing out some of the lamentable errors, which have pre
vailed in regard to the doctrine of the Trinity; and I can
not help considering this to be one cause for which, what
ever Your Grace may think of Swedenborg's revelations,
you have taken so" favorable a view of his doctrines; all of
which are founded on that one great truth, that there is one
God, that the Lord Jesus Christ is that God, and that in
Him there is a Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
Your Grace has, in your writings, maintained, what Swe
denborg long since maintained, that the doctrine of the
Trinity, as frequently interpreted, instead of being the
manifestation, is, in fact, the mystification of the unity; and
that the distinction of the persons had been so explained,
as to make the unity of the Godhead inexplicable; in fine,
that the unity had become the incomprehensible mystery.
We know the reluctance of the human heart to acknowl
edge its errors; nor is that reluctance diminished by the
circumstance of individuals forming into a body, as it then
becomes the combined reluctance of all; in which case, an
individual, in acknowledging his errors, has to acknowledge
them not only as his own, but as those also of the body
with which he is identified. Besides, the more widely
spread and deeply rooted is an error, the less easily is it
detected; and therefore, when Your Grace had discernment
enough, and, what is still more estimable, the honesty and
fidelity, to point out the errors regarding the Trinity, I can
not be surprised that many should be backward to perceive
* As the Essays, therefore, make no attempt to disprove the doctrinal views
taken by Swedenborg, so it is to be understood that the remarks upon this sub
ject, in the present letter, are designed rather as simple expositions of these
views, than as formal proofs.

24 DOCTRINES.
and acknowledge the fact, — a circumstance which only
shews how irradicated the error had become. Of the truth
of your assertion you gave a lamentable instance : my con
viction is. Your Grace might • have furnished hundreds.
There is reason to believe it is an error which has overrun
the Christian community. ' To introduce all the proofs of
this fact, would be to make quotations which would fill a
volume. I have thought it useful, however, to subjoin a few
in theAppendix. Now,if the doctrine of the Trinity be a fun
damental doctrine, if also we so regard it, it must, of course,
enter, more or less, into every other doctrine of Chris
tianity; it must, therefore, enter into that of the Atone
ment , which, after the Trinity, is next in importance ; and
if this doctrine of the Trinity enters into that of the Atone
ment, then must also our views of this doctrine. I. take
this for granted; — a universal truth must enter into all the
pairticular truths under it.- Consequently, if there be any
tritheism in our views of the doctrine of the Trinity, we
must carry it into the doctrine of the Atonement; and not
only so, but this system of ti'itheism must be, more or less,
the basis upon which our views of the Atonement are
founded; and hence the doctrine of the Atonement will be,
in a greater or less degree, a practical development and
application of a system of tritheism. My Lord, I cannot but
conceive that any one who first admits the fact, as you have
candidly done, of an introduction of tritheism into the pop
ular views of the Trinity, must necessarily admit this con
clusion. It is a conclusion which is not adverted to in the
Essays, although it appears necessarily to follow from what
you have stated; but it is one which is openly advanced in
the writings of Swedenborg, of which Your Grace says,
that "you do not deny that they include the fundamentals
of Christianity." Of these fundamentals the following is
one extracted from the "Universal Theology," art. 132.
"It is a fundamental error of the church to believe the
passion of the cross to be redemption itself; and this error,
together with that relating to three divine persons from
eternity, hath perverted the whole church, so that nothing
spiritual is left remaining in it."
"What doctrine doth more abound in the books of the
orthodox at this day, or what is more zealously taught and
insisted on in the schools of divinity, or more constantly
preached and cried up in the pulpit, than this, — that God the
Father, being full of wrath against mankind, not only sepa
rated them from himself, but also sentenced them to uni-

DOCTRINES. 25
versal damnation, thus excommunicated them from his fa
vor; but because he was gracious and merciful, that he per
suaded, or excited, his Son to descend, and take upon him
self the detfermined curse, and thus expiate the wrath of
his Father; and that thus, and no otherwise, could the Fa
ther be prevailed upon to look again with an eye of mercy
on rnankind? As also, that this was effected by the Son,
who, in taking upon himself the curse pronounced against
men, suffered himself to be scourged by the Jews, to be
spit upon, and, lastly, to be crucified as the accursed of God,
(Deut. xxi. 23;) and that the Father was by this means ap
peased, and, out of love towards his Son, cancelled the sen
tence of damnation, yet only in favor of those for whom
the Son should intercede, who was thus to be a perpetual
Mediator in the presence of the Father?. These and the
like doctrines are at this day trumpeted forth from the pul
pit, and re-echoed from the walls of the temple, as sound
is re-echoed in a wood, so that the ears of all present are
filled with it. But who, that hath his reason enlightened
and restored to health by the Word, cannot see that God is
mercy and clemency itself, because he is love itself and
goodness itself, and that these constitute his essence; and,
consequently, that it is a contradiction to say, that mercy
itself, or goodness itself, can behold man with an angry eye,
and sentence him to damnation, and still abide in his own
divine essence? Such dispositions are never ascribed to a
good man or an angel of heaven, but only to a wicked man
and spirit of hell; it is, therefore, blasphemy to ascribe them
to God. But, if we inquire into the cause of this false
judgment, we shall find it to be this, that men have mista
ken the passion of the cross for redemption itself: hence
have flowed those opinions, as falses flow in a continiied
series from one false principle; or, as from a cask of vine
gar nothing but vinegar can come forth; or, as from an in
sane mind we can expect nothing but insanity. For one
point being taken for granted, the conclusions that are made
from it must be of the same family, because they are included
in it, and are severally and successively produced from it:
and from this one point concerning the passion of the cross,
as constituting the sum of redemption, many more shock
ing and impious opinions, scandalous and disgraceful to
God, may still take rise and go forth into the world, vntil
that prophecy of Isaiah is fulfilled, where it is said, "The
priest and the prophet have erred through strong drink,
3

26 DOCTRINES.
they stumble in judgment; all tables are full of vomit gnd
filthiness," (xxviii. 7, 8.)
"From this idea concerning God and redemption, the
whole system of theology hath lost its spirituality, and is
become in the lowest degree natural. This was the neces
sary consequence of ascribing to God merely natural prop
erties and attributes; and yet on the idea entertained of God,
,and that of redemption, which makes one with salvation, ev
ery thing that hath relation to the church depends. For
that idea is like the head, from which all parts of the body
are derived; when, therefore, that idea is spiritual, every
thing that belongeth to the church becometh spiritual also;
but when that idea is natural, then every thing belonging
to the church becomes natural. Now, forasmuch as the
idea of God and of redemption is become merely natural,
that is, sensual and corporeal, it follows that all those things
are merely natural, which the heads and members of the
church have maintained, and do maintain, in their systems
and forms of doctrine. The reason why that idea must of ne
cessity give birth to nothifUg but falses is, because the natural
man is in continual opposition to the spiritual man, and thus
regardeth spiritual things as airy and visionary phantasies.
It may, therefore, be truly said, that, in consequence of that
sensual idea concerning redemption, and thence concern
ing God, the ways toward heaven, which are those that lead
to the Lord God the Savior, are beset with thieves and rob
bers, (John X. 1,8, 9,) and that the doors of the temple are
thrown down, so that dragons and owls, and the tzjim and
jiim have entered, and made a concert of dreadful discord.
That this idea concerning redemption, and Concerning God,
pervades the faith which prevails at this day throughout all
Christendom, is an acknowledged truth; for that faith re
quires men to pray to God the Father, that he would remit
their sins for the sake of the cross and blood of His Son ;
and to God the Son, that He would pray and intercede for
them; and to God the Holy Ghost, that He would justify
and sanctify them: and what is all this, but to supplicate
three distinct Gods, one after another? And, in such a
case, how can the notion which the mind forms of the di
vine government differ from that of an aristocratical or hi
erarchical government? orfrom thatof the triumvirate which
once existed at Rome, if only instead of a triumvirate it be
called a triumpersonate ? And in such a government, what
is easier than for the devil to put in practice the old maxim,
divide and govern? that is, to distract men's minds and ex-

DOCTRINES. 27
cite rebellious motions, sometimes against one God, and
sometimes against another, as hath been his practice since
the time of Arius to this day; and thus to thrust the Lord
God the Savior from His throne, "who hath all power in
heaven and in earth," (Matt, xxviii. 18,) and to exalt some
creature of his own in His place, and to enjoin men to wor
ship him, or, when the folly of this is detected, to destroy
the worship of the Lord Himself together with that of the
imaginary idol."
Since the time that Swedenborg wrote, there has been
a great variety of modifications of these views; but, so far
as I am aware, they all involve, among those who acknowl
edge the Lord's Divinity, the two principles which Sweden
borg has laid down as fundamental errors, — that of the ex
istence of three Divine Persons from eternity, and that of
the passion of the cross as redemption and Atonement.
Some consider satisfaction and expiation as the primary
principles of the Atonement, making little or no mention
of reconciliation. Others consider reconciliation to be the
primary, regarding satisfaction and expiation as only its
secondary features. These are they who, in general, view
the Atonement not so much a pacification of the wrath of
the Father, as a display of his justice; and hence, as a
reconciliation not only of God to man, and of man to God,
but of God to Himself; that is, of his attribute of justice
to his attribute of love. Such views of the Atonement we
consider to be untrue; not only in consequence of their
involving the two fundamental errors above mentioned,
but because we believe that the separation of the divine
attributes neither does, nor ever did, take place in the
Divine Being, but in man alone. When a person acknowl
edges the truth, but does not live according to it, there
is then in his mind a separation of truth from love; hence,
the truth that would otherwise save him then condemns;
in which case, it is seen, when the conscience is awaken
ed, with the aspect of a terrible justice, and e.xcites in
him the fear of an everlasting punishment; still, if his
abhorrence of sin does not ultimately become an inward ab
horrence of its sinfulness, as opposed to the Divine Nature,
but arises only from a consideration of the punishment that
has been inflicted upon another, and will be inflicted upon
himself, he has no true idea of the nature of sin, or of the
attributes of the Divine Being. The crucifixion of the
Humanity, to which the Lord submitted, we regard not as
arising primarily from the will of the Deity, but from that

28 DOCTRINES.
of the devil. It was undergone, not for any purpose of
reconciling one attribute of God to another, but only of re
conciling the world to God ; not for any purpose of exem
plifying in the person of the Son, the justice of another
person of the Father, but for the purpose of enduring those
temptations which were necessary to victory over the pow
ers of darkness, the glorification of the Humanity, and the
consequent descent-of the Holy Spirit; thus, with a view
to resctie mankind from infernal influence, so as to enable
them to exercise, what otherwise they could not, a free
choice, and to be restored to a salvable state.
^This view of the Atonement as a manifestation of the
Divine love, not of wrath, or of justice in him separate
from love, may be illustrated upon principles occasionally
admitted even by some of our opponents. Thus in the Ho-
rcB Solitarice, Mr. Serle remarks: "God is love, pure, per
fect, and incorruptible love; but the carnal mind, the mind
of every man by nature, the mind which is under the do
minion of his flesh, and makes this flesh his only end, is
corrupted, debased, and absorbed with enrahy."  "As
he became opposite to the love of God, he became possess
ed with enmity; being contrary to the holiness of God, he
was filled with sin; repugnant to the goodness of God, he
was seized with evil; and cut off from the life of God, he
inherited death, spiritual, temporal, and eternal. The Di
vine Nature could not be contaminated by, nor hold com
munion with, a sinful nature: and therefore there ensued a
separation of God from man, which, having every dreadful
consequence to the latter, is expressed by the wrath, abhor
rence, vengeance, judgment, &.c. of God, — -terms adapted
to the workings and capacities of the human mind, and
used to mark out its entire alienation (with the sad effects
of it) from its Maker. There is no wrath in God, as wrath,
because He is wholly love; but his separation of man from
the participation of his love, with all its various blessings,
operates upon the human passions, now defiled with enmi
ty, under the notions and impressions of anger and indig
nation. Thus God's love, being pure and unapproachable
by sin, becomes a most dreadful and even horrible attribute
to a sinner, because, as a sinner, he can never come nigh to
God, never hold communion with him, nor receive delight
or blessedness from him. And if divine wisdom had not
found a method of reconciliation, human nature would and
must have sustained whatever can be conceived under the
awful idea of damnation, or the state of absolute rejection

DOCTRINES. 29
from the presence of God. By these considerations it
might appear, were it necessary to extend them, that enmi
ty, sin, wrath, and misery, with other words of the like
import, are all correlative terms, which only variously ex
press the nature or effects of man's alienation from God,"
&c. "On the other hand, the word love is also correlative,
and entirely connected with every other divine attribute
and perfection, or with whatever may be called by those
names: it has, and can have, no difference from them, how
ever distinguished by a merciful condescension, for the bet
ter comprehension of our minds. Righteousness, for in
stance, is only a name for this love in act and exercise; for
th« love of God in its energies does only what is right *or
righteous. Love is the motive of all his actions, according
to the Scriptures; and by communicating this love, he ren
ders it the essential principle of all righteous action in man
(John iii. 16; 1 Cor, xiii. 4, &c.)* Truth, purity, and the
like, are also but love in particular forms, actions, or as
pects. In short, all the attributes and perfections of the
Divine Nature have their essence in love, and the term love
is but a glorious title for the grand assemblage of them, de
nominating (as the Bible hath) the first and supreme nature.
God is love, then; uniting, as in that one attribute, all the
other predicaments and glories of his majesty and goodness,
not per accidens, but in essentiality; and with respect to
his creatures, there is no grace nor act of righteousness
but what is an emanation from the same principle, enliven
ing, invigorating, and making them happy." (See article.
Love.) Hence it follows, that in God justice itself is only
a form of love; to reconcile, therefore, justice to love, or
love to justice, is to reconcile love to itself, a reconcilia
tion which it never needed. Justice and love, therefore,
were never separated in God, but were always one; and
in this oneness consists the perfection of the Divine Na
ture. The Atonement, therefore, wrought by Jesus Christ,
was the reconciliation, in his own person, of the Humanity
to the Divinity, by which the Humanity became one with
the Father, or the Divinity. This being effected, the
Holy Spirit could descend and assist man in a correspond
ing work, the reconciliation of his humanity to that of the
Lord Jesus Christ; a reconciliation which takes place by
* It is singular to observe how this author, after having made tlie foregoing
excellent remarks, comes into collision with his own principles .
3*

30

DOCTRINES.

renouncing sin, overcoming evil, receiving the Divine
Love and Wisdom into our nature, and thus being trans
formed into the image of Christ.
It will be seen, therefore, that the doctrine of the Atone
ment, as explained by Swedenborg, involves a view of the
divine perfections fundamentally differing from those which
are commonly received ; the consequence is, that, as the
waters of the fountain are different, so are all the streams
which issue from it.* A false idea of God cannot consist
with the worship of Him in spirit and in truth. " Upon a
just idea of God," says S\vedenborg, "is founded the
universal heaven; and, upon earth, the universal church;
and, in general, all religion; inasmuch as by such idea
conjunction is effected; and by conjunction, light, wisdom,
and eternal felicity." (Preface to the Apocalypse Re
vealed.) " The idea concerning God is the primary of all
ideas; for, according to the quality thereof with man, such
are his communication with heaven and conjunction with
the Lord; and hence, such are his illustration, affection of
truth and good, perception, intelligence, and wisdom; for
these things are not from man, but from the Lord, accord
ing to conjunction with Him." (Apocalypse Explained, n.
957.) "A knowledge," says a modern writer, " of the
mode in which God exists, is the foundation of all accepta
ble religious service. For without this knowledge, instead
of worshipping the Deity as he really exists, we shall be
in danger of worshipping a mere figment of our own imagi
nation. And thus, while we suppose ourselves to be faith
ful servants of th6 alone true God, we may, eflfectively at
* Allhongh the distinguished author of the Essays appears, in his various
writings, to take essentially the same views of the Atonement with those which
are cornmonly received, yet he seems to have avoided mentioning some of its
most objectionable features. We repudiate, however, in toto, not the doctrine,
but the generally received explanation of the doctrine. Mr. Law is very "un
sparing upon this subject. "What," observes he, " a paltry-logic, to say, God
is righteousness and justice as well as love, and therefore his love cannot help or
forgive the sinner till his justice or righteous wrath has satisfactioni Every
word here is in full ignt^ance of the things spoken of; for what is love in God,
but Ills will to all goodncps'? What is righteousness in God, but his unchange
able love of his own goodness; his impossibility of loving any thing but it; his
impossibility of sulferiiig any thing that i:s unrighteous to have nny communion
with liiml What is God's forgiving sinful manl It is nothing else in its whole
nature, but God's making him righteous again. There is no other forgiveness of
sin but being made free Jrom it."- (Vol. I. No. 13.) It is jilstlv remarked by
Mr. Law, in other parts of his works, that as all attributes of the Creator are
infinite, and all attributes of the creature finite; so if there be wrath in the
Creator, it must be an infinite wrath, which is to make him infinitely worse
than any man or devil.

DOCTRINES. 31
least, be guilty of adoring an idol." (Faber's Apostolicity
of Trinitarianism. Jntroduclion. )
Now why have I introduced these observations ? Sim
ply to shew what are the doctrines of the Trinity and
Atonement, popularly received, and what are those main
tained by Swedenborg. For if it be the fact, that the two
are not in coincidence, it will follow, that so much of the
argument in the Essays, as is founded upon the supposition
that they are practically the same, falls to the ground.
Not only, however, according to the popular views, is
the Fafher divided in himself, by setting one attribute
against another, but the Son is divided in himself, by pos
sessing two substances; one human, the other divine; one
created, the other uncreated; one finite, the other infinite.
The subject is worthy of a few remarks.
Swedenborg explains how the names, Jesus and Christ,
are names signifying a nature, that is to say, the Human
nature assumed by Jehovah. What follows from this prin
ciple? That in the Christian church Christ is not worship
ped, inasmuch as the Human nature is not worshipped;
for the Human nature is generally considered not Divine.
I say, not Divine; because, although most persons affirm
that they do consider it Divine, inasmuch as it partakes of
the Divine nature, yet it is obvious that, in calling the Hu
man nature of Christ Divine, they use the term much in
the same sense, as when they speak of a divine counter
nance, or divine music, or of the character of the Chris
tian as divine, from his participation of the Divine nature;
thus St. Peter says, "whereby are given unto us exceed
ing great and precious promises, that by these ye might be
partakers of the Divine nature." (Ep. 2, c. i, v. 4.)
Hence, also, the author of the "Hora; Solitarise" observes,
"human life upon earth maybe distinguished into three
modes or conditions, natural, artificial, divine, or spirit
ual." Thus, although a person declares that he believes
the Human nature of the Lord to be Divine, if he be asked
whether it be infinite, the answer is. Decidedly not; for
that this Human nature, notwithstanding it be called Di
vine,' is still creaturely. Hence writers, in general, speak
of the Human nature of the Lord as still finite; and if
what is finite and created can be no object of divine worship,
so neither can the Human or Christ-nature of Jehovali.
In proof of the assertion, that the Humanity of the Lord
is still contemplated as creaturely, allow me to quote a few
authorities. I might quote hundreds, if the limits of this

32 DOCTRINES.
letter would allow me. Matthew Henry observes, "The
glorified Humanity of our Lord Jesus Christ, with all the
dignity and power conferred on it, was no more than a
glorious creature." (Comment. 1 Cor. xv. 28.) — Dr.
Owen observes, "That He (Jesus Christ) is still in the
same Human nature wherein he was on the earth, that he
hath the same rational soul, and the same body, is a fiin-
damental article of the Christian faith. This nature of the
man Christ Jesus, is filled with all the divine graces and
perfections, whereof a limited created nature is capable. It
is not deified; it is not made a God; it does not in heaven
coalesce into one nature with the divine, by a composition
of'them; it has not any essential property of the Deity
communicated to it, so as subjectively to reside in it ; it is
not made omniscient, omnipresent, omnipotent; but it is
exalted in a fulness of all divine perfection. ! ineffably, above
the glory of angels and men. It is incomprehensibly
nearer God than they all; has communications from God
in glorious light, love, and power, ineffably above them
all — :but it is still a creature." (Glory of Christ, ch. vii.) —
Your Grace, also, having observed, that " when we wor
ship Christ, though we worship Him not as man, but ag
God," proceeds, a little subsequently, * as follows : (Es
says, p. 168.) "When I say, however, that we worship
Christ not as man, but as God, I mean only, that the wor
ship which evidently the apostles and their immediate dis
ciples paid, and were taught to pay, to Him, was not di
rected to a mere man, however high in the divine favor,
but to God ' manifest in the flesh.' I am far from suppos
ing that the generality of Christians, that is, the unlearned
and unphilosophical, were, or can be, capable of making,
in their worship, a complete mental separation of the two
Natures, abstracting distinctly, and contemplating solely,
the divine character, and laying aside all consideration of
the Human Nature, of Christ. This may be possible for
an acute, and learned, and reflective philosopher, without
his adopting the notion into which the attempt seems to
have led some of those early heretics, who regarded our
Lord as two Persons, — the man, Jesus, and Christ, a dis
tinct emanation of the Deity. The distinction, I say, it
may be possible for a profound and reflective mind so to
draw, as yet to keep clear of that heresy; but the bare
» The whole pas.sago is far too lon^ to be extracted, but as it is an important
one, the reader is referred to the original. This is the only way in which fidl
justice can be done, either to the Essays, or to the present argument.

DOCTRINES. 33
description of such an. abstractive process of thought,
would, I conceive, have as much perplexed the greater
part of the ea"rly disciples, as it manifestly would the gen
erality of unlearned Christians now. The apostles and
their hearers would have told us simply, that they address
ed their prayers to a Being whom they regarded as both
divine and human, — "the man Christ Jesus, in whom
' dwelleth ' (not some emanation or portion of the Deity,
but) ' all the fulness of the Godhead, bodily. ' They ad
dressed Him in their worship by his human name; as,
'Lord Jesus, receive my spirit,' &.c. Nor could they, in
deed, have invoked Him as their Intercessor and Mediator,
by virtue of his meritorious sacrifice, keeping out of their
minds the Human Nature which those offices imply. And
if such is the impression naturally produced in the gene
rality of simple unphilosophical minds, it cannot be a practi
cally incorrect one," &c. &c. &c. "The apostles do,
indeed, direct our worship exclusively to God; but to
'God in Christ, reconciling the world unto Himself: ' nor
do they dwell on the necessity of making, in our devotions,
any mental separation of the two Natures of that Person
who is the object of our worship." On the contrary, ob
serve how, in the Epistle to the Colossians, Paul presents
to our view the divine and the human attributes of the Sa
vior almost simultaneously; 'in whom,' says he, 'we have
redemption through his blood, even the forgiveness of sins;
who is the Image of the invisible God, the first-born of ev
ery creature (TTQordioxog nAaijg kt/otoic, born before all crea
tures,) for by Him were all things created that are in heaven,
and that are in earth, visible and invisible.' (Col. i. 14,
15, 16. V To these observations. Your Grace,, in accord
ance With the generally received views, adds the following
remark :
"That the notions conveyed, by such expressions, to a
plain reader, are philosophically correct, I will not undertake
to maintain: it is sufficient that they are scriptural."
Now, to say nothing of a notion which it seems is not
practically incorrect, but is so philosophically, I would
observe, it appears that the apostle speaks of the Human
nature as, in the strict sense of the term. Divine ; that a
simple unphilosophical mind would be disposed to form the
same conception of it ; that such a conception is, in point
of fact, untrue; and that it is only the acute, learned, and
reflective philosopher, who is capable of making a complete
mental separation of the two natures, abstracting distinctly

34 DOCTRINES.
and contemplating solely the divine character, and laying
aside all consideration of the human nature, of Christ. I'rom
the authors first quoted, it likewise appears, that the hu
manity of Christ, is not, in the strict sense of the term.
Divine. Your Grace, however, shews how the apostles
did appear to consider it so; how the simple minded might
be disposed to do the same; but you observe, that, philoso
phically, it is not correct; that is to say, although the ex
pressions appearing to attribute Divinity to the Humanity
may be scriptural, nevertheless, that the Humanity is, in
the strict sense of the term. Divine, is not the fact. This,
I believe, is no peculiar notion of Your Grace, but one
which is generally considered orthodox. Now permit me
to observe, that Swedenborg so far agrees with Your Grace
as to admit, that the acute, learned, and reflective philoso
pher, is capable of making this distinction, or rather sep
aration, between the Divine and Human natures ; that this
separation the apostles did not make, the simple-minded
Christian cannot make, but the Church has made; and
this, he maintains, has been the great source of all the
mystery and confusion which have prevailed upon the sub
ject. This is a vital point, and upon this question the
whole system of Swedenborg stands or falls. That the
infirm human nature which the Lord asssumed in the
womb of the virgin, and which hungered, thirsted, was
wearied, tempted, and put to death upon the cross, was
Divine, 'Swedenborg does not admit; and in this, I pre
sume, that he and Your Grace are both agreed. But
there is one thing which forms a leading feature in his
works, and which is wholly left out of the common system
of divinity; I mean, the process by which that Human
nature was sanctified, glorified, and thus united or made
one with the Father. The Humanity, thus glorified, we
consider to be the Humanity which Christ now has; and
that this Humanity is, in the strictest sense, Divine, is the
fundamental doctrine of the system of Swedenborg. Let
us proceed to consider this question; and in so doing,
although it may appear, from the mode of speaking of it,
that the doctrine is only speculative and unconnected with
practice, the result will shew that it involves the whole
system of Christian life and conduct, and leads to a revo
lution in all our motives and moral sentiments.
In speaking of the Divinity of the Lord's Humanity, it is
desirable that we have first clear ideas of what constitutes
humanity or human nature . That by which we are distin-

DOCTRINES. 35
guished as human beings, is the possession of a will and
understanding; and the perfection of these consists in will
ing what is good, and understanding what is true; so that
the more good we will, and the more truth we understand,
the more are we truly human, and the more completely are
we distinguished, as such, from the rest of the animal cre
ation. If, therefore, it be good and truth which makes us
human, then are these two the essential human principles;
and in this point of view, to speak of an infinite humanity,
is no other than to speak of infinite good and truth. Hence,
to consider our Lord's humanity as finite, is to consider his
goodness and truth as finite; and, since his goodness and
truth are manifested only in his Word, it is to consider his
Word as finite, that is to say, as possessing only a crea
turely wisdom. Such, then, as are our views of the Lord's
Humanity, such must be our views of his goodness and
truth, or his Word; and such as are our views of his
Word, such must be our views of his Humanity. When,
however, we speak of an infinite humanity, or infinite good
ness Lnd truth, we speak in reference to what is interior;
for God is not called infinite in reference to space, but in
reference to interiority, that is to say, purity. Hence,
when we speak of infinity of wisdom, we do not speak in
regard to quantity, but to quality; that is to say, interiority
and purity. The more interior is our wisdom, the more do
we see of the internality or infinity of the divine wisdom;
the purer we are, the more do we see of the divine purity;
the more spiritual we are, the more do we see of the divine
spirituality. To attempt to contemplate God, tlierefore,
out of his Humanity,* is to attempt to contemplate Him
* Dr. Hey, formerly Divinity Xecturer of Cambridsje, amongst other remarks
with regard" to Swedenborg in'his lectures, makes the following: "In the sum
mary ot the doctrines of Swedenborg, we find this account of the Trinity.
There is a Divine Trinity of Father, Son, and Holy Gho.=t, or, in other words,
of the all-begetting Divinity, the Divine Humanity, and the Divine Proceeding
or Operation, aud that this" Trinity consistetli not, therefore, of three distinct
persons, but is united as soul, bodv, and operation in man, in the one person of
the Lord Jesus Christ, who, there"foie, is the God of heaven, and alone to be
worshipped, being Creator from eternity. Redeemer in lime, and Regenerator
to eternity. I mention this notion chiefly on account of its making 'he Father
no object"of our worship, and dropping also all worship to the Holy Ghost."
Book IV. art 1. sect. 6. In reply to this it may he observed, St. Paul says,
God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto himself, that is, as we interpret
the expression, the Father was in the Son, reconcding the world untojpmself.
Now, if a person worships Christ, I suppose he worships God in Christ: for
were God not in Christ, Christ could not be an object of divine worship. Sup
pose now 1 were to say, that in this case, a person worshipping Christ does not
worship God, or because he worshipped God in Christ alone, he did not contem-

S6 DOCTRINES
out of his goodness and truth; for goodness and truth are
the essential human principles, or the Humanity, of which
the outward body is but the ultimate form; and since the
Word of God is a revelation of his goodness and truth, to
attempt to contemplate God out of his Humanity, is to at
tempt to contemplate him out of his Word, or independent
ly of any revelation he has made of Himself; and to think
we thus can know Him, is as absurd as to think we can
climb up into heaven by some other way than the one which
He has opened. The Divinity, considered independently
of the Humanity, transcends all possible thought of angels
and of men; it has no conceivable distinctions, hence no
conceivable attributes or perfections. It is, therefore, in
the Humanity alone, that the Divinity has any relation to
us, and through the medium of that Humanity alone, that
we can approach to the Divinity; which Humanity is,
therefore, our mediator; hence we can speak of God's
love, truth, mercy, wisdom, and so forth, all of which per
fections evidently exhibit the human character and nature.
Goodness and truth, therefore, being the essentia! human
principles, of which tSie body is but the ultimate or corporeal
form, it follows that, as the Lord alone is essential goodness
and truth. He alone is truly Man,* and that human beings
become men, or human, only in proportion as they receive
plate God as an object of worship; would this be considered a just conclusioni
Now, as God is in Chi ist, so the Father is in the Sun ; we could not wprship
the Son if the Father were not in Him; it is because the Father is in the Son
that we worj'hip the Son, knowing that, in thus worshi[iping the Son, we wor
ship the Father also, nay that we cannot worship ihe Father in any oiher way;
for we know nothing of the Father but of the Son, thercftn-e, we cannot wor
ship the Father out of the Son. They ralher make the Father no object of di
vine worship, who think to Avort^bip him out of the Son; — for as out of the
Son we can know noiliing of Him, so to worship that of whirlrwe know noth
ing, is to worship we know not what, which is in fact no woifhip at all. We,
thc-re'bre, worship ' hrist alon^ because it is in Clirisi alone that die Father is,
or in whom i.s all fulness of the Godhead b(idily. It is the attempt to produce
division in ilie Godhead, and hence a divided worship, that has produced divi
sion in the church. If, in ^he way in which it is generally understood, God be
three, how can the church be onel If there be a divided Godhead, how can
there be an undivided churchl
* As it is not my design to enter upon this subject any farther tlian is con
nected with the argnmeni in the Essays, the reader is referred, for a more full
exphiiiatioii of it, to the writings of Swedenborg. At the same time, to gnard
against misapprehension, it inav be well to observe, that, as the Divinity never
was known except through the" medium of a Humanity, so the"Hiimanity with
whicli^e is now clothed, is a Humanity in ultimates, or in a lower degree
than was possessed by the Lord before He" came into ihe world, and assumed a
body in the womb of the virgin ; it being only through the medium of this
lower degree, or Divine Humanity in ultimates, th-at the Divinity can now be
approached.

DOCTRINES. 37
of His nature. Hence it is the doctrine of Swedenborg,
that the Lord alone is a perfect Man, or that His Divinity
alone is perfectly Human, or, again, that that only is per
fectly human which is infinite. We cannot, therefore,
know God as He is in Himself, but we can know Him as
He is in His Humanity; and since He has a Divine or
Infinite Hum?inity, and we a humanity finite and creaturely,
therefore there is a relation of analogy established between
the two; but there is no traceable analogy between our
finite humanity and His Divinity independently of His
Humanity, because that Divinity is antecedent to any rela
tion to the creature, being sole, supreme, and independent.
It is from not attending to this circumstance, that some
appear to have fallen into error upon the subject of anal
ogy. From not having any just idea of a Divine Humanity,
they think that, in contemplating God, they must contem
plate the Divinity independently of the Humanity ; hence
they think that there is no analogy between the perfections
of the Almighty and the attributes of human nature, and,
consequently, that, know what we may of Him, we, after
all, know nothing. No wonder, for the reasons we have
stated, they should come to this conclusion ; for, in conse-
quenae of separating the Divine Nature from the Human,
they have only indefinite ideas of the Divinity; and, in con
sequence of separating the Human from the Divine, they
contemplate the Human only as creaturely, and therefore,
either, as in the former case, know nothing whatever of
God, or else, as in the latter, consider Him to be such a
one as themselves; that is to say, their theology is either
a system of self-originated abstract reasonings, or of natu
ral, carnal, and sensual ideas. The truth of this circum
stance we may see exemplified in those speculations which
have gone under the name of profound philosophy; and the
system of naturalism, which has of\en become current un
der the name of the plain and practical doctrines of Chris
tianity. Thus we find the Christian community divided
into two classes, one understanding the doctrines of Chris
tianity in the lowest and most carnal manner, in which case
they see little or no mystery in them; while the more edu
cated and reflecting, perceiving the impossibility of such
things, confess they have no clear notions upon the subject,
and, in fine, that nearly ihe whole is unintelligible. Hence,
the Doctrines of the Trinity, Atonement, Satisfaction, In-
tercession^ and Mediation, &c., are, one after the other,
proclainfed to be mysteries inscrutable, and the truth,
4

38 DOCTRINES.
which was intended to be the light of the soul, is contem
plated as abyssal darkness; the pious few awaiting the
period when God in His mercy may vouchsafe a clearer
revelation. If the Human nature be the only medium through which
we can have any idea of the Deity, it follows, that if that
Human nature be finite and creaturely, our ideas of God
must be of Him as a finite creaturely being, far above all
angels it may be, but still finite and creaturely; as such,
we must conceive Him as possessed of a nature the same
with our own, and worship a being like ourselves; the con
sequence will be the imitation of an imperfect model, com
paratively low ideas of the Divine perfections, a compara
tively low standard of religion or of life and conduct, and
hence, a degenerated church. This it is which Sweden
borg maintains to be the key to the present state of the
Christian community, "they know not the thoughts of the
Lord, neither understand they his counsel." True it is,
that, as Swedenborg observes, (Apocalypse Explained,
649,) "At the end of the church the Lord is indeed
preached, and, also from doctrine. Divinity is attributed to
him, like to the Divinity of the Father; but, notwithstand
ing, scarce any one thinks of His Divinity, by reason of
their placing it above or without His Humanity; where
fore, when they look to His Divinity, they do not look to
the Lord, but to the Father, as to another; when, notwith
standing, the Divinity, which is called the Father, is in the
Lord, as He Himself teacheth in John x. 30, 38 ; xiv. 7.
Hence it is, that man doth not think of the Lord otherwise
than as of a common man, and from that thought flows his
faith; howsoever he may say with his lips that he belie veth
His Divinity, Let any one explore, if he can, the idea of
his thought concerning the Lord, whether it be not such as
is here described; and when it is such, he cannot be con
joined to Him in faith and love, nor, by any conjunction,
receive any good of love and truth of faith. Hence then
it is, that in the end of the church there is not any ac
knowledgment of the Lord, that is, of the Divine (princi
ple) in the Lord and from the Lord. It appears, indeed,
as if the Divine (principle) of the Lord was acknowledged,
because it is affirmed in the doctrine of the church; but
whilst the Divine (principle) is separated from His Human,
His Divine (principle) is not yet acknowledged inwardly,
but only outwardly; and to acknowledge it outwardly, is
to acknowledge it only with th« mouth and not in the heart.

DOCTRINES. 39
or with speech only and not in faith." — Now the Humanity
of the Lord being infinite, and our Human nature being
finite, it is clear that, as finite beings can never have ade
quate ideas of what is infinite, so we can never have ade
quate ideas of the Lord's Humanity. Still, our ideas,
though finite, may, as we have said, be true, being founded
on a real analogy between the Humanity of the creature
and that of the Creator. Consequently, our knowledge of
God may bo as certain, as it is certain we may be an im
age and likeness of God; for, in regard to Divine Wisdom,
we have the faculty of receiving only that which we have
the faculty of- being, and no further. Though our finite
affections and thoughts, therefore, can never be adequate
to the Love and Wisdom of The Infinite, any more than
we can be infinite, yet The Infinite may be in them, mak
ing them so many finite likenesses and images of Himself.
Nevertheless, He is not in us in the fulness of the God
head bodily, or in the fulness of his glorious person; but
that which is in us, is the Holy Spirit proceeding from
Him, and which, in coming down to our souls, is adapted
to them, just as the heat and light of the sun, in passing
through the atmospheres, become finally accommodated to
each created object, according to its nature and require
ments. Thus it is, the spirit of man stands in the same
relation to the Sun of Righteousness, in which the body of
man stands to the outward and visible sun. Thus also it
is, man walks between two great lights, the one to enlighten
his body, the other, if he pleases, to enlighten his soul.
Although all the authors with which I am acquainted,
consider the Humanity of the Lord to be finite and crea
turely, yet, some of the learned and pious appear to have
seen obscurely the possibility of an infinite or Divine Hu
manity. Thus Hooker, Eccles. Pol. Book 5, after repeat
edly speaking of Christ as a creature, makes the following
observation: "Touching the manner how he worketh as
man in all things, the principal powers of the soul of man
are the will and understanding, the one of which two in
Christ assenteth unto all things, and from the other noth
ing which Deity doth work is hid; so that, by knowledge
and assent, the soul of Christ is present whh all things
which the Deity of Christ worketh. And even the body of
Christ itself, although the definite limitation thereof be
most sensible, doth, notwithstanding, admit, in some sort, a
kind of infinite and unlimited presence likewise;" the
nature of which the pious and learned author proceeds

40 DOCTRINES.
afterward in his own way to explain. There are others
who affirm that Christ had a kind of Humanity before he
came upon earth ; and although they do not appear to have
any distinct idea of what they mean, yet the very admission
tacitly implies an infinity in the Humanity, unless they con
sider Christ as a creature before he came upon earth,
which, it is presumed, most persons would not do. Be
sides, the sacrament of the Lord's supper might itself be
considered a symbol of some kind of presence of the body
and blood of Christ, that is to say, of his Humanity ; and
this itself might shew us the possibility of an omnipresent,
infinite, or Divine Humanity.
Now, why have I. entered into this subject ? Because,
if the Humanity of the Lord be Divine, if it be God, what
becomes of the modern system of popular theology? "An
absolutely perfect creature," says Archbishop King, "im
plies a contradiction. For it would be of itself and not of
itself at the same time. Absolute perfection is, therefore,
peculiar to God, and if he should communicate his own
peculiar perfection to another, that other would be God,"
(Origin of Evil, Chap. 3.) We cannot consider, then, the
Humanity, as some appear to do confusedly, both as finite
and infinite: it is either one, or the other: it is either
Divine or not Divine: it is either an object of worship, or
it is not an object of worship. If it be an object of wor
ship, then we address our prayers to Christ alone, that is,
to the Divine Humanity alone, because in that Humanity
alone can the Divinity or Jehovah be approached, this Hu
manity being the manifestation of all the fulness of the
Godhead bodily. Hence, all those carnal notions of Me
diation and Intercession, popularly entertained, we reject,
as unworthy of the Deity and unfounded in Scripture; it
being obvious, from the admission made in the Essays, that
the separation between the Divine and Human natures of
the Lord, the apostles did not make, the simple-minded
Christian could not make, but the acute, learned, and re
flective philosopher has made.* Nevertheless, allow me to
* Sonie of tlie practical evils mentioned by Swedenborg as resulting from
not considering the Lord's Human nature Divine, are the following: —
1. Ignorance of God among the learned, who contemplate the Divine nature
ont of the Human.
2. Ignorance of God among the unlearned and sensual ; because they con
template the Human nature out of the Divine; and so, by considering Christ as
a creature and yet God, degrade the Divine Being to the level of a creature, or
tu one like themselves.

DOCTRINES. 41
express my conviction, that much of what Your Grace has
said upon the subject, is worthy of a truly enlightened
mind, and deserves the profound attention of every member
of the Church of Christ . I refer more particularly to the
following passage in Your Grace's sermon on the Name of
Emmanuel. "There are, indeed, very few Christian prayers ex
pressly recorded in Scripture ; but from those few, it should
seem that our Lord's disciples understood his injunction to
them, to pray to the Father in His name, as meaning that
they were to address their prayers directly to Christ, and
pray to God in Him. This, indeed, if you consider what
has been said on the use of the word name, is what we
might naturally have supposed would be their interpretation
of the command to ask of God in Christ's name; i. e. of
God as manifested in Christ for the redemption of the
world. And the few instances that are recorded, go to
confirm this. Keeping in mind that the title of 'Lord,' or
'the Lord,' is that which the Christians constantly applied
to Jesus Christ, look at the prayer recorded in the begin
ning of Acts, where they apply to Him who had, in person,
chosen each of the apostles, to fill up for Himself the num
ber left deficient by the apostacy of Judas. They do not
say, 'Our Father, we pray thee, for the sake of Jesus Christ,
to fill up the number of his apostles,' but they apply themselves
to Him direct, saying, 'Thou Lord! who knowest the hearts
of all men, shew whether of these two thou hast chosen.'
Again, look to the dying prayers of the blessed martyr,
Stephen, whose birthday to immortal life we celebrate to
morrow. His prayers are an evident imitation of those of
3. A consequent tendency In some to unbelief in God, arising from an igno
rance of his nature.
4. The support of the Papacy, because when Christ is considered a creature,
and nevertheless Invested with Divine attributes, it is less repulsive to the mind
to consider another creature (as the Pope for instance) to be Invested with Di
vine power.
5. The worship of angels, because if one creature may be worshipped,
another may.
6. An unbelief in angels, or any intercourse with another world ; because
the Divine when contemplated out of the Human is no object of thought or love,
hence, virtually, a nonentity; consequently, also, heaven and hell.
7. Intercession of angels and saints; because. If one creature may Intercede,
another may . I will here add, that after once communicating to a Roman
Catholic the true Idea of Christ's intercession, as explained by Swedenborg,
and so removing the common Idea of its nature, he at once saw the folly of his
belief in the intercession of the Virgin Mary, and the saints; the consequence
of which was, he, of his own accord, renounced the whole doctrine, and ad
dressed himself to the Lord alone.
4*

42 DOCTRINES.
his crucified Master. Yet he does not use the same invoca
tion of Father, but addresses himself direct to Christ. Our
Lord had said, when his enemies were nailing him to the
cross, 'Father, forgive them, for they know not what they
do;' and again, when about to expire, 'Father, into thy
hands I commend my spirit.' Stephen, in manifest imita
tion of him, says, 'Lord, lay not this sin to their charge;'
and, again, 'Lord Jesus, receive my spirit.' It is plain
that these persons, if they designed at all, as they surely
did, to obey the injunction of praying to the Father in
Christ's name, must have supposed themselves to be con
forming to it, by ^praying immediately to Christ. It would
perhaps be too much to assert positively, that they prayed
usually in this form, and seldom in any other; but it is
plain that, according to their views, such might have been
their usual practice; and, I believe, not above* one in
stance of a departure from it is recorded. It is remarka
ble, too, that of the same character is the oldest, or one of
the oldest, of all the prayers for general use, that have
come down to us composed by an uninspired Christian;
that of the celebrated Chrysostom, retained in our service.
It is addressed to Christ Himself, with the title of 'Al
mighty God,' and with an allusion to his promise, to be
present in the midst of his disciples, and that they should
obtain what they should agree to ask, in a common or joint
supplication, when assembled in his name — 'Almighty God,
who hast given us grace at this time, with one accord to
make our common supplications unto thee, and dost prom
ise, that when two or three are gathered together in thy
name, thou wilt grant their request; fulfil now, O Lord,
the desires and petitions of thy servants, as may be most
expedient for them; granting us in this world knowledge
of thy truth, and in the world to come life everlasting.' "
If this be true, what becomes of the phraseology with
which prayers in general are opened and terminated ? what
becomes of our addresses to the Father, beseeching him to
listen to the prayers of his Son, Jesus Christ, and to re
ceive us for His sake ? what becomes of the popular notions
* " The only Instance, as far as I recollect, recorded of the emploj"ment, by
the apostles, of any other mode (if address to God, Is that which occurred after
Peter and John had been brought before die Jewish rulers, when they liad
healed the cripple at the temple gate . The occurrence suggests to the assem
bly the words of the Psalm: 'The rulers took counsel together against the Lord,
and against his Christ' (or Anointed.) And it appears as If they were thence
led to speak of Jesus Christ in the third person, in their prayer on the only re
corded occasion in which they do so,"

DOCTRINES. 43
of Christ, as an Advocate, pleading His merits to the
Father, and interceding with Him, for the sake of these
merits, to send the third person of the Holy Spirit ? That
Christ is an Intercessor, that he is a Mediator, that he is
an Advocate, we have the authority of Scripture; but we
do not consider that we have any such authority for those
earthly ideas, whiph are commonly entertained upon this
subject. That Scripture accommodates itself to the appre
hension of the simple; and hence, that its expressions are
not always to be taken in their most literal sense, there are
few who will not admit. Man having become a creature
of the senses, it was necessary to address him through the
medium of the senses. In teaching a child, we are obliged
to convey our instructions in a similar manner. We may
speak to the child of the sun rising and setting; nor are
we thus perverting its mind, because it is not yet able to
exercise the powers of reason. But if, when the child
becomes a man, we teach its reason that the sun moves
round the earth; and if, upon this principle, we build a
whole system of natural philosophy, are we not then per
verting the mind of our pupil, and turning an innocent,
useful, and even necessary mode of instruction, into a
means of falsification of the laws of nature? In the same
manner, the doctrine of Mediation and Intercession, as
commonly understood, is regarded by Swedenborg as a
perversion of the truth. Inasmuch, however, as the dark
ness occasioned by the absence of true light, is far less de
plorable than that which is occasioned by the presence of
a false one, there is no doubt that the acknowledgment of
ignorance, in regard to the great doctrines of Christianity,
is more becoming a pious and humble mind, than those
bold expositions which only indicate the intrusion of the
natural man behind the veil of the temple, or his attempt
to approach Jehovah, without taking his shoes from off his
feet. What, then, is the practical idea of the Lord's In-
terce"ssion and Mediation, as explained by Swedenborg?
Let us hear what he says:
"They who believe that there are three persons who
constitute the Divine (being,) and are together called one
God, from the sense of the letter of the "Word derive no
other idea concerning Mediation and Intercession, than,
that the Lord sits at the right hand of His Father, and dis
courses with Him as man with man, and brings the suppli
cations of men to the Father, and entreats that for His
sake, because He endured the cross for the human race,

44 DOCTRINES.
He would pardon them, and be merciful ; such is the idea
concerning Intercession and Mediation, which the simple
derive from the sense of the letter of the Word. But it is
to be noted, that the sense of the letter is according to the
apprehension of simple men, that they may be introduced
into interior truths themselves; for the simple cannot form
any other idea of the heavenly kingdom, than as of an
earthly kingdom; nor any other idea of the Father, than
as of a king on earth; and of the Lord, than as of the son
of a king, who is heir of the kingdom. That the simple
have such an idea, is very manifest from the idea of the
Lord's apostles themselves concerning His kingdom; for
at first they believed, like the rest of the Jews, that the
Lord, as being the Messiah, would be the greatest king
upon earth, and would raise them to a height of glory above
all nations and people on the universal globe. But when
they heard from the Lord Himself, that His kingdom was
not on earth, but in heaven; then neither could they think
any other than that His kingdom in heaven was to be alto
gether as a kingdom on earth; wherefore also James and
John asked, that in His kingdom one might sit on the right
hand, and the other on the left ; and the rest of the apos
tles, who were also willing to become great in that king
dom, had indignation, and disputed among themselves
which of them should be greatest there ; and whereas such
an idea was inherent in them and could not be extirpated,
the Lord also said to them that they should sit on twelve
thrones, to judge the twelve tribes of Israel; on which
occasion, what was meant of the Lord by twelve thrones,
by twelve tribes, and by judgment, they knew not. From
these considerations now, it may be manifest what, and
whence, is the common idea concerning the Lord's media
tion and intercession with the Father. But he who knows
the interior things of the Word hath altogether another
notion concerning the Lord's mediation, and concerning
his intercession, viz: that he doth not intercede as a son
with a father, a king on earth, but as the Lord of the uni
verse with Himself^* and as Qod from Plimself; for the
* The Humanity is the body, the Divinity the soul ; the soul assumes the
body, in order that, through this intermediation or intercession, it may become
visible to the creature, and hold communion with it, just as the soul of man is
enabled to hold communion with its fellow creatures on earth, through the me
diation or intercession of the body. The soul and tlie body are not two per
sons, but one; In like manner the Humanity is not a separate person from the
Divinity, still it is the Humanity which intercedes.

DOCTRINES. 45
Father and He are not two, but are one, as Himself
teaches. (John xiv. 8' — 11.) The reason why he is called
Mediator and Intercessor, is, because by the Son is meant
Divine Truth, and by the Father Divine Good, and media
tion is effected by Divine Truth, for by it is given access
to Divine Good: for Divine Good cannot be acceded to
(or approached,) because it is as the fire of the sun; but
Divine Truth can be acceded to, because this is as light ¦
thence derived, which gives passage and access to man's
sight, which is grounded in faith. Hence it may be mani
fest, what is to be understood by Mediation and Interces
sion. It may be expedient, further, to say from what
ground it is, that the Lord himself, who is the Divine Good
itself and the sun itself of heaven, is called a Mediator and
Intercessor with the Father. The Lord, when He ^yas in
the world, before that He was fully glorified, was Divine
Truth; wherefore at that time there was Mediation, and
He interceded with the Father, that is, with the Divine
Good itself, (John xiv. 16, 17; xvii. 9, 15, 17;) but after
that He was glorified as to the Human (principle,) then he
is called Mediator and Intercessor from this ground, be
cause no one can think of the Divine (being) Himself,
unless he forms to himself the idea of a Divine Man, still
less can any one be conjoined by love to the Divine (being)
Himself, except by such an idea. If any one, without the
idea of a Divine Man, thinks of the Divine (being) Himself,
he thinks indeterminately, and an indeterminate idea is no
idea; or he conceives an idea of the Divine (being) from
the visible universe, without an end, or with an end in
what is obscure, which idea conjoins itself with the idea of
the worshippers of nature; it also falls into nature, and
thereby becomes -no idea. Hence it is evident, that there
would not be any conjunction with the Divine (being) by
faith nor by love. All conjunction requires an object, and
the conjunction effected is according to the quality of the
object; hence it is that the Lord, as to the Divine Human
(principle,) is called a Mediator and Intercessor, but me
diates and intercedes with Himself That the Divine
(principle) Itself cannot be apprehended by any idea, is
manifest from the Lord's words in John: 'No one hath
seen God at any time; the Only Begotten Son, who is in
the bosom of the Father, He hath brought Him forth to
view,' (i. 18;) and again, 'ye have neither heard the voice
of the Father at any time, nor seen his appearance,' (v. 37.)
Nevertheless, it is remarkable, that ajl who think from

46 DOCTRINES.
themselves, or from the flesh, concerning God, think of
Him indeterminately, that is, without any determinate idea;
whereas, they who think of God not from themselves, nor
from the flesh, but from the spirit, think of Him determi-
nately, that is, present to themselves an idea of the Divine
(being or principle) under a human appearance," &c.
(Arcana Coelestia, B705.)
Such being Swedenborg's views of the Trinity, Atone
ment, Mediation, and Intercession, we now proceed to a
brief notice of his doctrine of Regeneration. It is a com
mon remark by some divines, that we have nothing to do
with the manner in which Jesus Christ effected the Atone
ment; that we are as little concerned with the manner how
Regeneration is effected ; that all that we are required to
believe is, that the Atonement is eflected, that the Holy
Spirit, some how or other, does regenerate the soul; but
that both the Atonement and Regeneration are, in them
selves, inscrutable mysteries. Now it is certain, that the
manner how a thing is done, is often the most important
part of our knowledge relating to it, more especially when
we are called upon to bear our part in the work. Suppose,
then, a person were required to co-operate in the work of
his regeneration, would it be a matter of no importance to
him, to know how the work was effected? Certainly, if he
had nothing to do with it, any inquiry upon the subject
might be considered to originate in folly and presumption,
since it could not serve any practical purpose; but where
we lay it down as a first principle, that certain doctrines,
which others consider we have no concern with, except
simply to believe, are vitally connected with our motives
and moral conduct, it is not difficult to see, that some in
quiry into the nature and manner how of the divine opera
tions, so far as they are connected with these doctrines, is
not made with a view to speculative Jjut to practical pur
poses. In such a case, we cannot consider those who
make the inquiry as the speculators, but those who first
have deprived the doctrine of its practical tendencies ; who
having evaporated it into a mere speculation, complain that
all who employ themselves in understanding it, are wasting
their time in a useless pursuit. What can be a more com
plete admission on their part, that the doctrines of Chris
tianity, as they receive them, have little or no intelligible
reference to practice ? I would, however, that this were
all; that such views of Christian doctrine, or rather such
darkness visible, produced no ill effect upon human con-

DOCTRINES. 47
duct: but, alas! I fear they either proportionably give rise
to fanaticism, by keeping the understanding in the dark,
and appealing only to the feelings, or else lead a man to a
careless unconcern with regard to truths, into which he is
told it is presumptuous to inquire, which he cannot under
stand, and which, even if he could, have no relation to his
life or actions.
In contradistinction to such views we would observe,
that since the Atonement wrought by Jesus Christ was, as
we believe, no other than the reconciliation of the Human
nature to the Divine, so this reconciliation was a progres
sive work, which was finally completed by the passion of
the cross. Jesus Christ is our great archetype, our great
exemplar, whom we are to follow; we are, therefore, called
upon to work, in ourselves, the same kind of work in our
human nature, which He wrought in His; — He after an
infinite, we after a finite, manner. Hence his glorification
is the exemplar, as well as the efficient cause of our regen
eration: but how can we follow him in the performance of
the work, if we know not what the work is, nor how it is
to be done? The way in which a thing is done, or the
mode of doing it, means only the causes employed in effect
ing it; and how can we produce the effect, unless we know
how to make use of the causes by which it is effected ?
Must not the whole process be involved in inscrutable
mystery, and if we attempt to define it, must not the defi
nition be as obscure as the thing defined? Why need we
wonder, then, that some divines should describe regenera
tion partly as follows: — "a new principle of spiritual life,
consigned over to the soul by a mysterious operation of the
Holy Ghost, which we can neither describe in words, nor
discern by its effects" — "a pure act of God's special grace,
immanent in himself, and terminating in man, limited and
determined to a particular time, and incapable of latitude
and increase, consisting of the forgiveness of sin; the gift
or earnest, or covenanted consignation, of the influence of
the Holy Ghost, considered independently of its moral
operations and legitimate effects, and a title to eternal life,
depending on the performance of certain stipulated condi
tions," &c. &c. The fact is, that, in consequence of the
introduction of erroneous principles, the truth of which is
taken for granted, the whole doctrine of Christianity
appears to have become mystified, and its power propor
tionally paralyzed. Men cannot be stimulated to action by
that of which they have no idea. It may try the faith they

48 DOCTRINES.
possess, but will never impart to them a degree which they
do not possess; their minds never can be enlightened by
unintelligible mysteries. It must be obvious, then, that the
doctrine of Regeneration, as explained by Swedenborg, is
fundamentally different from the one which is commonly
received, because it is founded on the process of the glo
rification of the Lord's Humanity, or that by which His
Humanity became Divine — adoctrine not only not understood
in the present day, but denied; the consequence is, therQ
i.s scarcely one single feature common to the two views of
Regeneration. The nature of the Lord's Humanity is fre
quently considered to be a speculative subject, as indeed
it well may be, if we see not its relation to Christian prac
tice. But when we inquire into the process by which this
infirm Humanity was glorified, we are not satisfied with
merely making the inquiry, and regarding the result as a
speculative truth; we instantly apply it to the practical
purposes of regeneration — the regeneration of our whole
being, hence of all our conduct, and of all the motives and
moral sentiments which we had previously imbibed from
the theology of the day. The common idea with regard to
Regeneration, is, that it signifies re-birth, or being born
again, and that, as a man can be naturally born but once,
so he can be spiritually born but once; the consequence is,
that Regeneration, whether supposed to take place at bap
tism, or in subsequent life, is consideied to be a simple or
single act, "incapable of latitude or increase." This
error arises, as we conceive, like all others in theology,
from a spiritual truth being naturalized, or degraded to the
level of the merely natural mind. For, though a man can
be born but once naturally, and hence also naturally can
die but once; yet, because the body can die but once, it
does not hence follo%v that the soul can die but once. The
life of the natural body is but of one nature, which never
ascends beyond that which it originally was; it can never
be elevated out of itself into a life of a higher order, for
animal or corporeal life is but one; and hence the body is
but once boijn, comes to but one perfection, and dies but
one death. The case is altogether different with the
life of the spirit, which, while we are living in this world,
may be elevated out of its plane or level, into another that
is higher, and this unceasingly. Every sinful habit to
which the soul dies is the occasion of a distinct death; and
it may have to die as many deaths as it has sins unto which
it must die. The same is true with regard to the evils in-

DOCTRINES. 49
herited by birth before they descend into ultimate acts.
As every evil has its own life in the soul, so also, in being
destroyed, it must undergo its own death; hence the soul
may die daily ; and as it may die daily, so, in a correspond
ing sense, it may be said to be born daily; hence, as there
may be a perpetual death, so may there be also a perpet
ual birth, hence a perpetual generation, and hence a per
petual regeneration. This state of generation and regen
eration is the eternal spring of the soul; and hence we see
the true reason for which, to angelic beings, heaven is a
season of perpetual spring. Besides, it is to be remem
bered, that we cannot but affix to the term regeneration a
sense more enlarged than the one it commonly bears, and
which appears to be its more immediate sense; for, prop
erly speaking, it does not signify re-birth, but re-getieration,
re-begetting, or re-production. Now, as all the processes
of growth which take place in a plant or animal, may be
said to be processes of generation, in the more enlarged
sense of that term, so every progression of the soul in
spiritual life, we consider to be a process of generation;
hence spiritual affections and thoughts are the result of
spiritual generation, and the way to purify or exalt their
nature is by, a perpetual process of regeneration. This is
no merely speculative or metaphysical doctrine, for it ne
cessarily originates this practical truth, that evil is not re
moved from the soul in an instant, as filth is washed from
the body; evil can be removed only by a death, and good
can be received only by its being generated within us;
hence there is no such thing as righteousness being imput
ed without being imparted, and the popular doctrine of
Justification by Faith, is one which we consider to be con
trary to God's Word, and contradictory to the real nature
and constitution of things. Though all tradition should
maintain that the tree of the knowledge of good and evil
might be considered as possessing the same nature with
the tree of life, by having the nature of the latter imputed
without being imparted, we must beg leave to withhold our
assent; and if this doctrine of Justification by Faith be the
article of a standing or falling church, we can make no
question to which of the two it belongs. If imputation be
salvation, there is.not a fallen spirit but might enter into
heaven. Now, if the doctrines of Christianity be practical, if they
furnish us with principles of action, then any alteration in
these doctrines implies a corresponding alteration in our
5

60 DOCTRINES.
conduct, motives, and moral sentiments. For I presume
Your Grace will not admit, that the doctrines of Chris
tianity have no relation whatever to Christian life, and that,
consequently, we may adopt any we please, without their
affecting in any manner our spiritual state ; yet this admis
sion the reader cannot but conclude that Your Grace must
make, if it be insisted on, that, in receiving the system of
Swedenborg, a man is not called upon to alter his conduct,
his motives, or his moral sentiments. This, my Lord, will
be still more demonstrable in the sequel, whatever be the
meaning attached in the Essays to the term system; for
certain it is, that Swedenborg's doctrines form as peculiar
a feature of his system, as his revelations, these revelations
being, for the most part, a further development of his doc
trines. To enter farther into the nature of the Christian
doctrines as explained by Swedenborg, would be to fill a
volume ; as however we have now very briefly adverted to
some of the most important, I must leave the reader to con
clude with regard to the rest; and to determine whether,
so far as regards the principles we have been considering,
they are the same v/ith those of what is called the Church
catholic, or whether it be not true, as Swedenborg says,
"The reason why the faith of the New Church cannot, by
any means, be together with the faith of the former or
present church, is, because they do not agree together in
the one third, no, nor even in the one tenth part." (Brief
Exposition. Section 24.)
By what we conceive to be a happy inconsistency in the
Christian community, we are enabled with pleasure to
point out sentiments occasionally prevailing among its
numbers, in perfect accordance with some of those to which
we have been adverting. It is one consolation to the
Church to know, that the hour of midnight is the hour in
which the new day commences. Hence we are thankful
to behold around us the dawn of better things; and though
the light is but dim, wherever we behold its beams, we
rejoice with exceeding great joy.
Before concluding this part of the subject, we may ob
serve, that there is a class of divines who openly deny that
the practical tendency of a doctrine (such as Your Grace
has chosen for testing the truth of the revelations of Swe
denborg, and such as we are willing to abide by,) is a true
or proper test of Christian doctrine. They question the
safety of their own speculations, upon this principle, as
well they might; they naturally object, that, upon this

DOCTRINES- 51
ground, (and I quote the words of one of them,) "those doc
trines in which it is less easy to discern any such practical
tendency are compara'tively disregarded." The doctrine
of the Tripersonality,* for instance, is one of those in
which it is not so easy to discern any practical tendency;
hence, upon the foregoing principle, it must be compara
tively disregarded ; yet it is generally admitted to be a fun
damental doctrine. Here, then, we see the illustration of
what was stated at the commencement, that at least certain
of the doctrines of Christianity, as commonly received, are
admitted to have either in whole, or in part, no intelligible
reference to practice. Here we see that not Swedenborg,
but his opponents, are the speculators, they themselves
avowing, that many of the doctrines of Christianity, as
they interpret them, are, in a greater or less degree, specu
lative; that it is dangerous to their views to be tried by the
test imposed in Your Grace's Essays; and that it is one of
our errors to submit to it — a test, nevertheless, by which
we desire to abide, and by which many of our opponents
refiise to abide — being aware of the consequences. Now
the error, we presume, does not lie with those, who, find
ing it to be no easy thing to discern in a doctrine its prac
tical tendency, are inclined to attach to it, in relation to
themselves, a secondary importance; but with those, who,
in their original conception of the doctrine, have separatecl
it from practice ; and when they have this done, and found
that it is shorn of its practical tendency and reduced to a
speculation, resort to tradition for the purpose of attaching
to it an extrinsic value, in the place of the intrinsic value
of which they have deprived it; in fine, who, as we con
scientiously believe, having undermined the temple, seek to
prop it up by external supports. For what is the practical
tendency of a doctrine ? Is it not its tendency to remove
evil, and to infuse divine love and wisdom into our hearts?
God is love, and to deprive truth of love is to deprive it of
that which makes it truth; for the practical nature of_a
truth is one and the same with the essence of a truth itself:
good is use, says Swedenborg, and truth is the form of
* Any non-practical doctrine, when made the basis of a system, becomes
relatively to that system practical, because it is upon this that the system rests.
Hence, even the doctrine of the tripersonality, or any other doctrine, however
non-practical, becomes, relatively to the system based upon It, practical. In tlie
same manner, tliere is no hypothesis, however visionary, which is not of practi
cal importance to the system which It supports. To call, however, either of
these practical, in the sense for which we are contending, is evidently Improper.

52 INTERNALSENSEOF
good. A speculation, though true, is not a truth, in the
Scripture sense of the term. Truth is living; it is the
Lord himself; and truth in us is nol faith in a proposition,
but God's image in the soul. Hence I would humbly sub
mit, that the church is no more a church for handing down
to posterity certain doctrines, which it acknowledges it
does not understand, and which it receives because tradi
tion handed them down to it, and they are supposed to be
proved by Scripture, than a man is a Christian for handing
down to posterity a Bible which his forefathers handed
down to him. The way for a church to hand down truths
to posterity is,, not merely by transmitting them as specu
lations received from tradition, or even proved by Scrip
ture, but by implanting them in the wills and understand
ings of its members, thus realizing God's image within
them, and leaving their children to inherit a nature less
prone to evil and averse to Divine goodness. The church
was not designed to be a mere garner in which the corn is
to be treasured up, but a field into which it is to be sown.
The corn should be in the earth, not locked up in the gar
ner. Our duty is not to stand at the door and keep the
key, but to be out in the field, cultivating the seed; for
truth is like seed; and what is the practical tendency of
seed ? Is it not to grow ? Is it not to develop its powers
of life ? To increase itself, and to bring forth sixty or a
hundred fold? If this be the case, then are speculative
doctrines but the tares of the church, which have the ap
pearance of genuine corn without the reality. It is true
they originally sprang from genuine seed, but it is con
fessed they bring forth nothing. In receiving the funda
mental doctrines of Christianity as subjective truths, we do
not reject any that are merely objective, because we do
not acKnowledge any such to exist; they are objective only
in proportion as they are not received into our life ; hence,
whatever relation they may have to other beings, they have
also a direct relation to man, so that we cannot disregard
any in consequence of admitting they have little or no
practical relation to us. The supposed speculative char
acter of a Christian doctrine, does not arise from the genu
ine truth' of the doctrine itself, but from the speculative
manner of viewing it. The speculativeness is not in the
doctrine, but in the church; not in the Word of God, but
in the mind of the reader. There is a great difference be
tween that view of a doctrine which we admit to be practi
cal, but relatively speculative only because we have not

THEWORDOPGOD. 63
yet practised it, and a doctrine which, in our original con
ceptions of its nature, we have deprived of all practical
relations, and, for this reason, prtfnounced to be speculative.
Upon the former principle, not upon the latter, we may
admit much of what Swedenborg has stated in his revela
tions to appear to be relatively speculative, and we shall
have occasion to illustrate this truth in the course of our
remarks. I now come to the other part of our subject, and, indeed,
to the principal object of this letter; I mean the alleged
revelations of Swedenborg, of which it is affirmed, that
they are of a non-practical character.
Your Grace observes, that Swedenborg "professed to
have been favored with most copious and distinct revela
tions, to have visited the celestial abodes, and to have con
versed with various orders of beings, of all of which he
gives minute descriptions. Yet, though his followers insist
much on the importance of believing in this pretended
revelation, it would, I believe, be difficult for them to state
even any one point in which a man is called upon to alter,
either his conduct, his motives, or his moral sentiments, in
consequence of such belief. The system furnishes abun
dant matter of faith, and food for curiosity; but has little
or no intelligible reference to practice." An ordinary
reader of the Essays might naturally, from this statement,
be disposed to presume, that the revelations alleged to be
made to Swedenborg were principally concerning the
celestial abodes, and the various orders of spiritual beings;
that, as such, whatever relation they might have to the
other world, they have no relation to this. Now the prin
cipal revelation alleged to be made to Swedenborg, is that
of The Internal Sense of the Holy Word — a revela
tion all mention of which the Essays have omitted, and
which may be considered quite independently of those to
which they allude; for even though Swedenborg's alleged
intercour.se with the spiritual world were considered only
as the day-dream of an enthusiast, yet this need not affect
the truth of the revelation of the Internal Sense of the
Holy Word as unfolded by him, the evidence of which
stands upon its own basis. So far, indeed, is this the case,
that some have fully believed in the reality of Sweden
borg's intercourse with the spiritual world, who yet do not
comprehend his explanations of the internal sense of the
Word of God; while others, who delight in his doctrines,
confess the difficulty they find in receiving all his visions.
5*

54 INTERNALSENSEOF
As, however, in the words of your Grace, "both reason
and experience shew, that it is the obvious policy of an
impostor, and the most natural delusion of a visionary, to
treat much of curious and liidden matters relative to the
divine operations, beyond what is conducive to practical
instruction," "and to be much occupied in ministering to
speculative curiosity;" as the Essays observe, that the
system of Swedenborg affords food for this curiosity; that
we ought to consider "whether the case is likely to be the
same with a real revelation," and that "such an inquiry
will be profitable and satisfactory, if fully pursued;" per
mit me to state the results of an inquiry made upon the
principles recommended by Your Grace, — an inquiry which
I have found both profitable and satisfactory; and which
has terminated in the conviction, that the Internal Sense
of the Word of God, as alleged to be revealed to Sweden
borg, does not appeal to a blind credulity, is not specula
tive, does not minister to curiosity, but has a direct intelli
gible relation to our life and conduct, and is of the highest
practical importance.
On entering, however, upon the arguments on this sub
ject, I find myself anticipated- by certain objections; objec
tions in limine, against all further revelations whatever
from the Almighty, whether through Swedenborg or any
other human medium. If these objections be well founded,
it is of no use to enter upon any inquiry into the particular
revelations alleged to have been made to Swedenborg; I
am, therefore, under the necessity of first answering such
of the objections as seem more particularly to bear against
any further revelation of the Internal Sense of the Word
of God; and the remaining ones, which more particularly
bear against any further knowledge with regard to the
spiritual world, I shall reserve as a subject for separate
consideration. With regard to objections in limine against all further
revelations whatever from the Almighty, it may first be
remarked, that they are not unusual, and are frequently
accompanied with feelings so strong, as either to prevent
any inquiry upon the subject, or to predispose the mind,
while professedly making the inquiry, against all the evi
dence adduced. When to this state are added, the dislike
of any thing in the shape of innovation, the satisfaction
which some persons find in religious knowledge as it is,
and their instinctive recoil from what does not harmonize
with their views, they come to the present argument with

tiiewordofsod. 65
all their mental powers and faculties committed to the
keeping of the strong man armed; being willing to believe
nothing, except as he may happen to allow them to believe.
These often receive the doctrine of no further revelations
with gladness; because they are thus rid of a very trouble
some thought, and their old habits and opinions are left
undisturbed. "When, therefore, they pray that they may
be led into all truth, they mean only such truth as may be
in conformity with their preconceived views; since nothing
else will they allow to be truth. Hence, their supplica
tions to the Almighty for Divine illumination, amount to
nothing more than asking Him to confirm them in their
own opinions. To such persons it would be needless to ad
dress myself. I shall, therefore, speak only to those, who,
notwithstanding their opposition to the principles of Swe
denborg, are not unwilling to make further inquiry into the
subject; to listen with an impartial mind to the evidence
adduced; and to consider it possible, that, however right
they may be in some things, they may be wrong in others;
and this, too, on points where they least suspect it.
I proceed, then, to the consideration of certain popular
objections, many of which, it appears that, in various parts
of your writings, even Your Grace has not considered un
worthy of your sanction. First, That we have light enough
already, and do not need more. Secondly, That God never
designed to make us prophets. Thirdly, That we ought
not to be wise above that which is written. Fourthly,
That man has no faculties adequate to the knowledge of
the higher divine mysteries. Fifthly, That inquiry into
them proceeds from a love of novelty. Sixthly, That there
may be new discoveries in science, but not in religion.
First, it is objected, that we have light enough already,
and do not need more.
Is not this the same with asserting, that we are good
enough already, and do not need to be better? For good
ness and truth are inseparably united; we cannot possess
one without possessing the other. Divine goodness can
not consist with a state of spiritual darknes.s; and it would
be difficult to discover how the Christian can be too much
enlightened. Assuredly, when he experiences Divine
light in his soul, he loves it so much that he prays for
more, knowing, in the language of the Psalmist, that, "in
thy light we see light." If a man says he has light enough
already, how can he think of praying for more ? The force
of the objection, however, would seem to lie only in its

56 internal sense of
ambiguity. For, if by light be meant mere head knowl
edge, or the mere science of religion, then, undoubtedly,
of this we may already have enough; nay, we may possess
too much; and further, still, it might have been better for
us if we never had any at all. If we possess any knowl
edge of religion, however practical, which nevertheless we
do not mean to practise, we have not only light enough,
but too much; if we possess any knowledge of religion
which we do not practise, but try to do so, we may have
sufficient knowledge for the present, but not for the future;
for as our practice may be always improving, so the time
may come when further knowledge may be desirable. Can
any true Christian say, that at any period he possesses too
much knowledge of himself? That the light whereby he is
enabled to discover the evils of his nature, and the purity
and holiness of God, he already possesses to a greater de
gree than is needful? Or, that he has already so much,
that, in this life, he will never need more? If this be the
case, what further proof can be given that he is in total
darkness, and that, instead of having light enough, he has
none whatever? Remove, then, the ambiguity of the ex
pression, and the objection is removed. That we may have
more light than we use, may be true. That we may desire
no more, may also be true. This may be said of the world
in its darkest and corruptest state; yet, so far from its being
a reason why God should not send further light, it may be
the very reason why he should; for if he did not, even that
we possess might be extinguished. The Jews had cer
tainly more light than they used; yet this did not prevent
our Savior from coming among them, and diffusing a still
further degree. "The light shined in darkness, and the
darkness comprehended it not." The contentment of the
world in general with the degree of light they possess, is
never any argument with Divine Providence for withhold
ing his light from the few who want more. The invalidity
of the objection is the more evident, when we consider that
the internal sense of the Holy Word, as explained by Swe
denborg, is alleged to be, not the light of mere science or
abstract knowledge; but one which reveals the mystery of
the human heart, and of the holiness of the Divine nature,
in direct relation to the present state of the church. To
affirm otherwise, is, for the present at least, to beg the
question. Nay, to assume that we have already light
enough for all practical purposes, is to beg the question;

THEWORDOPGOD. 57
for the ground of the revelations alleged to be made to
Swedenborg is, that we have not sufficient light; that God
has come and removed the candlestick of the church out of
its place ; she having put darkness for light, and light for
darkness. That a church may possess a degree of light
adequate to the practice she requires of her members, may
be true; but the question is, whether the standard of prac
tice with which she is content, be itself adequate to that
which is required of her. We shall see that it is not; that
light enough she may have for all her practical purposes,
but not for those of her Lord and Master.
It is objected, secondly, that God never designed to
make us prophets, and that it is time enough for us to have
a knowledge of events, after they are fulfilled.
But is not this as much as to say, that if a man warned
us beforehand of our house being robbed, it would be
early enough for us to notice the warning after the rob
bery had been effected? For our Lord declares, that he
will "come as a thief in the night," "and at such an hour
as we look not for him." Suppose any one should warn
us of the coming of a flood, which, unless we escaped,
would inevitably destroy us; should we act as reasonable
creatures, if we answered, that it was time enough to obey
the warning after the event was fulfilled ? For our Lord
affirms, that "as it was in the days of Noah, so shall it be
also at the coming of the Son of Man," — "they knew not
until the flood came and swept them all away." God,
certainly, never designed to make us prophets, that we
might be enabled to foretel future historical events; nor
are the prophecies, recorded in Scripture, interpreted by
Swedenborg as relating to this subject, but only to the
spiritual state of the church, consequently, to the spiritual
state of every individual of the church. The subject of
the prophecies, therefore, is as practical to every member
of the church, as the nature of his own spiritual state; and,
if he is warned beforehand of certain errors and evils into
which, without Divine illumination, he will assuredly fall,
by reason of the darkness of the age, what subject can be
more practical to him, than the one which treats of his dan
ger? He is not called upon to foretel the future, but to
understand the present ; to give the interpretation of the
handwriting which is upon the wall. Besides, if it be time
enough to know the meaning of prophecy after the events
to which it relates are fulfilled, what if they are already

58 internal SENSE OF
fulfilled!* What if they have already given to prophecy
its interpretation! What if we are blind both to the event
and the interpretation! Many seem to imagine, that events
have only to be fulfilled, in order for us to recognise them;
and certainly, where these events are only outward or po
litical changes, such may he ihe fact, (although even in
this case, it is not necessarily so;) but where they are the
same with inward, moral, or spiritual states, great is the
mistake to suppose, that we must be necessarily aware of
them. The character of an age may be as much hid from
that age, as the character of an individual from himself.
Ge'aerally speaking, the most unfavorable period for ascer
taining it is, that of the very age itself; for the mind has
been so educated and constituted in agreement with its
.peculiarities, that it is not able to discern them; nor, per
haps, are they ever seen, until after the age has passed
away, and all the evils have been suffered, which might
otherwise have been averted. If this be the case with
regard to external political events, how much more is it the
case with regard to inward and spiritual states ; for chan
ges in the political world are comparatively easily discern
ible; the spiritual states of the church are not so dis.cerni-
ble; they are more veiled over by holy external appearan
ces, and are more deeply hidden within the soul. The
longer a state continues, also, the less is its nature likely
to be perceived ; and if it be one of error and evil, nothing
but a new communication of light to those who are willing
to receive it, can enable them to see or understand it.
After all, therefore, it is possible for us to be living during
a state of the church, of the real nature of which, even the
wisest of its members may be in — profound ignorance.
But I proceed to a third objection, which is, that ' 'we
ought not to be wise above that which is written."
Undoubtedly ; but neither ought we to be wise below that
which is written. How indifferent are some, if any of their
fellow-creatures are ignorant of what they ought to know,
if, in fine, they are wise far below what is written; how
alarmed, should any appear to them to be wise above what
is written. Now we readily grant, that to be wise above
what is written is a great evil; but the question is, what
that is which is written; and until this question be settled,
* The reader is here referred to a work entitled, "A View of the Scripture
Revelations Concerning a Future State, by a Country Pastor," particularly to
Lecture vii, where this argument is very well stated, and all that I wish is here
to avail myself of its application.

THEWORDOPGOD. 59
it will be in vain to attempt to decide, whether any given
views are above or below what is written. There are
some, however, (and I am happy not to include the Author
of the Essays,) who would seem to settle this question in
a summary manner. In determining what is written, the
rule to be observed is, as they affirm, that we are to adopt
only that sense of Scripture which is plain and obvious.
This, uridoubtedly, seems a plausible mode; and yet it is
one which, I presume, will not bear examination. For
when we speak of the plain sense of the Word of God, it
may be asked, plain to whom? To the natural man, or to
the spiritual? Even in regard to historical facts. Your
Grace has well shewn, how a person, in the present day,
may be mistaken in speaking of the plain sense of Scrip
ture; and if the natural man may be mistaken in regard to
external historical facts,* how much more is he liable to
mistake, when he applies the test of plainness to internal
spiritual truths ! Assuredly, if we adopt that sense only
which is plain to the natural man, it is not very improbable
that we may adopt the wrong one; "for the natural man
perceiveth not the things of the Spirit of God, for they are
foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, for they
are spiritually discerned. ""[" If, therefore, in determining
the sense of Scripture, any person, whatever be his abili
ties or learning, uses only his natural discernment, and
appeals to what he considers the plain sense of the Word
of God; there needs no stronger proof, that the sense to
which he appeals is not the primary sense designed by the
Divine Author; and yet, on this appeal, rests the whole of
the argument generally urged by those, who speak of the
plain sense and meaning of Scripture. To the natural
man, the plainest sense is the merely historical or moral
sense: the less spiritual it is, the plainer it is to him, noth
ing being to him less plain and obvious than the spiritual
sense. To the spiritual man, however, the spiritual sense,
to the extent in which he understands it, is quite as plain
as to the natural man the natural sense. The question,
therefore, is, what is the state of mind of the person who
makes the appeal to Scripture? If it be a merely natural
state, the plainer to him be the sense of Scripture to which
* See Sermon II. Name of Emmanuel.
+ Of course, the whole of this argument is intended to apply only to those
books of Scripture In which we maintain there Is an inward sense, and which,
by way of distinction from the other books In Scripture, wa expressly denomi
nate—The Word of God.

60 INTERNAL SENSE OF
he appeals, the more natural it • is, and the less spiritual;
consequently, the farther removed from the one primarily
designed, that is to say, in those books in which a spiritual
sense exists. What was plainer to the Jews, than that,
when the Messiah was spoken of as one whose kingdom
should have no end, a temporal monarchy was meant?
And why? Because they hat! no idea of any other. The
plainest and most obvious sense of Scripture, in these pas
sages, was to them its most natural and literal sense; the
lower it was, the plainer it was. If a man says, therefore,
that he rejects a given interpretation of the Word of God,
because it is not the plain one, what is this, but making the
degree of his discernment the standard of Divine Wisdom?
If his life and conduct were more improved, how does he
know but his spiritual discernment would be increased, and
that things would be plain to him then, which are now hid
den from his view? When Divine Wisdom is represented
in the Book of Proverbs, as speaking, what is her lan
guage? "All the words of my mouth are plain" — to whom?
— "to him," it is added, "that understandeth." If a man,
therefore, says of a given interpretation of Scripture, that
it is not the plain one, he should first consider, what is the
degree of his own spiritual discernment; for the Word of
God, as to its spiritual truths, does not profess to be plainly
intelligible, except to those who can understand, any more
than objects are designed, in the natural world, to be
plainly visible, except to those who can see. Now in
Scripture it is a first principle, that the state of our spiritual
understanding depends upon the state of the heart; there
fore, in Daniel it is said, "none of the wicked shall under
stand, but the wise shall understand." To consider, there
fore, the degree of plainness with which a passage in the
Word of God may present itself to us, as a test of the only
nature and extent of its meaning, is much the same as if
the person who saw men as trees walking, should insist
upon this as the real fact, because it was the one which
was the most obvious to his eyes in the state in which they
then were.
A fourth objection is, that man has no faculties adequate
to a better knowledge of Divine mysteries.
It is much to be feared, that, in too many instances, this
is the case.. The mind has become so wedded to merely
natural things, and the reason, consequently, so darkened,
that the faculty of understanding spiritual things has be
come almost extinct. May not such an objection, however.

THE WORD OF GOD. 61
instead of being an argument against a revelation of these
mysteries, be a strong argument in its favor ? May it not
shew the necessity of some interposition on the part of
Providence, |without which, the only faculties which entitled
man to the name of a human being, would be on the verge
of being finally lost — nay, are supposed by some to be
actually extinct. Alas! what is it that makes Divine truths
such profound inscrutable mysteries ? Is it that they were
not intended for man while on this side of the grave ? — or,
that he has buried the higher powers of his soul in a selfish
and sensual nature, which averts itself from spiritual things,
and is incompetent to understand them? Ought we not, at
least, to, inquire how far this may be the case? How far
the mysteriousness of Christian doctrine, which persons
often allude to, originates from the infinitude of Divine
truth, and how far, from the carnal state of our own minds ?
Ought we not to ask, whether the darkness be only in the
object, or also in the eye that looks at it? — whether the
darkness be that of night to an eye that is open, or that of
day to an eye that is closed.? — Is not light itself as dark
ness, when we are blind? Have we not yet learnt that
man has spiritual faculties as well as natural? Yea, that
natural faculties were given him, in order that he might
become spiritual ?
But it is said, finite faculties can never comprehend what
is infinite. And can they ever comprehend -what is finite?
Can the finite comprehend the finite any more than it can
comprehend The Infinite? Can it rightly understand the
finite at all, except in proportion as it beholds in it The In
finite ? Surely, as in regard to the comprehension of The
Infinite, the highest and the lowest faculties are upon a
level; so, in regard to the comprehension of the finite, the
case is the same ; for to comprehend the finite, is, in fact,
to comprehend The Infinite. But because we cannot com
prehend the finite, is that any reason why we should cease
to advance in our knowledge respecting it? And because
we cannot comprehend The Infinite, must we, therefore,
cease to advance in our knowledge of God ? Or, if we do
not, must we be considered, when attempting to know
Him, as attempting to comprehend Him? The angels are
finite as well as we ; and in relation to The Infinite, stand
upon the. same ground as we do, having no more faculty
than ourselves of perfect comprehension. The highest
angel, perhaps, never could possess a wisdom adequate to
that displayed in the creation of the smallest leaflet. We
6

62 ^ INTERNALSENSEOF
never, perhaps, can fully comprehend ourselves; but Your
Grace will admit, that all these are no just reasons for
never attempting to know the state of our hearts, the laws
of the phenomena of nature, or the perfections of the Deity.
And if these are no sufficient reasons) where are we to
stop ? — who is to draw the boundary line ? May it not be
affirmed, that the principal thing which, in spiritual mat
ters, limits the understanding, is the state of the heart? I
say, the principal thing; because, undoubtedly, the very
condition of our being is itself somewhere a limit. But let
ns not confound this condition, imposed by Providence,
with that which we have imposed upon ourselves. It is
time enough to consider the limit imposed by Providence,
when we have arrived at it. Besides, to place a limit to
the spiritual sight, is to place a limit to the spiritual life.
To say, "hitherto shalt thou see; and no further," is to
say, "hitherto shalt thou be holy, and no fiirther;" for as
the truth cannot be in us without goodness, so we cannot
have genuine goodness without truth. In the Divine order
of things the two cannot be separated. To place a limit,
therefore, to our advance in truth, is to place a limit to our
advance in goodness. How darkly do many reason upon
this subject, speaking of the spiritual faculties as they do
of the natural! — of ability to comprehend spiritual things as
they do of natural talent and genius! — ^not recollecting that,
as natural talent is given them by natural birth, so spiritual
talent can be given them only by spiritual birth; and that
it is only in proportion as a man is regenerated, that he
can see the kingdom of God. Mistaking, as they do, the
merely natural faculties for the spiritual; "and then, endeav
oring with the natural to comprehend spiritual things, one
attempt, of course, fails after another; their labors are all
fruitless; and the truth at which they are aiming, is, con
sequently, declared to be wholly beyond the reach of man,
never designed by Providence to be known, written only
with a view to try our faith, and never intended to be other
wise than — inscrutable mystery; that, hence, it is the part
of the humble tnind to be content with a state of profound
ignorance, and only of a presumptuous inquirer to seek for
more Divine light. Undoubtedly, they are right, if the
person seeks for Divine knowledge in their way, or upon
tluir principles . But in coming to their conclusion, this is
the point they assume. Now, we reject those merely nat
ural ideas, which they would carry into the investigation
of Divine trtith. We know that a spiritual mind only can

THE WORD OP GOD. 63
have a saving knowledge of spiritual things, and this is the
only ground upon which we attempt to acquire that knowl
edge. Besides, are we quite sure that confessed ignorance
of spiritual things is always a sign of humility ? May it
not be the sign of that merely natural state of mind, to
which we have been adverting? — of that indocility of will,
which refuses to believe, that its failure in the search of
truth, was, in the slightest degree, owing to commencing
the inquiry upon wrong principles? — or that, previous to
inquiry, it was under the influence of error, and of natural
and carnal feelings? May it not be the sign of that
humility which tacitly says, "If I cannot find out the truth
upon the principles I now hold, I will not attempt to find it
out at all: it shall be consistent with my present views, or
else I will reject it; I will maintain that it is inscrutable
mystery, and that every one who attempts to inquire into
it, is actuated by a spirit of curiosity or presumption."
Yet, what says an* eminent philosopher upon this subject?
"It is madness and a contradiction, to expect that things,
which were never yet performed, should be effected, except
by means hitherto untried."
Upon what ground, moreover, does any person maintain
that such a knowledge would be speculative, or not prac
tical ? How can he maintain it to be so, if he begins with
declaring the whole subject to be a mystery, and that, as
such, he knows nothing of the matter? If he had pretend
ed to undferstand the mystery, and having this done, clearly
perceived that it had no relation to practice, he would be
justified in affirming such a knowledge to be speculative,
and- not practical; but when he begins with declaring him
self to be ignorant of the subject, why should he proceed
to pronounce upon it with as much confidence as if he un
derstood it? The explanations givenby others, he may,
indeed, pronounce to be speculative, or non-practical, so
far as he understands them; particularly, when he believes
they are untrue; but has he, therefore, a right to assume,
that no true explanation of the subject can be practical?
Or, that the subject is one with which we are not con
cerned? To pronounce every thing in religion, with which we
happen to be unacquainted, to be speculative and non-
practical, appears, then, to be a premature proceeding. If
the subject be one upon which we confess that we are
* Lord Bacon, Novum Organura — Apophtliegm, vi.

64 INTERNAL SENSE OP
entirely in the dark, how can we come to any other con
clusion than that of Bishop Butler; who, speaking of the
economy of the universe and the course of nature, of which
he says we are confessedly ignorant, &c., observes,* " What
would be the consequence if we could really get an insight into
these things, is very uncertain; ivhether it would assist ua in,
or, divert us from, what we have to do in this present state."'f
This, I conceive, then, to be the only conclusion to which
the distinguished Author of the Essays is entitled on the
present occasion. I respectfully submit, that he is not
justified in assuming, that what is alleged to be unknown in
religion, or unrevealed, would, if known, be non-practical;
and then proceed to hold up to view those, who believe
these mysteries to be revealed, as, necessarily, mere specu
lators. All that he is entitled to is, the mere doubt and
uncertainty whether such a knowledge would be practical
or not. He has assumed that it would be non-practical,
and this mere assumption vitiates, as I humbly conceive, the
whole of the argument which is founded upon it. As to
the positive affirmation, that what Swedenborg has written
upon the subject is non-practical, the truth of this will be
ascertained in the sequel; and, again, as to the objection,
that had the subject been practical, God would long since
have revealed it, this, it will be seen, is reserved for a
separate reply.
In the mean time, it may be well to repeat the question,
why ignorance alone should be considered as consistent
with humility ? True it is, that this present world is but
the infancy of our being; that, as such, know what we
may, we are, after all, but children. It should, however,
be considered, that the very design of Divine knowledge is
more and more to make us children. None was so little a
child as Jesus himself Arrayed in all the majesty of his
glory, even now none is so little a child as He: no seraph
so lowly, yet none so wise; for with whatever humility the
angels may bow before his throne, it is a humility which
first comethfrom that throne before which they bow; and
if in this world the smile of the infant be that which most
directly reflects the Majesty of the Most High, so have
always the wisest and the best men been most truly chil
dren; and though filled with the light of the glory of God,
yet always have they most cohffessed their ignorance.
Their knowledge has taught them to see that, which, with-
* Sermon on the Ignorance of Man. t li^id.

THEWORDOPGOD. 65
out their knowledge, they could not see, the all-sufficiency
of the Creator, the nothingness of the creature; none,
therefore, can more truly say with the Psalmist, "Lord, I
am not high-minded: I have no proud looks; I do not
exercise myself in great matters which are too high for
me; but I refrain my soul and keep it low; like as a child
that is weaned from his mother; yea, my soul is even as a
weaned child," (Psalm cxxxi.) Let us not, then, suppose,
that the ignorance confessed by wisdom, is the same with
the ignorance of the infant or child in its natural state.
"There are some," says Swedenborg* "who imagine gen
uine innocence to be the same with that of natural infancy;
by reason of what the Lord said concerning infants, that
'of such is the kingdom of heaven;' and that they, who do
not become as infants, cannot enter into the kingdom of
heaven. But they who give in to such imagination, are
unacquainted with the internal sense of The Word; and,
consequently, with what is meant by infancy. By infancy
is meant, the innocence of intelligence and wisdom; which
is such, that they who possess it acknowledge themselves
to have life from the Lord alone, and that the Lord is their
only Father; for man is man by virtue of the intelligence
of truth and the wisdom of good, which he hath solely from
the Lord. Real essential innocence, which in the Word
is called infancy, hath no existence, or abode, but in wis
dom; insomuch that, the wiser any one becomes, so much
the more innocent he is: wherefore, the Lord is essential
innocence, because he is essential wisdom," (Arc. Coel.
2305.) — I shall only add, that the progress from natural to
spiritual innocence, as unfolded by Swedenborg, appears
to me profoundly interesting; and, as I believe, of the
deepest importance to those, who desire to walk in the way
which leads to the mind of Jesus.
These observations enable me now to answer an objec
tion, which is stated in the second Essay, p. 165. Speak
ing of the revelation of God in Christ Jesus, it is observed,
"Our views, indeed, on this awful subject must, after all, he
indistinct, confused, and imperfect; but if they are better
than we could otherwise have attained, and are the utmost
that we can or need attain, the object is sufficiently accom
plished." "We have here an acknowledgment, that the
principles upon which the Divine Nature is generally con
templated, lead to confused and indistinct views; and we
have already pointed out the cause of this effect. So long
as the error is committed, of contemplating the Humanity
6*

66 INTERNAL SENSE OF
of the Lord as finite and creaturely, and hence, of contem
plating the Divinity out of the Humanity, or the Humanity
out of the Divinity, it is impossible to be otherwise. I
grant that, if this obscurity, indistinctness, and confusion,
be the utmost that in this life we can or need attain, a
better knowledge of God is in this world unnecessary; and
that we have a good a priori argument against frirther
light. This, however, is a point which the Essays assume;
but to which we cannot assent.* It is added, however,
"and, indeed, if any one had clear, distinct, and complete
views of the DivineTJeing, this would alone be a sufficient
proof to me that they were incorrect views." Now, if by
complete be meant adequate, it is readily granted that we
can never have adequate views of the Deity; inasmuch as,
what is finite can never be adequate to what is infinite.
Nevertheless, this does not imply, as I humbly conceive,
that all our views of the Deity must be necessarily obscure,
confused, and indistinct. An idea may, I presume, be very
inadequate, without being either indistinct or confused.
"We may have a clear and distinct idea of a thing to a cer
tain extent, beyond ^vhich the idea may indeed be obscure
and confused. The point np to which we may have clear
ideas of Divine Truth, is the degree of goodness at which
we have arrived, and beyond which our views become
obscure and indistinct. Whether in regard to man or
angel, the rule holds equally good, that "the pure in heart
only shall see God." Their ideas of God are true, dear,
and distinct, according to the degree of purity to which
* Authors sometimes speak, not only of the impossibility of knowing God as
he Is in himself, but of tlie impossibility of knowing the human mind, or any
object in creation, as It Is in itself. Now the expression, "as if is in itself,"
if rightly understood, may be unobjectionable, and a convenient mode of speak
ing ; but still. If by the terms, as it is in itself, he meant, as it Is independently
of any relation to any thing else, Swedenborg shews, that there is no such thing
created. There Is no such thing as an irrelative essence or substance, or any
independent being; and, therefore, the very idea of contemplating a tiling as
that which it is not, appears to be In-tdmlsslble. Every thing in this visible
world is but an efiject ; and to attempt to know the eifeet as it is in itself, or in
dependently of any end or cause, is to attempt a knowledge of that which Is not
and cannot lie, nay; which Implies a contradiction. To speak, therefore, of a
thing as it Is In Itseli^ or. Independently of any relations. Is much the same
thing, as to speak of a branch as It is In Itself, or a leaf as It Is In Itself, the
eye or the heart, as it is in itself; for it is a iirst principle with Swedenborg,
that everything Is In its order; and order implits relation; the higher we
ascend In tracing the essences of things, the higher is the order of relations at
which we arrive; the essence in a lower degree being a universal in relation to
the particulars below it, but a particular In relation to tlie universal above it,
or to the essence In a higher degree. This, however, cannot be understood
without a perusal of his works.

THEWORDOPGOD. 67
they have attained. Nevertheless, as in relation to the
Divine purity, the very heavens are unclean in the sight of
God, so, in relation to the Divine glory, the light of the
highest angel is comparatively darkness; still, we should
scarcely be justified in saying, that Emgelic perceptions
were dark, indistinct, and confused. The same rule holds
in regard to man, although it is capable of being exempli
fied in him only in a lower degree. There is a point up to
which a good man has a clear idea of Divine Truth, and
beyond which it becomes obscure; a greater clearness in
his perception requiring a higher degree of good than that
to which be has yet attained. Nevertheless, the purer be
the good to which he attains, the clearer will be the per
ception at which he arrives. This is true with regard to
his condition, both in this world and in the next. Hence,
Swedenborg observes, (Arcana Coelestia, 3833,)"During
man's initiation into truth, and thence into good, all that he
learns at this time is obscure to him; but when good is
conjoined thereto, and he thence respects truth, in this
case, all is clear to him; and this successively more and
more. For now he is no longer in doubt whether a thing
be, or whether it be so; but he knows that it is, and that
it is so. When man is in this state, he then begins to
know innumerable things; for he proceeds, in this case,
from the good and truth which he believes and perceives,
as from a centre to the circumferences; and in proportion
as he proceeds, in the same proportion he sees the things
which are round about; and successively extends his
views, by a continual removal and dilatation of the bounda
ries thereof. Henceforth, also, he commences from every
object in the space within those boundaries; and hence, as
from new centres, he produces new circumferences, and so
forth. By this means, the light of truth derived from good
increases immensely, and becomes as a continuous lucid
principle; for, in this case, he is in the light of heaven,
which is from the Lord. But with such as are in doubt
and in disquisition whether a thing be, and whether it be
so, these innumerable, yea, indefinite things, do not at all
appear. All and singular things are to them obscure, and
are scarce respected as one principle really existing, but
rather as one principle whose existence is doubtfiil. In
such a state is human wisdom and intelligence at this day;
when he is deemed wise who can reason with ingenuity
whether a thing exists; and he is deemed still wiser, who
can reason in proof of its non-existence. As, for example;

68 INTERNAL SENSE OP
in respect to this question, whether there exists an internal
sense of the Word which is called mystical ; until this is
believed, it is impossible for any one to attain the least
knowledge of those innumerable things which are in the
Internal Sense, and which are so many as to fill the Uni-
. versal Heaven with an infinite variety. So, also, in regard
-to the Divine Providence ; he who reasons concerning it,
whether it be only universal and not extended to particular
things, cannot possibly become acquainted with the innu
merable arcana respecting Providence, which are as many
in number as the contingencies of every one's life, from
first to last, and from the creation of the world to its end,
yea, to eternity. To' take yet another example: he who
reasons whether it be possible for any one to be principled
in good, by reason that the will of man js radically deprav
ed, cannot possibly know all the arcana relating to regen
eration, nor even that a new will is implanted by the Lord,
together with the arcana of such implantation; and so in
all other cases. Hence it may be clearly seen, in what
obscurity such persons are, and that they do not even see,
much less touch, the first threshhold of wisdom."
The fifth popular objection is, that our reception of the
revelations of Swedenborg, proceeds from a love of nov
elty. Your Grace observes, that even the early converts to
Christianity were led astray by a spirit of innovation; and
that, (Bampton Lectures, page 78,) "the danger which
they withstood, though then peculiarly strong, is not now,
nor ever will be, removed, while human nature remains the
same. Most sedulously are we still bound to guard against
the temptation of novelty, when we consider that it had
power to seduce even the hearers of the apostles them
selves. With this view, we must constantly bear in mind,
that, however the case may be with other subjects, in reli
gion, whatever appears to be new, if it relate to any point
of considerable importance, carries with it, so far, a pre
sumption against its being right."
That a mere love of novelty is to be deprecated, there is
no doubt, and more particularly in our search after Him
who is "the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever." In
this observation, every sincere Christian must agree with
Your Grace. It is certain, however, that as many love a
thing only because it is new, so also that with these per
sons, as soon as the novelty is gone, the opinion is apt to
be readily parted with. I am not aware, however, that

THEWORDOPGOD. 69
this is the case with those who receive the writings of
Swedenborg; but have good reason to believe the contrary.
The quiet, steady, unwavering state of mind which is man
ifested by those who have been principled in these writings,
is a fact so remarkable, as not to have escaped the atten
tion of many of our opponents. With regard, however, to
a mere love of novelty, it will be readily granted by Your
Grace, that, although it is an error, it is not the only error
to be avoided; inasmuch as we are also called upon sedu
lously to guard against a mere love of antiquity. The early
Christians could not so fully display this failing, because
the church was then in its infancy; the principle, there
fore, could not be fully developed till subsequent ages,
when the church had become somewhat older. It is, how
ever, certain, that as some persons lo.ve what is new only
because it is new, so others love what is old only because
it is old. In so doing, they have this advantage, that, be
ing always stationary, they can assume the appearance of
what is sometimes, undoubtedly, a great virtue, a stability
and fixity of mind; an immovable persistence in which,
they represent as walking in the old ways, and abiding in
the faith once delivered to the saints. There is nothing,
however, in which persons are more apt to be deceived by
appearances, than in the case of those, who, in thus adher--
ing to antiquity, are presumed to have a fixity and stability
of principle. It is often for the very reason that they have
no such thing, that they are glad to cling to any thing
which appears to be stationary, and hence to what appears
to be old. They are like a vessel without rudder or com
pass ; and hence feel themselves safe only in harbor, it may
be, drawn up upon shore, and there made secure; nothing be
ing so much dreaded by them, as contact with the element
upon which they were designed to be useful. When soci
ety in general is formed of this class, they who receive
what appears to be new become the exceptions; hence
their principles are more the subject of notice, and a love
of novelty becomes the theme of general reprobation, while
there is an utter silence with regard to the love of antiqui
ty. Besides, in this oa.se, the errors of those who are mis
led by novelty, are errors in detail, errors of individuals.
The errors of those who are seduced by a love of antiquity,
are errors in mass. The ruin of ten minds by a love of
novelty is ten separate events; the ruin of a society, nation,
or church, by a mere love of antiquity, is only a single
event.

70 INTERNAL SENSE OF
That which is alleged to be novel, is, however, too often
judged to be so in relation to that which is common, not in
relation to that which is old. Considered in relation to
that which is common, it may be novel; considered in rela
tion to that which is old, it may not be so ; for, instead of
being any thing new, it may be only the old revived. Even,
however, the love of antiquity is often not so strong as the
love of what is common; for it is frequently the case, that,
however old a thing may be, if it be not commonly adopted,
neither its excellence nor its antiquity will be of any avail
in introducing it into -practice . The approbation of antiqui
ty is only the approbation of the dead; the approbation of
society, as it is, is the approbation of the living; and we
know how strong a motive to action has been always the
love of the praise of men, particularly the praise of the liv
ing. Now I will not say, that a person might not read the
revelations of Swedenborg out of a love of novelty; but it
will be seen in the sequel, that there are too many barriers
in the way to permit him, finally, to receive them upon this
principle ; and that it is as absurd to suppose, that a person
does so from a mere love of novelty, as to suppose, that it
is a mere love of novelty which induces the natural man to
become spiritual. It is, however, singular, that many,
when arguing upon the subject of doctrinal novelties, should
entirely forget the possibility or probability of any new reve
lation; and treat the whole subject as if every one admit
ted, that no such promise in Scripture had ever been made,
or as if no rational man had ever believed it; for if it be
true that a doctrine is false because it isnew, or because
no one had any opportunity before of considering whether
it were true, it necessarily follows, that any alleged revela
tion which shall pretend to any thing new, come with what
authority it may, is justly entitled, on that very account, to
be considered as the greatest delusion. Besities, although
a mere love of novelty deserves to be condemned, yet, as
one extreme is apt to give rise to another, may we not ask,
whether it is not possible that the blind love of novelty in
some, may not be produced by the blind love of antiquity
in others? May not, in fine, a candid mind ask, how far
the following observation, which Lord Bacon applied to the
arts and sciences, is applicable to the theology of the day?
" If a man turn his eyes to the library, he may, perhaps, be
surprised at the immense variety of books he finds; but,
upon examining and diligently weighing their matters and
contents, be will be struck with amazement on the, other

THE WORD OP GOD. 71
side; and, after finding no end of repetitions, but that meh
continually treat and speak the same things over and over
again, fall from his admiration of the variety into a wonder
at the want and scantmess of those things, which have hith
erto detained and possessed the minds of men." Did not
this great genius frequently deplore that shew of variety in
scientific works, which, upon examination, resolved itself
into infinite repetitions of a few things, or numerous appli
cations of a few principles differently dressed and modelled,
according to particular humors, fashions, and exigencies?
(Nov. Org. Ap. 85.)
A shxth objection, to which I now advert, is One which is
not unfrequently advanced by divines, namely, that discov
eries maybe made in science and philosophy, because these
are subjects proper to the exercise of human reason; but
that God, having made a final revelation, which in no wise
resulted from any exercise of our faculties, no discoveries
of imp^tance in Christianity can in future be made, nor
can any more be expected.
In order to meet the objection fairly, allow me to quote
Your Grace's words. "In philosophy we know not that
there may not hereafter be discoveries made, even of great
er magnitude and importance than all that have gone be
fore; so that there, though a rash prejudice in favor of
every thing new is to be avoided, the pursuit of novelty and
truth may often chance to coincide. In religion, on the
contrary, a full and final revelation having been made, no
discovery, properly so called, of any high importance, is
to be expected; not merely, because the book which con
tains all we know of the Divine will has been so long
before us, (for so also has the book of nature, in which we
are nevertheless daily reading new truths which had escap
ed the researches of our predecessors,) but because that
book was designed by the Almighty to convey such in
struction as he judged needful lor all; which purpose it
would not have answered, had its true meaning in essen
tial points been hidden until now." (Bampton Lectures,
page 79.)
Let us Suppose the case of a person cultivating science
and philosophy, not from a love of novelty, but with a view
of improving his mind and acquiring useful knowledge. It
will doubtless be granted, that, between a true religion on
the one hand, and tru« science and philosophy on the other,
there is some connection, and not only so, but a close con
nection. If this be the case, is it reasonable to suppose,

72 INTERNAL SENSE OF
that discoveries of great magnitude and importance can be
made in science and philosophy, without producing any
changes in our views of religion ? Or, if this be admitted,
will it be maintained that these changes will not be of any
great importance ? If so, let us take a case, and, first,
that of science. Suppose science should discover, that there
never could have taken place such a flood as is popularly
thought to have occurred in the time of Noah; and that the
account of the creation, presented to us in the book of
Genesis, cannot possibly be true as popularly interpreted;
would the consequences arising from this circumstance oc
casion no change in our religious views of any importance ?
If they would not, (and some might think so,) let us take
the case of philosophy. Your Grace speaks, in your Bamp
ton Lectures, page 187, of the indistinct comprehension
we have, of numerous words familiarly employed in our rea
soning, "and which lead, by a very few steps, into an un
fathomable abyss of darkness. Such are Time^ Space,
Eternity, Infinity, Cause, and, in short, most of the terms
employed in the discussion of questions eyen of natural re
ligion." Now, as it is acknowledged that, "in philosophy,
we know not that there may not hereafter be discoveries
made even of greater magnitude and importance than all
that have gone before," suppose that, under the blessing of
God, philosophy should clear up our ideas upon these sub
jects; should give us true and distinct views of Time,
Space, Eternity, Infinity, Cause, and all those other things
which enter into our reasonings, both in natural and re
vealed religion, and which. Your Grace admits, are at pre
sent but a few steps removed from an unfathomable abyss of
darkness; can it be said, that if we arrived at true and
clear ideas on these subjects, no discoveries had been made,
which, in relation to religious knowledge, would be of any
great importance ? Suppose that, under the blessing of God,
a true philosophy should discover to us the nature of the in
tercourse between the soul and body, nay, in a greater or
less degree, the very nature of the soul itself, suppose a true
philosophy should discover, that there is a correspondence
between the spirit of man and the body of man, hence, be
tween the world of spirit and the world of matter ; suppose
it should discover the very nature and laws of this corres
pondence, so as to enable us to see, that material things are
types and shadows of spiritual things; suppose, above all,
that, by the Divine mercy, it furnished us with a key to
open the mysteries of God's word, and enabled us to per-

THE WORD OP GOD. 73
ceive, that His Word is capable of being interpreted upon
the same principle as His works, and that, if so interpret
ed, views are opened to us of the nature of God and the
nature of man, in comparison with which all our former
knowledge was ignorance and darkness; — can it be said
that, under such circumstances, no discoveries had been
made which would have any important influence upon our
religious ideas? This case is put hypothetically, because
the nature of the argument allows me to do so; inasmuch
as it is admitted, that "in philosophy we know not that
there may not hereafter be discoveries made even of
greater magnitude and importance than all that have gone
before." What, my Lord, if the case need not be put
hypothetically! What, if these discoveries have already
been made! What, if the light has shined in darkness, and
the darkness has comprehended it not! It was a pointed
question once asked by Swedenborg, "Will it take ages
to discover the truth, or ages to acknowledge it when dis
covered?" Does not the history of human science shew,
that in proportion as a truth is great, and transcending the
capacity of the age, it is either forgotten or rejected ?
There are those, however, who, in opposing our views,
would carry Your Grace's principles farther, perhaps, than
Your Grace might be disposed to do. The objection
founded upon new discoveries in religion and doctrinal
novelties, has been urged against us not unfrequently, and
insisted upon with no little confidence. It should be re
membered, however, that we do not profess to add to, or
to take away from, the written Word of God. That Word
we consider to be the sole foundation of a true church;
and in a stricter sense, too, than some of our opponents,
who to the written Word add, what they are pleased to
call, the unwritten — an addition not made by us, and one
we cannot but deplore. I grant we cannot make new dis
coveries of Divine truth; but can Divine truth make no
new discoveries of itself to us? What is our progress in
the Christian life, but a progress in Divine love and wis
dom? What is our progress in Divine love, but one ii-om
a lower to a higher affection ? What is our progress in
Divine wisdom, but a progress from the practice of a lower
to the practice of a higher truth? Are we always to stand
still upon the same level? Are we never to have new
thoughts or new affections? Though we can make no new
discoveries in revelation, is revelation never to make new
discoveries to us ? When we find a received truth unpro-
7

74 INTERNAL SENSE OP
ductive, js it not a sign, either that it is not genuine or that
it is dead .' — that, in fine, it is speculative, and not practi
cal ? Yet the distinguishing characteristic of a living prac
tical truth, is urged against us as a mark of speculative
and visionary doctrine; while, as might naturally be ex
pected, the sure mark of a dead and speculative doctrine,
is urged against us as the only sign of a genuine truth.
If, in rejecting what are called doctrinal novelties, a per
son means to maintain, that, under the guidance of the
Spirit of Truth, we cannot make the same progress in the
practical truths of religion as in the practical truths of sci
ence, we must be allowed to repudiate such a principle;
believing, that any church which maintains it, has arrived
at the last days of its spiritual life. For how can we go on
to perfection, if we are to stand still in wisdom? Or how
can we go on in wisdom, if we are to stand still in truth?
Is it not in religion as it is in science, that one truth dis
covers another? If, then, I find a given doctrine originat
ing something new, the newness of the discovery, so far
from being necessarily a sign of the speculative nature of
the doctrine, may be the reverse; because a dead and
speculative doctrine cannot originate any thing new and
practical, any more than a merely speculative doctrine in
science, or one, the practical application of which cannot
be seen, can give rise to a new discovery. We know that
the Truth of God is eternal and immutable; but though the
truth itself cannot change, our conceptions of it may; and
indeed become so entirely different, that, in popular lan
guage, it maybe called a new truth; more especially if,
in our original view of it, there was any radical error
which experience has enabled us to detect and remove.
We ought not, then, to confound our ideas of a truth with
the truth itself, and then maintain, that because a truth is
immutable, our ideas of it must be stationary, — and that,
consequently, there can be no new discoveries.* The
error of our opponents appears to lie in this: They first
separate doctrine from life : they make it objective, not sub
jective truth: they regard much more our faith in truth,
* I am aware tliat it is admitted by Vincentius, that, provided we keep to-tlie
received doctrines of the church, we may make as many new discoveries in
practical religion as we please. That is to say, we may make as manv new
discoveries as we please, provided we start uptsn principles upon whicli It is
impossIUe to make any. For false principles never can, of themselves, lead to
the discovery of new truths. This wc see iexemplified in the history of the
church, which certainly does not appear to haVe made much progress in this re
spect, but rather tile reverse.

THEWORDOPGOD. 75
than truth in us, growing with our growth, and strength
ening with our strength; and because they do this, and
consider truth to be extraneous or extrinsical # us, and
hence incapable of growth or enlargement, and we repudi
ate the idea, they pronounce that we are speculative and
they are practical, that we add to God's Word and they
leave it as it is . Now, we believe that the Word of God
is essential life; that whatsoever lives in us must grow,
must produce in us something new, this being the very*
sign of its life. We do not add to the Word of God, but
that Word, like seed sown in the heart, adds to itself; and
thus, we make first the discovery of the blade, then the
new discovery of the ear, then the new discovery of the
full corn in the ear; then comes the new insemination of
the newly-born seed, then the new blade of the seed newly
sown, and so on through a perpetual series of progressions
in will, wisdom, and practice. Alas! when will the natural
world cease to be a type, and the Christian an image, of
never-eiiding progression? When will corn cease to be
sown, and hence to be re-generated? When will a lower
truth cease to develop a higher; the higher, one that is
still higher, and so on through an everlasting process of
regeneration? Assuredly, if regeneration be, after all,
only "a pure act of God's special grace, immanent in him
self and terminating in man, limited and determined to a par
ticular time, and- incapable of latitude and increase," the
whole of God's spiritual creation must be virtually station
ary. If it be said to us, "This is only a dispute about
words; you mean by regeneration only what we mean by
sanctification ; " I answer, if this be the case, the argument
is at an end; but I believe the things meant are funda
mentally different; because regeneration, as we understand
it, is founded upon a doctrine fundamentally different, and
because we cannot separate spiritual life from spiritual
generation. We do not believe spiritual life to be a sim
ple expansion of the same germ, or the mere continuous
enlargement of one form; it is not like a perpetually
expanding circle, but a perpetual transition out of a lower
form into a higher; out of lower principles into higher;
out of lower affections and thoughts, however good and
true of their kind, into others still purer, and nearer to the
fountain from which they flow.
Were the real principles of the progress of Christian
life known and acted upon, there is reason to believe, we
should not be constantly hearing so much about mystery

76 INTERNAL SENSE OP
in religion. Religion, lijce science, would, indeed, always
have its mysteries; but they would not be the same myste
ries. 'We should not be perpetually walking the same
level, or pursuing the same monotonous round; beholding
the same dull cloud, hanging at the same height, over the
same precipice, in the same valley, much less gradually
sinking down towards us. We know, indeed, that "the
wind- bloweth where it listeth," that "we hear the sound
thereof, but cannot tell whence it cometh and whither it
goeth;" but we must distinguish between that condition
which necessarily belongs to a created being, and-that
which we have imposed upon ourselves. The regenera
tion of the soul, next to the glorification of the Lord's Hu
manity, is the Lord's greatest work: it is a work, the
mystery of which we never shall fully comprehend; and
yet, of which we may obtain a clearer idea in proportion to
Qur progress in Christianity. Like the traveller who
ascends the Alps, the higher he goes, the higher appear
the heights he has to ascend ; yet the broader and more
comprehensive the view which lies below him. Such is
the picture of progress in spiritual life, and hence, in new
discovery, which is made by the Christian.
Having said thus much upon the subject of novelty and
new discovery, we proceed to the objection, as thus contin
ued in the Bampton Lectures, page 80.
"If, therefore, for instance, a new mode of interpreting
or of translating Scripture be proposed to us, which mate
rially alters its doctrines from what have been uniformly
received, we have no need, however plausible it may
appear, to rest the question upon critical researches into
the ancient languages; our ready answer may be, that
Plato, or Aristotle, indeed, may have designed to write
mysteriously, and to conceal their doctrines from all but
the most acute philosophers; and that Polybius, or Livy,
may , have been accidentally misunderstood till modern
researches cleared up their narratives; but that, if the true
sense and doctrine of the Bible was not understood by any
for so many centuries, it cannot be called at least a final
revelation." Here, I cannot avoid the opportunity of expressing the
pleasure I feel, in finding that Your Grace possessed too
sound a judgment to insist upon uniformity of reception as
a criterion of the truth of Christian doctrine; and though
it is here intimated, that certain doctrines of Christianity,
as now generally understood, have been uniformly receiv-

THEWORDOPGOD. 77
ed, yet there is reason to think that, since this observation
was made, the distinguished author has availed himself of
the privilege of modifying his views upon the subject.
Still, as uniformity of reception is asserted, and an argu
ment is founded upon it, which, in an external point of
view, militates against the credit of Swedenborg's alleged
revelations; as the principle, moreover, is often insisted
upon by those who oppose us, and, indeed, is one of the
strong holds of their opposition, I may be pardoned, per
haps, for making a few observations, which, were I appeal
ing to the judgment of Your Grace only, I should consid
er altogether unnecessary.
Mention, then, is here made of doctrines which have been
uniformly received; and the question is, what these doc
trines are ? On the Primitive Doctrine of Justification, a
modern writer observes* — " When from age to age, with
out any variation, the Fathers deliver, as the sense of the
whole church, an interpretation of certain texts which ex
hibits them as declaring the doctrine of the Trinity, or the
doctrine of Christ's Godhead, or the doctrine of the Atone
ment, and the like; when, from the very beginning, in per
petual harmony, they professedly speak, not merely their*
own private sentiments, but the sentiments of the church
at large, the"]" Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus;
* Faber on the Primitive Doctrine of Justification, page 47.
t The universal consent of Fathers and Councils, &c., or the rule ** ^McrZ
semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus;" does not appear to have been un
known to the Jewish school of tradition, if we may trust to the following obser
vations in Allen's Modern Judaism, (chap, iii ,) as stated to have been derived
originally from Mainionides. "Whatever Joshua and the elders had received
from Moses was admitted without any controversy or disagreement; but if
there was any branch respecting which nothing had been delivered by Moses,
the decision proper to be made. In such a case, was discovered hy fair inference
from the original precepts, by the help of some o{lhe thirteen rules given to Moses
on Mount Sinai, which are so many ways of argumentation to elicit the true
sense of the law. In some cases of this kind there was but one opinion, and the
decision was received with universal consent;- whenever there was a difference
of seni'imeat, the opinion of the majjrity -prevailed." — "When Joshua died, all
the Interpretations which he had received from Moses, together with all that
had been made in ills time, whether settled by unanimous consent, or determin
ed by «Ae opinion qf the majority, were transmitted by him to the elders who
survived him. Those elders conveyed thern to the pt'opliets, and by one
prophet thoy were delivered to another ; so that no age passed without Inqui
ries being made into the meaning of the law, and conclusions being drawn
from it; the men of every age taking the determinations of their predecessors as
tile foundatioTis of their conclusions^ Now, respecting the foundations received by
tradition, there never was any disagreement down ta the time of the men of the
great synagogue," ^'c. Among the various ordinances to be observed, as con
tained In the Mislma, were the following : — " Interpretations received from
¦ 7*

78 INTERNALSENSEOF
I really, however mortifying such an opinion may be to
modern self-conceit, cannot help thinking, that the authori
ty of their interpretation considerably transcends the au
thority of any mere private interpretation, even of the en
lightened nineteenth century." The learned author hjid
previously observed, in the same chapter, — " It is some
what remarkable, that the Church. of England, notwith
standing she defines the doctrine of Justification after a
manner altogether different from that which has been
adopted by the Church of Rome, similarly appeals to an
tiquity as her voucher for primitive, and therefore accurate
interpretation." To these two statements allow me to add
a few more; and, first, one by Your Grace. (Essays,
page 361.) — "We may, however, perversely refuse to
take advantage of these wise provisions,* by exalting, like
the Romanists, (and I am sorry to say, some Protestants of
these days,) the Creeds, Formularies, &c. which are sanc
tioned by tradition, and by the enactments of a church, to
a level with the Scriptures. Then, indeed, we incur the
evils already spoken of, with the additional one of ' teach
ing for doctrines the commandments of men.' Such a sys
tem, accordingly, tends to foster that neglect of the study of
Scripture, that averseness to labor in the investigation of
truth, — that indolent, uninquiring acquiescence in what is
ready prepared for acceptance, in the lump, — to which man
is by nature so much disposed, and which the structure of
the Christian Scriptures seems to have been expressly de-
Moses, which are citlier Implied In the written law, or elicited from it by rea
soning, and these have never been controverted; but as soon as any one said, '1
have received it by tradition,'' the point was settled." Again, "Opinions that
had been formed by the thirteen ways of reasoning, and which were first controver
ted and afterwards determined by the majority.^^ — It appears also that the rule,
quod semper quod nhique, quod ah omnibus, was not unknown to the heathens,
who pleaded it against Christians In favor of their Idolatry. If it be replied,
" Wc prove our tradition by Scripture;" the answer is, it is reasoning in a
circle to prove tradition by Scripture, if, in so doing, we are allowed to inter
pret Scripture only by tradition. I will here add, that the consent of the
Fatliers appears to be sometimes spoken of as if it were a consent or agree
ment of their private sentiments; wliereas It seems that. In general, they re
signed all right to any private sentiments in regard to fundamental doctrines,
and considered themselves bound to consent to that which others had handed
to them on the authority of tradition. With regard to the doctrines alleged to
be thus sanctioned by tradition, authors do not appear to be agreed; some con
fining Ihcm only to the Apostles' creed ; others, including theNicene; others,
also, the Athanaslan creed; and others, a variety of other doctrines, each ac
cording to his own particular views. Some authors, again, appear to consider the
NIcene and Athanaslan creeds only as a kind of interpretation of certain parts
of the Apostles' creed.
* The omission, in Scripture, of a summary of Christian doctrine.

THEWORDOPGOD. 79
signed to guard against. And all this evil is incurred by
reliance on an infallibility, (either of some particular
Church, or some undefined universal Church,) which, after
all, is only imaginary. When we inquire, what we are to
receive as sanctioned by the unerring judgment of the
Universal Church, the answer usually given, is, ' whatever
has been believed, always, every where, and by all,' (quod
semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus;) but if those who
give this answer, are requested to make out a list of the
articles of faith which fulfil these conditions, and to prove
them to be such, they do not find it easy. They do, how
ever, often find it easy to make an unlearned Christian be
lieve, that what their church and their party hold, is to be
received by him as possessing this claim." — To take
another instance: speaking of the rule of faith adopted
by the Roman Catholics in the interpretation of the Scrip
tures, Bishop Marsh observes:*—^" It is represented as a
doctrina tradita, handed down by the Fathers of the Church,
who are considered as the depositories of this rule ; whence
it is inferred, that the expositions in which they agree, are
the true expositions of Scripture. Now all this is mere
matter of opinion, and is calculated solely to support the
credit of the Church of Rome. There is not the slightest
historical evidence that the apostles transmitted to posterity
any rule but what is recorded in the New Testament. The
Fathers, therefore, are precisely on the same footing, with
respect to the authority of their interpretations, as the com
mentators of the present age. Nor, in fact, are they uni
form in their interpretations, even in regard to doctrine,
notwithstanding the agreement alleged by the Church of
Rome; though some commentators may be selected, as well
ancient as modern, which agree on particular points, ""f —
* Interpretation of the Bible. — Lecture I, page 274.
t In making these few quotations, my only object is to shew the general
reader that the author of the Essays does not stand alone in his opinibn. I have
no desire to enter far into the revived controversy on the subject of tradition, as
it is not necessary to the present argument. TheJ who wish to read more upon
this question, may consult the works of Middleton, Chillingworth, and Water-
land; also, Vincent's Comnionitory; tlie sermons of Hawkins, Keble, and
Pearson; Newman's Popular Protestantism; Russell's Judgment of the Angli
can Church; Palmer on the Church of Christ ; the Via Media and Consensus
Omnium, by members of the Oxford convocation; also Perceval's Christian
Priesthood, &c., and ihough last, not least, an Inquiry into the Use of Church
Authority and Tradition, &c., by J. M. Capes, B. A., of Baliol College,
Oxford. , , ,. . ,
Many, however, of the foregoing authors, having attempted to establish tlie

80 INTERNAL SENSE OF
Again, Mr. Chillingworth, who is no inferior authority,
at least with some Protestants, observes, "I, for my part,
after a long, and, as I verily believe and hope, impartial
authority of tradition, il is of importance to bear in mind the moral nature of an
appeal to it, whatever be its decision, as tlie tribunal for determining the truth
of Christian doctrine. It may be observed, then, that the authority or testimo
ny of tradition is only external; and where a doctrine is inculcated and made
to rest upon external authority, the belief in the doctrine, as founded upon this
authority, is only external : and, so far as a church is composed of members
who possess only an external faith, sq far it is only an external church, and an
external chuich is one that has a name that it lives, but is dead. Suppose,
therefore, all ihe doctrines which it is alleged are sanctioned by tradition,
were true; yet, if they are received only upon the authority of tradition, or the
principle quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus ^ the church which so receives
them is a church only in name, having the form, but not the power of godliness.
The same may be said of all appeals even to Scripture; for though a man could
prove a thousand times, the doctrines of the church to be in Scripture, yet if
they are not in ^'m, if he has not the evidence or the witness of tlie Spirit
within himself, to the truth of tliose. doctrines, he is no real member of the
church of Christ. Therefore, although all the doctrines of a church could be
proVicd to be true, both from Scripture and from tradition, this would not
prove that the church was really a churcli, or that its visitation was not nigh at
hand; for, notwithslanding all this, there might be no truth in the church, and,
as such, it might still be a desolation. It will be replied, "Are we, then, in
support of the truth of a doctrine, to rest only on the internal evidence of the Spiritl
Surely if we do so, every one will follow his own way, and claim the evidence
of tlie Spirit for his own interpretations, however contradictory to those of ano
ther, who claims the same evidence." I answer, if the churcli has come
to tliis, and many afhrm that it has, it has come to its end. All unity produc
ed by external means, is only an externa! unity, a unity that may exist
where there is internal disunion; .and whei'e there is internal disunion, there is,
so far, no real church. I have here supposed the esse of the dcctrines of ihe
church to be true: but what if ihey arc untrue'? Certainly, doctrines whic^
are untrue can have no internal witness of the Spirit to their being true, and, as
such, external evidence is their proper and only basis: .they who, therefore,
plead the authority of the church and of tradition, as the foundation of -ceriaiu
doctrines, are only pursuing that course which a church would do, whose doc
trines were incapable of affording any internal evidence of their truth, or which,
in fine, were untrue. HenCe, when persons are told, that there arq certain doc
trines upon which ihey have no right to exercise a private judgment, but that
they must take them upon the authoritjftf the church, I answer, *They are lold
only what ihey would very naturally be told by a merely external church. ' Be
sides, if, in regard to certain doctrines of a church, the right of private judg
ment ought to be taken away, to prevent its members from Falling into heresies,
it follows, that no person has any right to conclude those doctrines to be true,
merely from the convictions of his own private judgment. It is inconsistent to
admit the right of private judgment in another, when this judgment happens to
coincide with the views of a given church; and to reject that right when the
private judgment differ? from them. If it be said, that we admit the right of
private judgment, but It must hot interfere with that of Fathers and Councils;
what is this, but making internal convictions, which may be the operations of
tlie Holy Spirit, subordinate to the decisions of councilsl Besides, what
makes so many afraid of the exercise of private judgmentl Why should they
discourage itl Why should they flee from it as from some fearful cnemyl How
much better would it be for them to ser-k to enlighten the judgment, than to de
stroy it. Can they think, tliat, when science is making such progress; when.

THE WORD OP GOD. 81
search of the true way to eternal happiness, do profesd
plainly that I cannot find any rest for the sole of my foot,
but on this rock only (of the Scriptures.) I see plainly,
and with my own eyes, that there are Popes against Popes,
Councils against Councils, some Fathers against others, the
same Fathers against themselves, a consent of Fathers of
one age against a consent of Fathers of another age, the
Church of one age against the Church of another age.
Traditive interpretations of Scripture are pretended, but there
are few or none to be found," Sfc. (Religion of Protestants,
chap, vi, art. 56.)
The fact, then, of uniformity of reception appears to be
disputed. The quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab omnibus,
is a rule, the existence of which is as much contested as
the doctrines it is called upon to settle. Besides, even if
it were not, its first principle, as a test of Divine truth, are
inadmissible ; inasmuch as they resolve themselves only into
those of time, space, and custom — which are far more ap
plicable to the fashions of the world, than to the doctrines
of eternal life. The always of Divine truth is not the
always of time, but of eternity: the every where is not that
of space, which is finite, but of the Spirit of Him, who is
omnipresent : and the by all, is not that of the many who
are called, but of the few who are chosen. A truth,
day after day, upon all other subjects, appeals are made to the judgment, un
derstanding, and reason ; when man Is constantly being roused and inyited to
the free exercise of his faculties ; it will be possible to repress that freedom the
moment he turns his attention to matters of religionl Perhaps, a great deal is
laid to the charge of private judgment, which properly docs not helqng to it.
Many claim this right on religious matters, who do not exercise it uTien they
have it: they are too supine, or too prejudiced: they either make no attempt to
understand what is submitted to them, or, in making the attempt, are carried
away by their feelings. After all, tlierefore, that Is said in favor of the
right of private judgment by those who maintain it, or that is laid to its
charge Ijy those who deny It, I believe the right Is comparatively but little exer
cised. Many pretend to exercise their j-udgment, who, in fact, do no such thing.
One great evil of the present day, moreover, is carelessness and unconcern in
matters of religion — a consequent readiness to leave the Important subjects of
religion to others, whose sole business they conceive it to be to judge of them;
by which means, they save themselves all trouble of thinking of theni, which
they often do, under the pretext of orthodoxy, and unwillingness to interfere
with the supposed office of the church. I will only add, that, considering the
Internal Sense of the Word of God has not been known to the church, and that
this sense is the only internal evidence we can have of the Divine Inspiration of
every part of it, tradition has doubtless sci-ved a providential purpose, in pre
serving this Word to the present period ; and, so far as the Divinity of this
Word is not received, except upon the authority of tradition, so far, undoubtedly,
tradition is allowed by Providence as a testimony to its Divine Inspiration:
this testimony, however. Is only external, and in proportion as the church rests
upon it. It is only an — external church.

82 INTERNAL SENSE OP
though only the alleged noVelty of yesterday, may have in
it more of durability, than a doctrine which has lasted from
the time of the fall : though confined only to a single spot
of earth, it may have in it more of the principle of ubiqui
ty, than an opinion which has spread itself over the globe :
though received only by one, it may have in it more of
catholicity, than an opinion which has been received by
one million. Indeed, to test the eternal truth of a doctrine
by the number of hours it lias lasted, as counted out by the
elock; the universality of its nature, by the multitude of
superficial miles over which it has extended, by the decrees
of human authority, or by the number of voices who have
proclaimed in its favor; is to employ a test which is worthy
only of that which can be so tested. Let us, then, concede
to the fashions of the world the principles of time, space,
and custom; and reserve to ourselves the only character
istics of divine truth; — its intrinsic eternity, infinity, and
universality. But it is said, " if the true sense and doctrine of the
Bible was not understood by any for so many centuries, it
cannot be called at least a final revelation."*
Perhaps, in the ideas conveyed by the term revelation,
there is a slight ambiguity . It is often used to convey one
or both of two things ; either the thing communicated, or
our apprehension of its nature. If it be meant to signify
the thing communicated, of course, a thing may be commu
nicated to us which we do not, therefore, necessarily, un
derstand. The Apocalypse of St. John, for instance, com
monly called the Book of Revelations, communicates, as
many are willing to admit, a variety of things of the mean
ing of which they have no apprehension; and hence, there
is no book of which the meaning more requires to be re
vealed, than the Book of Revelation itself. Still, in one
sense, although a person may not understand the book, he
* "The more distinct and particular knowledge of those things, the study of
which the apostle calls going on unto perfection, and of the prophetic parts of
revelation, like many parts of natural and even civil knowledge, may require
vei"y exact thought and careful consideration. The hindrances, too, of natural
and of supernatural light and knowledge, have been of the same kind. And, as
it is owned the whole scheme of iScnptureis not yet understood, so, if it ever comes
to be understood, before the restitution of all things and without miraculous in
terpositions. It must lie in the same way as natural knowledge is come at, — by
the continuance and progress of learning and of liberty, and by particular per
sons attending to, comparing, and pursuing, intimations scattered up and down
it, whicli are overlooked and disregarded by the generality of the world."
(Butler's Analogy, Part 2, chap, ill.)

THEWORDOPGOD. 83
may admit it to be a final revelation ; but if by this he
means to imply, that its meaning or interpretation is no
further to be understood, then, undoubtedly, it is not a final
revelation. Revelation, therefore, so far as the book itself
is concerned, is final ; so far as our understanding its con
tents is concerned, it is not final. This distinction, which
I cannot but think will be readily admitted, removes the
difficulty above stated. For when it is said, that the Bible
was designed by the Almighty to convey such instruction
as He judged needful for all, reference is evidently made
to the book — the book as containing instruction, and which
would fully answer its purposes as a record of the Divine
Will, without its being necessarily understood. It is not
the book that makes us understand, but the Holy Spirit
that makes us understand the book ; and I apprehend, that
the understanding of the book is left to every man's option,
and depends, in a measure, upon the means which are put
in his power. The book, therefore, would answer its pur
pose as a means of conveying instruction, even though
but few were willing to resort to the use of these means.
It certainly contains truths needful for all ; yet none are
compelled to receive it : they may, if they will, reject it :
still, although they reject it, the book, nevertheless, serves
its purpose as a record of the Divine Will, and a testimony
against them.
If, then, God has given us a book, the knowledge of whose
truths is necessary to our salvation; and if, at the same
time, we are not compelled to understand them, it follows
that, notwithstanding our possession of the book, causes
may operate to blind our eyes, and to prevent us, some in
a greater, some in a less degree, from understanding the
nature of its contents, and that, too, even in essential
points.* The question, therefore is. What are these
* "It may be objected still farther, and more generally, — 'The Scripture rep
resents the world in a state of ruin, and Christianity as an expedient to recover
it, to help in these respects where nature fails; in particular, to supply the defi-
ciences of natural light. Is it credible, tlien, that so many ages should have
been let pass, before a matter of such a sort, of so great and so general Impor
tance, was made known to mankind ; and then that it should be made known to
so small a part of Iheml Is it conceivable, that this supply should be so very
deficient, should have the like obscurity and doubtfulness, be liable to the like
perversions, in short, lie open to all tlio like objections, as the light of nature
Wlfl' Without determining how far this fact Is so, I answer. It is by no
means Incredible that It might be so, if the light of nature and of revelation be
from the same hand. Men are naturally liable to diseases, for which God, in
his good Providence, has provided natural remedies. But remedies existing in
nature have been unknown to mankind for many ages; are known but to few

84 INTERNAL SENSE OF
causes ? — and is it the fact that they have so operated ?•
Now Your Grace will admit, that all these causes may be
considered as centred in one, namely, a natural and carnal
mind. As to the question, whether this cause has operated,
so as to produce a diversity of doctrines; whether it has
made it no easy task for some to determine what doctrines
have been uniformly received, and induced others to resort
to the opinions of men, rather than to the Spirit of Truth; —
these, it appears, are tolerably certain facts. Whether,
again, it has produced a diversity of incongruous modes of
interpretation, is a question we now proceed to consider.
With respect to the quotation about to be made, it is to
be observed,_that it does not convey the sentiments merely
of an individual, but of an existing class of the Protestant
community. I refer to a work entitled "The History of
the Rise and Early Progress of Christianity;"* and, in
reading the quotation, it will be desirable to mark the sev
eral gradations by which, it seems, since the Reformation,
or the period when the church began to profess itself to be
founded upon the Scriptures only, a highly respected Di
vine of the Church of England maintains, that the estima
tion in which the inspiration of ihe Sc-riptures has been held,
has been gradually on the decline . For the convenience of
the reader, the several stages are numbered.
1. "Whilst Christians, of all denominations, have ever
agreed in admitting the inspiration of the New Testament,
on no one point, perhaps, has there been a greater diver
sity of opinion, than on the character of this inspiration.
On this diversity of view, one general reinark may be haz
arded, and it will be found, I think, warranted by histori
cal fact. In proportion as inspiration has been made to
now; probably many valuable ones are not known yet. Great has been, and
is, the obscurity and difiiculty in the nature and application of them. Circum
stances seem often to make them vei*y Improper, where they are absolutely ne
cessary. It is after long labor and study, and many unsuccessful endeavors,
that they are brought to be as useful as they are ; after high contempt and abso
lute rejection of the most useful we have ; and after disputes and doubts which
have seemed to be endless. The best remedies, too, when unskilfully, much more,
if dishonestly, applied, may produce new diseases ; and with the rightest appli
cation, the success of them is often doubtful. In many cases, they are not at
all effectual ; where they are, it is often very slowly ; and the application of them,
and the necessary regimen accompanying it, is, not uncommonly, so disagree
able, that some will not submit to them ; and satisfy themselves with the excuse,
that if they would, it is not certain whether it would be successful." (Uutler's
AnaIogy,"chap. Hi, part 2.)
* By the Rev. S. Hinds, M. A., Vice Principal of St. Alban's Hall, Oxford.
Appendix, vol. ii. Article, Inspiration of Scripture.

THE WORD OF GOD. 85
approach to a complete inditing of the Scriptures, the
Scriptures have been neglected. The consequence of the
study and application of the Bible, from the period of the Re
formation, has been, gradually and progressively to Umit ike
extent of inspiration; and, by so doing, to vindicate the holy
character of what is unquestionably of Divine origin, and
to make the application of the rule of faith more sure. It
was only perhaps in the worst ages of superstition, that an
entire inspiration of matter, words, and composition gen
erally, like that asserted of the Koran, was universally con
tended for. At the period of the Reformation, Luther
placed the first limit on this view, and contended that the
matter only was of Divine origin, the composition human,
&c. 2. "With the gradual progress of inquiry, however, and
the more diligent use of Scripture, a. further limitation came
in time to be put on scriptural inspiration. It became a
question, whether even all the matter of the Bible was to be
considered as having the stamp of Divine truth on it. The
progress of natural philosophy made it impossible, that any
thing but Wind superstition should assert this character for
all physical facts ; and the whole branch of topics which
fall .under that head, have been accordingly excluded by a
great part of Christians, &C.
3. "But one portion of the matter of the Bible, its natu
ral philosophy, having been once excluded from the sphere
of inspiration, in the view of so many learned and pious
Christians, further doubts, on similar grounds, have been
suggested respecting the statement of those historical facts,
which belong not to sacred, but to profane history. It has
been justly contended, that similar difficulties are obviated
by excluding profane history, as by excluding natural phi
losophy; and that there is no more ground for maintaining
the inspiration of the sacred writers in the one, than in the
other case, &c.
4. "It would lead to much more discussion than is com
patible with a mere note, to enter into the general ques
tions of what/w//ier limitations may and ought to be put on
the inspired character of Scripture. I will only briefly
state, that the following may perhaps, on reflection, be found
not inconsistent with the purest view of God's written word.
It may be fairly questioned, then, first, whether even its
sacred history is inspired. For ahhou^h, wherever a point
of faith or practice is involved in the historical record, in
spiration must be supposed, (else the application of the
8

86 INTERNALSENSEOF
record, as an infallible rule, must be abandoned,) yet, where
this is not the case, there seems to be no necessity for sup
posing inspiration; and by not supposing it, several difficul
ties in the attempt to harmonize the sacred historians are
removed." 6. Again: "Proceeding still on the principle, that the
truths to be believed , the material of faith, is the point to
which the control or suggestions of inspiration must have
been directed, and to which alone it is necessary for con
stituting the Bible the rule of faith, that it should be direct
ed, the reasoning of the inspired writers may be considered
safely as their own. I do not mean to impugn the reason
ing of any one passage in the apostolical writings; but
were any found open to it, the circumstance would not,
according to this view, aifect the inspired chara'cter anti
authority of the work. The assertions, not the p-roqfs, are
the proper objects of unqualified assent," &c. &c. &c.
' While, however, there are authors in the Protestant
Church, who think the only way of vindicating the Scrip
tures is that of indiscriminately lowering their inspiration,
there are others on the opposite side, who consider the only
way of doing so, is that of indiscriminately exalting it: and
it is with pain I add, there is as much confusion on this side
as on the other. A modern eminent writer,* who advo
cates the highest degree of Divine inspiration for all the
books now commonly composing our Scripture, says, "We
have no means to discover the inspiration of the Scriptures,
but by historical testimony; it cannot be discovered by any
internal evidence." "Internal evidence," he says, "may
verify the fact of inspiration, but could never discover it."
And how, according to him, does internal evidence verify
the fact of inspiration? By its moral and spiritual effects
upon the mind. True. But in what particular are these
moral and spirhual effects distinguishable from those pro
duced by other pious writings? In none, so far as we are
told. To what extent, then, are we to rely upon these
moral and spiritual eflPects, as an internal evidence of the
Divine Inspiration of the Scriptures? The learned author
thus answers the question. "j" "Richard Ba.xter seems to
have thought more judiciously on this subject than some of
his contemporaries. For my part, says he, I oould never
» Dr. Chalmers. Miraculous , lnd Internal Evidences of tlie Christian Reve
lation. Book iv, chap. 3.
t Page 405, Vol. ii.

THEWORDOPGOD. 87
boast of any such testimony, or light of the Spirit, nor rea
son neither, which, without human testimony, would have
made me believe, that the Book of Canticles is canonical
and written by Solomon, and the Book of Wisdom apocry
phal and written by Philo. Nor could I have known all or
ANY historical books such as Joshua, Judges, Ruth, Samuel,
Kings, Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, Sec, to be written by
Divine inspiration, but by tradition." When Baxter,
therefore, urges tradition, as the evidence of Inspiration,
what does Calvin s<(f? Let us hear Dr. Chalmers,* "Cal
vin antedated the matter wrong, when, in his controversy
with the learned of the Church of Rome in behalf of the
Scriptures, he made appeal to that internal evidence which
k felt and appreciated by the unlearned; at the time when,
fighting his adversaries with their own weapons, he should
have urged the argument critically and historically. He
has charged it as preposterous to plead this argument as
distinct from the internal evideiice; but we should reverse
the proposition, and call it preposterous, in this matter, to
place the internal before the external evidence." Now,
what is the external evidence? Tradition. Here, then,
we find it maintained, by one who advocates the highest
degree of Scripture Inspiration, that it is preposterous for
the Church, as a public body, to place the internal evi
dence of this inspiration before the external evidence of
Tradition ; and why ? Because, it is declared to be inade
quate to a discovery of the divinity of, at least, a consider
able portion of the Scriptures. It is true, the learned
author adds, "In the Christianization of individuals, the
experimental probation is the only one resorted to, and the
only one realized by the great majority of the household of
faith;" still no definite signs,. by which to verify the fact of
inspiration, are given us; hence we cannot help calling to
mind the statement of another distinguished writer, who
observes, "If it be said, that pious Protestants have the
witness in themselves, as a sure test to their own hearts of
the truth of Scripture, the faci is undeniable; and a suffi
cient and consoling proof is it to them, that the doctrines of
Scripture are true; but it does not prove, that the very
book we call the Bible was written, and all of it written,
by inspiration; nor does it allow us to dispense with the
external evidence of tradition, assuring us that it is so."
(Newman's Romanism and Popular Protestantism, page
» Page 418.

88 INTERNAL SENSE OP
43.) Others, again, affirm that tradition has notliing to do
with the inspiration of Scripture, but is an evidence only of
the authenticity and genuineness of the writings of which
Scripture is composed. It is obvious, then, that there is
no one settled principle in the church, with regard either to
the discovery, or the verification of the fact, of Divine In
spiration. Now, if those who advocate the highest views
of Scriptural Inspiration make admissions such as we have
quoted, of course those who adopt lower views of that In
spiration, and, much more, those wh# adopt the lowest,
cannot be supposed to consider the. Scripture as invested
with any higher authority. Indeed, the advocates of these
respective systems seem to regard each other as destroying
the Divine authority of Scripture, while intending to uphold
it. What is the consequence? the whole subject is con
verted into one mass of confusion. The term Inspiration,
and the expression Word of God, are used in scarcely any
definite sense ; the very canon of Scripture jitself is called
into question; and even with regard to those books which
are admitted to be inspired and canonical, there is no end
to the diversity of interpretations. Thus, in regard to the
canon of Scripture, it is observed by a modern writer* of
no inferior repute, but who, I believe, is not a member of
the Church of England, ^"Next in point of importance
and interest to the fact, that the sacred writers were in
spired, are the questions. What are those books, on behalf
of which the claim of Divine Inspiration is advanced ? And
what is the evidence on which we believe, that a certain
specific number are exclusively entitled. to this distinction?
It is notorious that nothing like unanimity respecting these
points prevails. Not only have they been keenly agitated
among theologians of different periods; but collections of
books, differing more or less in point of size and number,
yet all comprehended under the general name of the Holy
Bible, have obtained in several of the churches in Chris
tendom. The Scriptures, as generally received by us,
differ from those in accredited circulation among the Lu
therans; the books to which inspiration is ascribed by that
body, are not numerically the same with those for which it
is claimed by the Roman Catholics. The catalogues of
sacred writings sanctioned in the Romish and Greek
churches, also, differ from each other? while the Armenian
Bible contains more books than are to be found in any
* Dr. Henderson on Divine Inspiration, Lcctnre ix, page 449,

THEWORDOPGOD. 89
other. With respect, indeed, to the books which are com
monly circulated in this empire as Divine, and which
accord with those composing the Hebrew Bible and the
Greek New Testament, there exists no disagreement in
the creeds of the different churches. In all and each of
these creeds, the claims of the whole Scripture, to the
extent in which it is approved by us, are unhesitatingly
admitted. But, most of the foreign churches have append
ed to them, intermixed with them, or sanctioned by promot
ing their joint circulation, other books or portions, which
possess no claim to inspiration. On the other hand, ihe de
mands made on our religious regard, by some qf the books qf
ihe Old and JVew Testament, have been called in question,
both in ancient and modern times. "
With regard, again, to the interpretation of Scripture,
Bishop Marsh, in his first Lecture upon this subject, having
observed that Tradition was the acknowledged rule of faith,
guiding the Roman Church in its Interpretations, adds,
that when the early Reformers abandoned the guidance of
Tradition, they supplied its place by "Reason and Learn
ing." What Reason and Learning have done for the
Scriptures, we have been told in a foregoing extract upon
the gradual limitation of their extent of inspiration. In
regard to interpretation, however, the learned prelate
observes, page 271, "If the interpretation of Scripture
were easy and obvious, there would be little or no diver
sity in the explanations, which different commentators have
given of the same passage. But, if we compare the Greek
with the Latin commentators, we shall frequently find such
a variety of interpretation, as would appear almost impossi
ble to be extracted from the same text. If we compare the
Jewish commentators, either with the Greek, or with the
Latin, we shall find as great a variety, though a variety of
a different kind. If we compare our English commenta
tors with any of the preceding, we shall find no diminution
in the variety of interpretation. Nor do we find uniformity-,
either among commentators of the same language, op even
among commentators of the same church. It is true, that
in all things relating to doctrine and discipline,, the church
of Rome preserved, during several ages, an uniformity of
interpretation, by the commentary which was called the
Glossa Ordinaria. But when the revival of learning had
opened new sources of intelligence, and the Reformation
bad restored the right of unfettered exposition, the Glossa
Ordinaria was exchanged for new systems of interpretation;
8*

90 INTERNAL SENSE OF
from Luther and Melancthon^ from Calvin and Beza, from
Grotius and from Spanheim."
With regard to the doctrine and discipline of the church
of Rome, maintained by its uniformity of interpretation,
the learned prelate afterwards' observes, page 274, Lect.
1, "There is not the slightest historical evidence that the
apostles transmitted to posterity any rule but what is
recorded in the New Testament. The Fathers, therefore,
are precisely on the same footing with respept to the
authority of their interpretations, as the comrhentators of
the present age. Nor, in fact, are they uniform in their
interpretations even in regard to doctrine, notwithstanding
the agreement alleged by the church of Rome; though
some commentators may be selected, as well ancient and
modern", which agree on particular points."
Now, if a true church be built upon true doctrine; if
true ''ioctrine be buih only upon a true interpretation of
Scripture ; if a true interpretation of Scripture be founded
only on true ideas of inspiration; and if our views of the
inspiration of the Scriptiire constitute thus the very foun
dation of the church; we cannot but conclude, when
reflecting upon.1statements such as we have adduced, that
<<the foundations of the church are shaken." I will not
say whether a person would be right or wrong in his appli
cation of the passage; but when he meets with a fact
answering to a description, can he avoid associating the
description with the fact, and so, repeating the words of the
Scripture, "The sun shall go down over the prophets, and
the day shall be dark over them."* (Micah, iii, 6.)-^I
know it may be said, differ as t;he church may upon the
interpretation and doctrines of Scripture, there is one
thing upon which all are agreed, that "without holiness no
man shall see the Lord." Now I have great pleasure in
believing, that there have been, and are, many pious and
* If, in the present letter, I have not quoted Scripture so much as some
miglit think I ought to have done, it Is bec.iiise, i^dopting a difi'erent principle
of inspiration, we necessarily adopt a different mode of interpretation; and,
consequently, consider Scripture as often meaning something vei"}' different from
the sense In which it is commonly understood. Thus, for Instance, they who
maintain the permanency of the Protestant, or of what they, no d'oubt'consclen-
tiously, call, the infallible universal church, partly found their opinions on these
words of our Savior, "Lo! I am with you always, even lo the end of the
world," — a text we should quote as proving the end of that which they maintain
is not to come to an end. For by the end of the world, we consider to be meant
the end of the age or dispensation — an interpretation which is actually given lo
the words (by our opponents, when applied to the end of the Jewish dispensa
tion.

THE WORD OP GOD. . 91
holy men in the Christian community, with whom, there
fore, so far, we hold no controversy; but yet I believe,
that if holiness depends upon our doing the truth, the
nature of our actions will depend upon the nature* of our
principles, and, consequently, that there will be as much
difference in the nature of actions, as there is in the nature
of the principles upon which we act. When, therefore, in
addition to the confusion prevailing' in regard to the inspi
ration of Scripture, the interpretation of Scripture, and the
doctrines of Christianity, we add also that M;hich prevails
with regard to good works, or to the nature of holiness in
outward life and conduct, will not a reflecting person have
a strong tendency to call to mind those words in Isaiah,
(xxxxiv, II,) "He shall stretch out upon it the line of con
fusion."? That the line of Confusion is stretched upon the
Christian community, who ever doubted?
I have no wish to draw a picture of what the state of the
church either is, or has been. More is offered to my
acceptance than I am willing to avail myself of I shall
merely quote the description given by a distinguished
member of the church, who, so far as I am aware, has no
repute, on that account, for being an enthusiast. "In
truth," says he, "the whole course of Christianity from
the first, when we come to examine it, is but one series of
troubles and disorders. Every century is like e\ery other,
and to those who live in it seems worse than all times
before it. The church is ever ailing, and lingers on in
weakness, 'always bearing" about in the body the dying of
the Lord Jesus, that the life also of Jesus might be made
manifest in her body.' Rehgion seems ever expiring,
schisms dominant, the light of Truth dim, its adherents
scattered.* The cause .of Christ is ever in its last agony;
as though it were but a' question of time, whether it fails
finally this day, or another. The saints are ever all but
failing from the earth, and Christ all but coming; and
thus, the day of judgment is literally ever at hand; and it
is our duty ever to be looking out for it, not disappointed
that we have so often said, 'now is the moment;' and that,
at the last, contrary to our expectation. Truth has some
what rallied. Such is God's will, gathering in His elect,
first one and then another, by little and little, in the inter
vals of sunshine between storm and storm, or snatching
Ihem from the surge of evil, even when the waters rage
* Quod semper, quod ubique, quod ab .omnibus»

92 INTERN AL SENSE OP
most furiously. Well may prophets cry out, 'How long
will it be, O Lord! to the end of these wonders? how long
will this mystery proceed? how long will this perishing
world be sustained by the feeble lights which struggle for
existence in its unhealthy atmosphere?' God alone knows
the day and the hour when that will at length be, which he
is ever threatening; meanwhile, thus much of comfort do
we gain from what has been hitherto; not to despond, not
to be dismayed, not to be an.xious at the troubles which
encompass us. They have ever been; they ever shall be;
they are our portion; — 'The floods are* risen, the floods
have lift up their voice, the floods lift up their waves. The
waves of the sea are mighty, and rage horribly, but yet the
Lord who dwelleth on high is mightier.' "-^(Romanism
and Popular Protestantism, by J. Hi Newman, B. D., Fel
low of Oriel, cowcteiora.) "¦:
If, then, such be the state bf things, more particularly
if, under the present dispensation of the church, there be
no hope of any amelioration of her circumstances, may it
not be fairly asked, whether there be any enthusiasm or
fanaticism in supposing, that such a state of the church
cannot be a matter of indifference to Him who first founded
the church; that the Lord of the vineyard would have pre
vented these evils, had it been consistent with man's free
agency; that, if He could not have prevented them. He
would provide a remedy for them ? We have no reason to
think that human tradition, or human reason, or human
learning, will, of themselves, do more for the church than
they have already done. Tradition has tried its iron yoke,
and the result is — the lowest bondage. Reason gnd learning
have set the faculties free, and the result is — confusion.
Is there so far, then, no a priori argument in favor of an
additional revelation? Many, both in the i'stablished
Church and out of it, who know nothing of the writings of
Swedenborg, and whose general orthodoxy would not be
doubted by their respective followers, have thought that
some additional revelation is requisite; nay, that in the
Scriptures it is actually promised.
But it is said by some, though reason has failed, Tvhy may
we not pray to God to enlighten it? He has promised to
do so, if we faithfully ask him; and, in this case, what is
the use of a further revelation? Suppose, however, it
should happen that this revelation should be the very source
from which our reason was designed to be enlightened!
Nay, it is replied, God's design is to leave tbe reasoning

THEWORDOPGOD. 93
faculties free, and a revelation interferes with their free
dom. I answer. Why should we presume this ? Even if it
were true, shall we be content to live in moral darkness,
in order that our reasoning faculties may be left free? But
we do not admit the truth' of the objection; for may not
revelation enable us the better to exercise our rational
powers, instead of necessarily superseding them? Are not
the many excellent observations in the Essays a proof, that
revelation, instead of destroying reason, may strengthen it,
aad afford it a more ample scope for exercise ? If it were an
argument against another revelation, that it would inter
fere with the e.xercise of our rational powers, such as they
are, and that the very darkness in which we live enables us
the more to resort to the free exercise of reason, then might
we not presume that life and immortality ought never to
have been brought to light? for that, as long as men were
in the dark as to the immortality of the soul, they were ena
bled freely to exercise their reason, and come to various
conclusions, or rather conjectures, or rather doubts, upon
the subject, or, it might be, positive denials; but no matter,
SO long as the reasoning feculties were left free, to arrive
at any results they might think proper. There is, however,
one point of view, in which a revelation may be considered
as interfering with the free exercise of reason ; for in hu
man reason, unregenerated, there is a root of self-hood, the
destruction of which is supposed to be the destruction of all
freedom of the rational faculties. With such - a reason,
revelation doubtlesfe comes into collision. Even what such
a reason admits tq be true, it nevertheless rejects, if the
discovery of the truth was not its own. Hence, what vain
speculations will it not pursue with avidity, if they are but
its own offspring ! — what divine wisdom will it not reject, if
it comes not in the form of its own self-intelligence !
Supposing, then, a revelation to be made, in what is it
reasonable to presume that it would consist ? Most persons,
probably, will agree, that the Word of God is sufficient to
guide man in the way of salvation, provided there be a right
understanding jof that Word. What, therefore, is it more
reasonable to presume, than that, if a revelation should be
made, it would consist in communicating a better know
ledge of that Word ?* It is obvious, however, that if a right
* The views of the nature of the Inspiration of the Scriptures have been fre
quently .so low, and the authority of tradition has been so much exalted, that it
is very questionable whether many of the Protestant Church, in the present day,
will not refuse assent to this position. If the Scriptures are sMch as many con»

94 INTERNAL SENSE OF
knowledge of the Word of God depend upon right views of
inspiration and right principles of interpretation, the reve
lation would oonsist, either of some new principles relating
to these subjects, or some improvement of the old princi
ples. In this case, the newness of the interpretations given
to Scripture, and their opposition to the doctrines popular
ly received, so far from being an argument against their
being a divine revelation, is only what, in such a case,
might be reasonably expected; for if the revelation alleged
to be made, with the view of introducing unity into the
church, resolved itself onlv into principles which had al
ready brought confusion, then, however the more disposed
some persons might be to receive it on this account, there
would be good reason for the conclusion, that it was of a
non-practical character, or, rather, that it was helping to
increase the mischief it was intended to remove. Now
Swedenborg .has shewn, how all the evils which have origi
nated in the church, have arisen from its tendency to mere
ly natural and carnal principles; how these principles have
produced, not only contradictory interpretations of Scrip
ture, but untrue and degraded views of the nature of Divine
Inspiration itself; and we appeal to fact, in confirmation of
what he has stated.
Many authors, perhaps even most, consider that the In
spiration of the Word of God consists in the divine influ
ence exercised upon the minds of the writers; whereas,
Swedenborg considers that, however conjoined, they are
two distinct things. One consequence of the former view
is, that where the writer is acquainted with the historical
fects he records from his own personal observation, or the
testimony of others, he is considered to be in no need of in
spiration to enable him to record them; hence, that those
parts of Scripture, the writing of which may be accountod
for upon this principle, are virtually without inspiration;
while other divines, who are justly alarnied for the authori
ty of Scripture when placed upon this basis, claim for the
sacred writers, indiscriminately, a degree of supernatural
influence which their opponents rightly argue it is impossi
ble to maintain. Hence the necessity under which they
labor, in settling the authority of Scripture, of resorting to
elder them to be, ihey are not woHh any further revelation ; they arc but as a
candle in the temple, which has almost burnt to the socket, and "whoso light is
on the verge of becoming extinct. No wonder that such pei-sons should smile
at the idea of an inward and spiritual sense, capable of bcingderived from their
eontents.

THEWORDOPGOD, 93
tradition, or external evidence, where they are so wholly
at variance on the subject of any other. Now we humbly
submit, that these disputes originate* from the error, of con
founding the inspiration of the writer with the inspiration of
the thing written; of mistaking the inspiration of the Word
of God, for the inspiration of the penmen who recorded it.
The two questions we believe to be wholly distinct. If we
say the Word of God is inspired, we say what we mean;
that the thing written is inspired, independently of the mind
of the penman who wrote it. And in what does the inspi
ration of this Word consist? — In what can it consist, but in
the Divine Wisdom it contains, which alone giveth spiritual
life? " The words which I speak unto you," saith our
Savior, " they are spirit and they are life." Here is the
real principle of their inspiration. It is the revelation of
this Divine Wisdom that is truly the second coming of the
Word. In the first coming, the Word was made flesh, and
dwelt among us in person; in his second coming, he dwell
eth among us in spirit; and this second coming in power
and great glory, though within clouds, is the great and
final day in which, as King of kings and Lord of lords, the
Word of God goeth forth, conquering and to conquer."!"
* A bare enumeration of the theories of inspiration wonld, perhaps, occupy a
volume. . Tile various aspects under which it is viewed, are as diiferent as the
various theories, A few writers. Indeed, appear to include in their definition
of inspiration, the truths it conveys; but still these trndts they often consider as
identical with correctly stated historical facts, dnles, and so forth ; in fine, with
the lowest species of truth in the merely natural mind. Ordinary providential
circumstances, oriental imagery, the use of hyperboles, and an almost unbounded
license of the natural imagination, are also included under the comprehensive
term of inspiration ; not to mention that the exfiression Word of God is fre
quently used by writers' in a sense .so lax, that it is not always easy to deter
mine its meaning; and in many cases, where its meaning is determinable. It
obviously implies nothing more than, the -word of man, considered as in accord
ance with the Divine Word.
t In the Evidence of Chrislianlly, by the pious and excellent author, the
present Bishop of Chester, where he Is speaking of the first establishment of
the Christian religion, and the antecedent probability that it would be authenti
cated by divine miraculous interposition, I find, in chap. 10, page 321, the fol
lowing note. — " The cases of successful imposture or enthusiasm which some
times astonish us, are no exception to this argument. Such persons as Sweden
borg and Southcole do not introduce a new religion, but stand forward as in
terpreters of a religion before established on very diiferent grounds ; and because
that Is believed, they are listened to. If the religion were nol already believed,
these persons would gain no attention. The apostle." raised Christianity out of
nothing, and against every thing." Now I would respectfully observe, that where
persons see in the dark, objects the most dissimilar cannoi be discriminated one
from Ihe other; not however to pursue this subject, it may be added, that in
this note there appears to be a triple error. First, The Internal Sense of the
Holy Word, as revealed to Swedenborg, is absolutely the opening of a new dis-

96 INTERNALSENSEOF
The vn-itten Word, therefore, does hot derive its inspira
tion from the writer, but fVom the Living Word Himself.
This is the principle upon which we consider the canon of
Scripture to be settled, independently of any authority (f tra
dition.'^ This is the principle upon which we steer perfectly
clear of all the controversies upon the subject in the pres
ent day. This principle also furnishes us with a key to in
terpretation, and this key is analogy or correspondence,
which is adistinct, definite, and tangible method, by which
to determine, upon internal evidence, the Divine Inspiration
of every part of the Word of God. We maintain, then,
the genuine' books of Scripture to be the written Word,
even as the Divine Humanity of the Lord is the living
Word; the consequence is, we believe the written Word
of God to be as far above all other books, as the Divine
Humanity of the Lord to be above the humanity of any cre
ated being. This Word is the foundation of the church of
the New Jerusalem, the rock upon which it is built, against
which the gates of hell shall not prevail.
Supposing, then, a revelation to be made, of the kind we
have here described, we may presume that it would be one
which must have a direct relation to the improvement of our
life and conduct. Here, however, I am met by the objection,
that the writings of Swedenborg have little or no intelligi
ble reference to practice. Why have they not? I may ask.
Because practice, in general, has little or ho intelligible
reference to them. For practice, we would observe, is of
two kinds; the one relating to the mind, the other relating
to the body; the one relating to the formation of right
principles; the other to the performance of right actions.
It is a maxim with Swedenborg, that no man can perform
a right action except upon right principles; and hence, that
it is of the utmost importance to practice, that right principles
pensation ; a dispensation as different from the former, as Uie Clirlstian dispen
sation was different fi-om the Jewish. Secondly, It is nol always believed, be
cause Chrlsliamty Is already believed, but not-unfrequently because the corrup
tions of Christianity are sucli as to have begun lo produce infidelity; and hence,
it has ^leen the glory of the New Dispensation to reclaim manyi not who pre
viously believed in .tlie received doctrines of Christianity, but w'ho did not be
lieve in Ihcm at all.. Thirdly, with all due deference I would submit, that the
apostles did not raise Christianity out of nothing, though against every thing ;
for the Old Testament is the Gospel as much as the New, and of this iGospel
the Jews wcrfe in possession. -The difference between the coming of the Word
in person, and his coming in spirit. Is, that,, in the latter case, tlie evidence of
his mission is, — not miraculous,^ but moral; and is to be seen and felt in Ihe en
tire regeneration of our nature, as produced by the power of— Truth. "These
signs shall follow them that believe," &c. &c. &c.

THEWORDOPGOD. 97
should be first laid down. His writings, therefore, may be
said to form a book of principles; principles which relate
to a practice that is not, and which, in this sense, are un
doubtedly not practical; although they relate to a practice
which ought to be, and are, in this sense, most highly prac
tical. If the practice existing in the present day be light,
then, certainly, inasmuch as the works of Swedenborg do
not assist us in this practice, they are not to be consider
ed practical. To a man of the world, that only is practical
which enables him to practise the ways of the world; and
Miy thing which will not bear upon this practice, is to
him not practical; fiir, with him, the only criterion of what is
practical, is that which is generally practised, — quod semper,
quod ubique, quod ab omnibus; and if any thing be told him
which in itself is right, but which is not generally practised,
he immediately receives as speculative. Now, it is admit
ted, that the principles of Sw«denborg relate to that which is
not practised by the church, the reason of which we have
already seen; for the two things to which the internal sense
of the Word refers, as interpreted by Swedenborg, are the
glorification of the Lord's Humanity, and the regeneration
of the soul, the former being the archetype of the latter.
Now, the Divine Humanity of the Lord, as we have seen,
is denied; hence the regeneration of the soul, as founded
upon that doctrine, is also denied; and the process by
which, under any circumstances, regeneration is effected,
is declared to be an inscrutable mystery. Whether Swe
denborg's principles are true or not, is here the question; I
only say, that it is very natural to consider a work which
treats entirely of what is either denied, or is unknown as
having little or no inteIHgible reference to practice; and
this, I think, will be seen to be the true reason for which it
is considered to be non-practical. What is more unintelli
gible to a great portion of mankind than a spiritual life?
and, consequently, what appears to them less practical, and
more unintelligible, than the truths which relate to it?
Should any one attempt to describe that of which another
could as yet form no idea, would not the description appear to
him to be obscure or unintelligible, and its import non-
practical? Yet spiritual life is the sole subject of Sweden
borg's writings, and surely it has its laws, its distinct
stages, as well as natural life; but who has hitherto ven
tured clearly to point them out? If spiritual life be the life
of the will and understanding, if it be thus a voluntary and
intellectual life; it must be a life which is willed and under-
9

98 ¦ INTERNALSENSEOF
stood. It must be understood, in order to be willed ; for no
one can will to do that of which he knows and understands
nothing. Yet, I ask it with all possible deference and sub
mission, what does the church know concerning the states
and stages of spiritual life? Is not the subject avowed to
be a profound mystery? How, then, can we say of an au
thor who attempts to unfold this mystery of godliness, nay,
who has, as I may presume until it is disproved, unfolded
it, however unintelligible it may appear to some, that there
is nothing practical in his principles, or nothing peculiar in
his views of practice? It will be granted that the knoT^
ledge of the laws of the human mind is a practical know
ledge; else why do we read and recommend the writings
of various authors upon the subject? Now, what these au
thors have attempted with regard to the natural faculties
of the mind, Swedenborg has effected with regard to the
spiritual; and not only with regard to the spiritual, but
with regard to the natural also. Is it a useful and practi
cal undertaking to unfold the laws of the natural mind; and
shall an attempt, at least to unfold the laws of the spiritual
mind, have, necessarily, little or no intelligible reference to
practice? Is man, in the cultivation of his natural facul
ties, to be guided by the strictest rules; and the moment he
enters upon the cultivation of his spiritual faculties, to be
abandoned to his feelings, or left to adventure? Have nat
ural things their laws, and spiritual things none? Is it
nothing to unfold the nature of heavenly affections and
thoughts, to mark our progress in the spiritual life, and
thus to walk with our eyes open on the road that leads to
the New Jerusalem? Had the subjects of which Swedenborg
treats been well understood, there would have been little
or no occasion for his works; since they would be only the
republication of what was previously known. But may not
the very circumstance of these subjects not being under
stood, or being conceived as having little or no intelligible
reference to .practice, tend to show only how loud was the
call for his works; since truths the most practical, nay, of
the most awful importance, had come to be considered as
wholly unintelligible, or having little or no relation to man's
life or conduct?
Allow me, then, most respectfully to submit, that a brief
but fair answer has been given to the objections to the sys
tem of Swedenborg,* so far as relates to the particular part of
* It Is to be observed, that I omit the subject of conjugal love, which is one
treated of by Swedenborg In a manner so different from that in which it has been

THEWORDOPGOD. 99
it under discussion. I will, therefore, conclude this portion
of the argument with a few extracts from his writings, illustra
tive of those principles we have been considering; and show
ing how the doctrine of regeneration, as explained by him,
may, indeed, to some, be unintelligible, how it may become
intelligible, and what is its peculiar relation to practice.
"They who deny any thing, as they who deny the inter
nal sense of the Word, when they dispute or contend, must
needs dispute or contend about the existence of such a thing.
It is well known, that several disputes at this day go no
farther than this. But so long as men remain in debate
whether a thing exist, and whether it be so, it is impossi
ble to make any advance into any thing of wisdom; for in
the very thing which is the subject of debate, there are innu
merable particulars, which cannot be seen, so long as the
thing itself is not acknowledged; inasmuch as all and sin
gular the things appertaining thereto, are in such case un
known. Modern erudition scarce advances beyond these
limits of debate, viz. whether a thing exist, and whether it
be so; and, of consequence, there is an exclusion from the
intelligence of truth. As, for example, he who merely con-
ffinrls whether there e.xists an internal sense of the Word,
cannot possibly see the innumerable, yea, indefinite things
which are contained in the internal sense. Again, he who
(disputes whether charity be any thing in the church, and
whether or no the things of faith be not the all thereof, can
not possibly knowthe innumerable, yea, the indefinite, things
which are contained in charity; but remains altogether in
ignorance of what charity is. The case is the samis with
regard to a life after death, the resurrection of the dead,
the last judgment, the existence of heaven and hell. They
who only dispute whether such things exist, stand out of
the doors of wisdom so long as they dispute, and are like
persons who only knock at the door, and cannot even look
into the magiiifieent palaces of wisdom; and, 'vi'hat is sur
prising, people of this description fancy themselves wise in
comparison with others, and so much the wiser in propor
tion to their greater skill in debating whether a thing be so,
and especially in confirming themselves that it is not so;
when yet the simple, who are principled in good, and whom
such disputants despise, can perceive in a moment, without
ftny dispute, much more without learned controversy, both
generally viewed, that, had I attempted to Impart a just idea of it, this letter
must have extended to double its length. Were the principles he advocates
upon this subject alone, carried into effect, they would produce an entire revolu
tion K tlw pQudijct, motives, and moral sentiments of society.

100 INTERNAL SENSE OP
the existence of the thing, and also its nature and quality.
These latter have a common or general sense of the per
ception of truth ; whereas the former have extingaished this
sense, by such things as incline thetn first to determine
whether the thing exists. The Lord speaks both of the
former and of the latter, when he says, 'I thank thee, O
Father, Lord of heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these
things from the wise and intelligent, and revealed them
unto babes. '
" 10,551. They who are in illustration, when they read
the Word, see it from within; for their internal is open^
and the internal, when open, is the light of heaven. This
light flows in and enlightens, although man is ignorafit of
it. The reason why he is ignorant of it, is, because that
light flows in into the knowledges which are in man's memo
ry, and those knowledges are in natural light; ^nd whereas
man thinks from those knowledges as from himself, he
cannot apperceive the influx; nevertheless, he may know,
from various proofs, that he was in illustration. Howbeit,
every one is deceived who believes himself to be in illustra
tion, if he doth not love to know truth for the sake of truth,
and for the sake of the good of life, tbua, who dotk suit
love Divine Truth for the sake of life; since to live ac
cording to Divine Truths from the Word, is to love the
Lord; and from the Lord, when he is loved, comes all illus
tration. But they who have not for an end a life ac
cording to Divine Truths from the Word, but regard
honor, gain and reputation, as ends, and thus the Di-
¦vine Truths from the Word as means, cannot, in any
wise, be in any illustration; for this latter end is worldly
and corporeal, and not spiritual and celestial, and on this
account it closes the internal man; in which case, no light
can flow in from heaven and illustrate. If these believe that
they are in illustration when they read the Word, they are
altogether deceived; for they do not think from heaven, but
from the world; thus, not from the Lord, but from them
selves; and so far as they think from themselves and from
the world, so far they thmk from natural light separate
from heavenly light; and natural light separate from heav
enly light, is mere thick darkness in things spiritual. In
case these persuade themselves that they have seen any
thing from illustration, it is a fallacy; for they perceive
whether a thing be true, from no other source than from
ethers by confirmations; which is to see truth from with
out and not fVom within, or to see it from persuasive faith.
Persons of such a character may see what is false as what

THE WORD OP GOD. 101
is true, and what is true as what is false ; also, what is evil
as what is good, and what is good as what is evil. . . . The
man whose internal is open, perceives the Word spirit
ually; but this he is ignorant of whilst he lives in the
world; because his spiritual thought flows in into the natu
ral in the external man, and there presents itself to be
seen. Nevertheless, that interior thought is what illus
trates, and by which is effected influx from the Lord.
Some of the learned, also, by looking into their own
, thoughts, and, by reflection on the occasion, have observed,
that there is given with man interior thought which doth
not appear; wherefore the ideas of that thought they have
called immaterial and intellectual, which they have distin
guished from the ideas of exterior thought which appear,
calling these latter natural and material. But they knew
not, that the ideas of interior thought are spiritual, and that
when they flow down, they are turned into natural, and
appear under another species and under another habit.
From these considerations it may, in some measure, be
manifest, in what manner influx is effected, by which is
illustration." "5398. They who are of the church at this day, are so
little acquainted with any thing respecting regeneration,
that it can scarcely be called any acquaintance at all. They
do not even know this, that regeneration continues through
the whole course of the life of him who is regenerated, and
that it is continued in the other life; also, that the arcana
of regeneration are so innumerable, that scarcely the ten
thousandth part of them can be known to the angels; and
that those which the angels know, are the things which
constitute their intelligence and wisdom. The reason why
they who are of the church at this day know so little con
cerning regeneration, is, because they speak so much con
cerning the remission of sins and concerning justification;
and because they believe that sins are remitted in an in
stant; and some, that they are wiped away as filth from
the body by water; and that man is justified by faith alone,
or by the confidence of one moment. The reason why the
men of the church believe thus, is, because they do not
know what sin or evil is; for had they known this, they
would know that sins cannot be wiped away from any one;
but that they are separated or cast aside, to prevent their
rising up when man is kept in good by the Lord. Also,
that this cannot be effected, unless evil be continually cast
out, and this by means which are in number indefinite, and
9*

102 INTERNAL SENSE OF
for the most part ineffable. They in the other life, who
have carried with them the foregoing opinion, that man is
justified in an instant by faith, and is washed altogether clean
from sin, when they apperceive that regeneration is effect
ed by means indefinite in number and ineffable, are amazed
and laugh at their ignorance, which they also call insanity,
concerning the instantaneous remission of sins, and con
cerning justification, which they held in the world. They
are occasionally informed, that the Lord remitteth sins to
every one. who from his heart desires it; nevertheless, .
they to whom sins are so remitted, are not, on that ac
count, separated from the diabolical crew, to whi'ih they
are close tied by evils; which evils follow the life which all
carry along with them. They learn afterwards from expe
rience, that to be separated from the bells is to be separated
from sins, and that this cannot in any wise be effected, ex
cept by a thousand and a thousand means known to the
Lord alone, and this by continual succession, if you are
willing to believe it, to eternity; for man is so great evil,
that he cannot be fully delivered even from one sin to eternity,
but can only, by the mercy of the Lord, if he hath received
it, be withheld from sin and kept in good."
" 5115. When man is in the act ofbeing re-born, spirit
ual life flows in into him, as life by heat from the sun into
a tree, when it is in the act of budding. He who is born a
man, is, in the Word throughout, compared to the subjects
of the vegetable kingdom, especially to trees'; and this, be
cause the whole vegetable kingdom, as also the animal
kingdom, represents such things as appertain to man, con
sequently, such as are in the Lord's kingdom; for man is a
heaven in the least form. . . . Hence, also, the ancients
called man a microcosm: they might have called him, like
wise, a little heaven, if they had been better acquainted with
the state of heaven. . . . Man who is born anew, that is, who
is regenerated by the Lord, is especially called a heaven;
for, in this case, he is implanted in good and truth divine,
which is from the Lord; consequently, he is implanted in
heaven. For the man who is re-born, in like manner as a
tree, begins from seed (wherefore by seed, in the Word, i%
signified the truth which is from good:) also, in like manner
as a tree, he produceth leaves, next blossoms, and, finally,
fruit; for he produces such things as are of intelligence,
which also in the Word are signified by leaves; next, such
things as are of wisdom, which are signified by blossoms;
and, finally, such things as are of life, viz: the goods of
love and charity in act, which in the Word are signified by

THE WORD OF GOD. 103
fruits. Such is the representative similitude between the
fruit-bearing tree, and the man who is regenerated; inso
much that from a tree may be learnt how the case is with
regeneration, if so be any thing be previously known con
cerning spiritual good and truth."
'f 5116. The cause and ground of the existence of such
things in the vegetable kingdom, are from the influx of the
spiritual world. But this cannot at all be believed by those
-who attribute all things to nature, and nothing to the Divine
(being or principle;) whereas, to those who attribute all
things to the Divine (being or principle) and nothing to na
ture, it is given to see, not only that every particular thing
in nature is from that source, but also that it corresponds,
and, in consequence of corresponding, represents; and,
finally, it is given them to see, that universal nature is a
theatre representative of the Lord's kingdom; thus, that the
Divine (being or principle) is in each particular thing
thereof; insomuch, that it Is also a representation of The
Eternal and the Infinite — of The Eternal, from propagation
to eternity; of The Infinite, from a multiplication of seeds to
infinity. Such tendencies could never have existed in the
respective subjects of the vegetable kingdom, unless the Di
vine (being or principle) continually flowed in; for from in
flux comes conatus; from conatus, energy; and from ener
gy, effect. They who attribute all things to nature say,
that such things were implanted in fruits and seeds in the
first creation, and that, in consequence of the energy
thence received, they are afterwards moved of themselves
to such operation; but they do not consider, that subsist
ence is perpetual existence, or, what is a similar thing,
that propagation is perpetual creation ; neither do they
consider, that effect is the continuation of cause, and that
when the cause ceases, the effect ceases; and hence, that
every effect without a continual influx of the cause instantly
perishes. Nor yet do they consider, that what is uncon
nected with the first of all principles, consequently with
the Divine (being or principle,) in an instant falls into noth
ing; for what is prior must be in what is posterior, in
order that what is posterior may have being. If they who
attribute all things to nature, and to the Divine (being or
principle,) so little as scarcely to amount to any thing, con
sidered' these things, they might be enabled also to acknow
ledge, that all and singular the things in nature represent
such things as are in the spiritual world; consequently,
such as are in the Lord's kingdom, where the Divine (prin
ciple) of the Lord is proximately represented. This is the

104 INTERNAL SENSE OF
reason for which it was said, that there is an influx from the
spiritual world; but thereby is meant, that the influx is
through the spiritual world froni the Lord's Divine (princi
ple.) The reason why natural men do not consider such
things is, because they are not willing to acknowledge
them; for they are in terrestrial and corporeal things, and
hence in the life of self-love and the love of the world, con
sequently, in an inverted order with respect to those things
which are of the spiritual world or heaven; and to see such
things from an inverted state is impossible ; for they see the
things which are below as things above, and the things
which are above as things below, Stc. . . . Who amongst
them is there, who, whilst he sees blossoms on a tree and
on other plants, considers that it is, as it were, the mani
festation of their gladness, in consequence of producing,
on that occasion, fruits or seeds? They see that flowers
precede, and are continued even till they have the ini-
tiaments of fruit or seed into their bosom, and thereby
drain off their juice thereinto; if they knew any thing con
cerning the re-birth or regeneration of man, or rather, if
they were willing to know, from similitude they would also
see in those flowers a representative of the state of man be-
foreregeneration, viz. that man at that time blossoms in
like manner from the good of intelligence and wisdom, that
is, is in interior gladness and in beauty; "because, in such
case, he is in the endeavor to implant those things, viz. the
goods of intelligence and wisdom, into the life, that is, to
produce fruits. That the state is of such a sort, cannot be
knov/n by them; because what the interior gladness is, and
what the interior beauty which are represented, is not at
all known by those who are only in the gladnesses of the
love of the world, and in the delights of self-love. Those
gladnesses and delights cause the above things to appear
gladless and undelightful, insomuch that they hold them in
aversion; and when they hold them in aversion, they also
reject them as somewhat offensive, or as somewhat of no
value; consequently they deny them, and at the same time,
in this case, deny that there is any such thing as a spirit
ual and celestial principle. Hence now comes the in
sanity of the present age, which is believed to be wisdom."
"10,225. Man, when he attains to the age of twenty
years, begins to think from himself; for man, from first
infancy to extreme old age, undergoes several states as to
his interiors, which are of intelligence and wisdom. The
first state is from nativity to the fifth year of his age; this

THE WORD OP GOD. 105
State IS a state of ignorance, and of innocence in ignorance,
and is called infancy. The second state is from the fifth
year of age even to the twentieth; this state is a state of
instruction and of science, and is called boyhood. The
third state is from the twentieth year of age to the sixtieth;
which state is a state of intelligence, and is called adoles
cence, youth, and manhood. The fourth or last state is
from the sixtieth year of age and upwards; which state is
a state of wisdom, and of innocence in wisdom, &c. That
the first state is a state of ignorance, and also of innocence
in ignorance, is evident. During the continuance of this
state, the interiors are forming to use, consequently are
not manifested, but only the most external, which are of the
sensual man. When these "alone are manifested, there is
ignorance ; for whatsoever man understands and perceives,
is from the interiors. Hence also it may be manifest, that
the innocence which exists at that time, and is called the
innocence of infancy, is innocence the most external. That
the second state is a state of instruction and of science, is
also evident; this state is not yet a state of intelligence,
because the child at that time doth not form any conclu
sions from himself, neither doth he discern between truths
and truths, nor even between truths and falses, from him
self, but from others; he only thinks and speaks things of
the memory, thus from science alone; nor doth he see and
perceive whether a thing be so, except on the authority of
his master, consequently, because another hath so said.
But the third state is called a state of intelligence, since at
this time man thinks from himself, and discerns, and con
cludes; and what he then concludes, is his own, and not
another's: at this time faith commences; for faith is not
the faith of the man himself, until, from the ideas of his own
proper thought, he bath confirmed what he believes; pre
vious to this time, faith is not his, but another's in himself;
for he believed the person, not the thing. Hence it may
be manifest, that a state of intelligence then commences
with man, when he no longer thinks from a master, but
from himself; which effect hath not place until the interi
ors are open towards heaven. It is to be noted, that the
exteriors appertaining to man are in the world, and the
interiors in heaven; and that in proportion to the quantity
of light which flows in from heaven into those things which
are from the world, in the same proportion man is intelli
gent and wise; this is effected in the degree, and according
to the quality, jn which the interiors are opened; and they

1 06 INTER N A L SENSE OP
are so far opened as man lives for heaven, and not for the
world. But the last state is a state of wisdom and of inno
cence in wisdom, which is, when man has no longer any
concern about understanding truths and goods, but about
willing them and living them, for this it is to be wise ; and
man is enabled to will truths and goods, and to live them,
so far as he is in innocence, that is, so far as he believes
that he hath nothing of wisdom from himself, but that what
ever relish he hath of wisdom is from the Lord ; also, so
far as he loves it to be so; hence it is, that this state, also,
is a state of innocence in wisdom. From the succession of
these states, the man who is wise may also see the wonder
ful things of Divine Providence, which are these; that a
prior state is the plane of those which continually follow;
and that the opening or unfolding of the interiors proceeds
from outermost things, even to inmost things successively;
and at length in such a sort, that what was first but in
things outermost, this also is last but in things inmost, viz.
ignorance and innocence; for he who knows that of him
self he is ignorant of all things, and that whatsoever he
knows is from the Lord, he is in the ignorance pertaining
to wisdom, and aleo in the innocence pertaining to wis-
dom." "4136. Man knoweth not how goods are varied with
him, still less how the state of every good is changed; not
even how the good of infancy is varied and changed into
the good of childhood, and this into the succeeding good
which is that of youth; afterwards into the good of adult
age, and lastly into the good of old age. With those who
are not regenerated, they are not goods which are chang
ed, but affections and their delights; whereas with those
who are regenerated, there are changes of the state of
goods, and this from infancy even to the last period of their
life; for it is foreseen of the Lord what kind of life man
is about to lead, and how he will suffer himself to be led of
the Lord; and inasmuch as all and singular things, yea,
most singular, are foreseen, they are also provided for;
but how the case is on such occasion with changes of the
state of good, man knoweth nothing, and this, principally,
by reason that he hath no knowledges of such a thing,*
* In the original, two different words are used, scietitia and cognitio. I have
used the common translation, which does not give the difference between Ihe
two. Il might be rendered thus: With regard to the changes ofthestate of good
on such occasion, man is in possession of no science or information, by reason that
his thoughts are not cognizant of the fact itself, nor ]ias he any deiire tliat t^e^
should be.

THEWORDOPGOD. 107
nor, at this day, desires to have; and whereas the Lord doth
not flow in immediately with man and teach, but flows in
into his thoughts, thus mediately, therefore he cannot in
any wise know the changes of the states of those goods: and
inasmuch as man is such, viz. is without knowledges of
this subject, and moreover there are few at this day who
suffer themselves to be regenerated, therefore if these
things were explained more fully, they could not be com
prehended." 4096. With regard to the reciprocal application of the
affections of truth to good, "these things are such that
they do not fall into any but an instructed understanding,
and one which perceives a delight jn the science of such
things, consequently, which hatli for an end spiritual
knowledges. Others have no concern about such things,
and are not able to stretch the mind to the consideration of
them; for they who have worldly and terrestrial things for
an end, cannot withdraw the senses thence; and if they did
withdraw them, they would perceive what is undelightful;
for, in such case, they would depart and remove them
selves from those things which they have for an end, that
is, which they love. Let every one, who is of such a
quality, make the experiment with himself, whether he be
willing to know how good adjoineth itself to the affections
of truth, and how the affections of truth apply themselves;
whether or not it is not irksome to him to know this ; and
whether he will not say, that such considerations are of no
profit to him, and also that he apprehends nothing about
them. But if such things are told him as relate to his busi
ness in the world, howsoever deep and hidden they may
be, and what is the quality of such and such a person as to
his affections, also how by those affections he may adjoin
him to himself, by applying himself to his intentions and ex
pressions: this he not only apprehends, but has also a per
ception of the interior things thereof In like manner, he
who studies from affection to investigate the abstruse prin
ciples of the sciences, loves to look into, and also does look
into, subjects of a more intricate nature than what are here
treated of; but when spiritual good and truth are treated
of, he feels it irksome, and also holds it in aversion. These
observations are made, in order to shew what is the quality
of the men of the church at this day."*
* These quotations are taken from the English translation, which I have cop
ied just as it is, with the exception of a few verbal alterations.

108 INTERCOURSE WITH
Here, my Lord, 1 bring to a close my extracts from the
Arcana Coelestia, and, with these, my observations on the
Internal Sense of the Word of God, as unfolded by Swe
denborg. That these observations will be satisfactory, nay,
that they will occasion any serious reflection in the minds
of some of my readers, is more than I have reason to antici
pate. I know too well the force of prejudice, the determi
nation of our opponents, in general, that we shall be wrong
at any rate. Do we teach the plainer precepts of the Gos
pel? What folly to inculcate, as part of a new revelation,
what every one knew before! Do we unfold the more
inward and spiritual truths of the Gospel ? We are teach
ing what is unintelligible and speculative; whereas, the
Word of God is plain and practical! Do we shew the rea
sonableness of our views of Christian doctrine ? It is pre
sumption to introduce reason into divine mysteries, or to
attempt to explain them without an express revelation!
Do we plead the fact of a revelation? The very supposi
tion of such a thing implies the greatest folly and fanati
cism ! Do we inculcate doctrines which are bid ? How
absurd to teach it as part of what presumes to be new!
Do we teach what is new ? for that very reason it must be
false! Do we, like the householder, bring out of our
treasure things old and new? We are, on this account,
doubly deluded; for what is new cannot be true, and what
is old cannot be new! Verily, may we say, "Whereunto
shall we liken the men of this generation, and to what are
they like? They are like children sitting in the market
place, and calling one to another, and saying. We have
piped unto you and ye have not danced; we have mourned
to you, and ye have not wept. — But wisdom is justified of
all her children!" (Luke vii, 31.)
I now come to consider the subject of Intercourse with
THE Spiritual World; and in so doing, my object will be
to shew the peculiarly practical nature of the information
communicated by Swedenborg under this particular.
On this, however, as on the former occasion, it will be
desirable to make a few antecedent observations; for, as
the Essays have urged certain a priori arguments against
further knowledge upon this subject, it will be well first to
meet these objections, and to ascertain whether or not there
be any a priori argument in its favor; as also to clear away
some of the clouds in which the subject has been envelop
ed. The first objection is, that this kind of knowledge is
calculated only to gratify curiosity. The second,, that it is

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 109
forbidden, and that aiming to acquire it is presumption.
The third, that, were it useful, God would long since have
revealed it. The fourth, that it leaves no room for the exer
cise of faith; and the fifth, that no other revelation is to be
expected, beside the one we already possess.
The first objection is, that the kno\^ledge thus communi
cated is cialculated only to gratify curiosity.
This objection applies not merely to the visions of Swe
denborg, but to any further information whatever respecting
another world, beyond that which is generally supposed to
be possessed ; and, undoubtedly, if, in the case of any indi
vidual, information of this kind serves only to gratify his
curiosity, and to indulge in him a prying and inquisitive
spirit, he is better without such a knowledge than with it.
We read in the Acts, that " all the Athenians and stran
gers at Athens spent their time in nothing else, but either
to tell or to hear some new thing;" and hence, when St.
Paul was at Athens, they were curious to know what new
thing it was which he had to tefl them. "And some said.
What will this babbler say? others, He seemeth to be a
setter forth of strange gods. May we know what this new
doctrine, whereof thou speakest, is ? for thou bringest cei*-
tain strange things to our ears; we would therefore know
what these things mean." The philosophers, it appears,
were curious to know what new thing St. Paul had to tell
them; but if their motive was mere curiosity, whose fault
was this.' — the fault of St. Paul, or of the philosophers?
Upon the principles urged against the writings of Sweden
borg, any one might have addaced a prima facie eyideace
against the truth of what the apostle had to preach, by
stating, "You are going to gratify our curiosity, but Divine
Wisdom does not gratify our curiosity; so that what you
are going to say cannot be Divine Wisdom." Surely,
a person may listen to what is true and practical, as well
as to what is false and visionary, out of motives of
mere curiosity; yet his motives, whatever they may be,
are no argument against the truth of what he may hear;
if they were, we may as well argue against the visions
recorded in Scripture, and, indeed, against every part of
the Bible, because a person may examine them from
wrong motives. The Essays, however, observe, (page
242,) that Scripture sometimes excites curiosity, but does
not gratify it. Now, I humbly conceive that, in the mind
of a good man, it excites no curiosity; and for this reason,
that he has no mere curiosity to be excited. For by curi-
10

110 INTERCOURSE WITH
osity, I understand the Essays to mean, a desire of knowl-i
edge merely for its own sake, — a prying and inquisitive
spirit. But a truly good man has no such spirit, either to
be gratified or excited ; and therefore I cannot say of him,
that Scripture is calculated to excite his curiosity. A de
sire of Divine knowledge is not mere curiosity. It may
appear so to those who have no other motive to urge them
to the attainment of this knowledge ; and if they made the
attempt, possibly curiosity alone might induce them to do
so; but would they be justified in attributing to others the
wrong motives by' which they themselves were actuated?
Many are too apt to judge of others by themselves; and a
man's self-love will easily induce him to think that others
cannot be actuated by higlier motives than himself.
But the Essays observe, not only that what Swedenborg
has stated with regard to the other world is "food for curi
osity," but that "his followers insist much on the impor
tance of believing this pretended revelation." — If by "pre
tended revelation," be here meant Swedenborg's narra
tives with regard to the other world, I can only say that,
the revelation which we believe it most important for man
kind to receive, is that of the internal sense of the Holy
Word; and the reason why we do so is, because, as we
have seen, it treats of the regeneration of the human heart.
Comparatively with this revelation, we consider that which
relates to Heaven and Hell to be of secondary importance.
I am persuaded that a very ordinary attention to the sub
ject will convince any impartial reader, that, so far from the
receivers of Swedenborg's principles insisting on a belief
in his revelations with regard to the other world, as the
point of main importance, they, on the contrary, may be
found complaining of these assertions on the part of their
opponents as unfair; as one of the many instances of mis
representation of their views; and as a ready, though not
a safe, refuge from the force of their arguments.
Again, the reader of the Essays, judging solely from
what is there stated "with regard to Swedenborg and those
who receive his principles, would be led to conclude, that
Swedenborg's alleged revelations, with regard to the other
world. Were highly gratifying to curiosity; and, as such,
were insisted upon by his -followers, with a view to allure
converts. Allow me, however, to say, that if Swedenborg ever
wrote, or if his followers ever circulated, these narratives,
merely with a view to allure converts, they must have con-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. Ill
tradicted their own principles; for it is a maxim with Swe
denborg, that a man is not reformed by seeing visions, nor
merely by believing in them; and that faith founded upon
mere external evidence, is not genuine.* A man who
receives the doctrines of Swedenborg, merely because he
believes in the reality of Swedenborg's intercourse with the
other world, is not a genuine receiver of them: the very
idea of considering him such we should esteem absurd.
Besides, it is a mistake to suppose, that either Swedenborg,
or the receivers of his writings, consider his narratives
calculated to allure converts. Generally speaking, the
reverse is the fact. Indeed, we learn from the bic^raphy
of Swedenborg, that when he published these narratives,
he was perfectly aware of their being calculated rather to
repel than allure; and there is reason to believe, that some
of them, at least, were designed to operate upon the minds
of many, in this manner. A contemporary of Swedenborg,
Count Hopken, (who for many years Avas Prime Minister
to the King of Sweden, and personally acquainted with
Swedenborg,) in one of his letters to General Tuxen,
observes: — (New Jerusalem Magazine, page 269) — "Swe
denborg might, with or without reason (which I do not
indeed venture to determine,) be accused of having given
a heated imagination too free play in his revelations; but,
for my own part, I have nothing on which I could found
this Criticism. Whether or not our Lord, in our times,
grants to particular persons particular revelations, what is
the nature of such revelations, and what the criterion for
distinguishing the genuine from tlie false, — of all this I have
no solid grounds forjudging. And if, according to human
notions, we were to compare the revelations in the Apoca
lypse with those of Swedenborg, I know not to which of
the-two classes the preference would be given. ... I once
represented to this venerable man, in rather a serious
manner, that he would do best not to mix his beautiful
writings with so many revelations, of which ignorance
makes a jest and derision. But he answered me, that this
did nol depend on him; that he was too old to sport with spir-
* In order that Ihe reader may understand the design of tliis argument, it
should be remembered, that alleged visions in the early ages of the church, as
some writers inform us, were the ground on which certain doctrines or ecclesi
astical regulations were enforced ; so tliat if any one doubted the truth of the
one or Ihe propriety of tlie other, it was declared to be placed beyond all dis
pute, by some pretended vision. However questionable either might be, Ihe
vision ^ettlei] tlie ipatter.

112 INTERCOURSE WITH
itual things, and too much concerned for his eternal happiness,
to give into such foolish notions; assuring me, on his hopes of
salvation, that no imagination produced in him his revelations,
which^ were true, and from what he had heard and seen."
The writer then proceeds to deplore the obstacles which
would be presented by the Memorable Relations, and states
the difficulties he had felt in his own mind upon the sub
ject; while he acknowledges the delight he experienced in
the perusal of other parts of Swedenborg's works. In
another letter, (No. 6,) to the same person, the same
writer observes, speaking of a foreign clergyman, "He
was by no means a Swedenborgian, for he did not under
stand his revelations; and I could wish the happy deceased,
(Swedenborg) had left them out; since they may prevent
infidelity from approaching towards his doctrines, and they
make enthusiasts and visionaries of the credulous. I rep
resented to him these inconveniences; but (he replied) he
was commanded to declare what he had seen in the other
world; and he related it as proofs, that he did not reveal
his own thoughts, but that they came from above. " By
this I understand, that Swedenborg was aware of the ob
stacle which would be presented by his narratives, to the
progress of his principles; that, as such, in all human
judgment, it might be better to withhold them; and that
the fact of his not doing so, might be considered as some
indication that he was acting in obedience to a higher com
mand. Though himself convinced that his Relations were not
calculated to suit the popular taste, and, as such, to allure
converts, he was nevertheless aware, that some would con
sider him as publishing them for this purpose. (Arcana
Coelestia, n. 68.) "1 am well aware," says he, "of the
objections which will, here be urged by a variety of per
sons. Some will insist that it is a thing impossible for any
one to converse with spirits and angels, during his life in
the body; others, that such intercourse must be mere fancy
and illusion; others, that I have invented such relations
in order to gain credit; whilst others will indulge doubts
and scruples of different sorts. All these objections, how
ever, are of no weight with me. For I have seen, have
heard, and have had sensible experience of what I am
about to declare." — In another place, (Arcana Coelestia,
n. 1880,) alluding to the circumstance of his communicat
ing to others what he had seen and heard, h& observes,
"This, however, I was forbidden to do, and for this among

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 113
tither reasons; that they would have said, I was out of my
senses; or would have thought that what I told them was
the invention of a delirious imagination." — We may indeed
observe, that various objection?, which he anticipated-
would be brought against the Memorable Relations, are
stated in various parts of his writings, with greater force
and clearness than by those who entertain them; nor am I
aware of the author any where manifesting any particular
desire to answer them, except by opening the mind of the
reader upon spiritual things, and then leaving him to judge
of the truth of the narratives, from their own internal evi
dence. Not only, however, are many of the objections to the
Memorable Relations anticipated in Swedenborg's writings;
but the Relations themselves appear sometimes designedly
interposed as an obstacle to prevent all, as far as possible,
from entering into a knowledge of these writings, who are
not prepared to receive them into their life. Thus, perhaps,
one of the most objectionable Relations in the works, oc
curs immediately after the following words: — "Unless a
man be principled in Divine Truths, or if he be only in a
few truths and in falses at the same time, he may falsify
truths by falses, as is done by every heretic with regard to
the literal sense of the Word. To prevent, therefore, any
person from entering into the spiritual sense, and pervert
ing genuine truth which belongeth to that sense, there are
guards set by the Lord, which are signified in the Word
by cherubs." With respect, then, to the readers of Swe
denborg's writings, so far from circulating his narratives
with a view to procure converts, they would expect no more
success from giving them circulation, than any ordinary
Christian would in making converts, from circulating an
explanation of the visions recorded in Scripture: they are,
in fine, generally speaking, the last things from the circu
lation of which they would expect success. Besides, nar
ratives of the marvellous are usually addressed to the igno
rant, to those who have neither moral nor intellectual pow
er sufficient to put their truth to the test. Swedenborg,
however, wrote for men of information; for the educated,
as well as for the ignorant. He did not make his preten
sions before a superstitious multitude; but openly, in the
face of one of the courts of Europe,* and of all the scien-
* Kant, the celebrated German philosopher, was a contemporary of Swe
denborg; and, hearing of his reputed supernatural communications, considered
the evidence upon which he heard ihem, sufficient to justify him in writing to
10*

114 INTERCOURSE WITH
tific and philosophical persons, to whose acquaintance his
previous works had introduced him. An ignorant mind
Swedenborg upon the subject, fiwedenborg, it appears, never answered Ihe
letter ; neither did he answer a letter upon a similar subject, addressed to him
by Lavater. Swedenborg's silence, however, did not deter Kant from making
further inquiries, the' result of which appears lo be his conviction of the renllty
of Swedenborg's supernatural Intercourse. I mention this, in order to Intro
duce the following remarks upon the subject, by the Editors of the Intellectual
Repository, as published In vol. I, page 57, for the year 1830-31 : —
" Swedenborg's omitting to answer, by letter, Professor Kant's inquiries of
him, relating to the above affair, may appear extraordinary, lint It is to be
observed, that he never, himself, laid any stress upon these miraculous proofs of
the truth of his pretensions. If asked respecting them by those who had heard
them from others, he would say that the reports were trae ; but he abstained
from writing ^ny accounts of ttem; and never does he appeal to them, or so
much ^as mention them, in his works. How strong an evidence is ihls of his
elevation of mind ; and of his perfect conviction of the truth of the views he
was made the instrument of unfolding, witli his own divine appointment to that
purpose, as standing in need of no such evidence for their support! Could it he
possible for any of ihe merely fanatical pretenders to divine communications to
appeal to sncli testimonies of supernatural endowment, how continually would
they do sol how eagerly woiild they seek to silence objectors, by referring to
the queens, counts, ambassadors, governors, and universily professors, that had
been witnesses of their power! But it is precisely on account of the silencing
nature of such evidence, that Swedenborg declines to make use of It. It is a
principle In his theology, that nothing which externally compels assent can im
part an Internal reception of genuine truth, which is the only kind of reception
that can do the subject of it any real good: it Is to the praise, then, of his con
sistency, that he never adverts to the external demonslralions, which, under pe
culiar circumstances, he had occasionally been Induced to give, of the reality bf
his communications with the spiritual world. Yet, this once established, the
reality of his divine commission is established also. To be able to have Inter
course at pleasure with the inhabitants of the eternal world, and with any who
have hence departed thither, is obviously an endowment unattainable by any
natural means. It can, then, only be enjoyed by the special gift of the Lord.
But the Lord, we may be certain, would not remove the barrier, which, for va
rious important reasons, is established between the other "world and this, for
any merely trivial and natural purpose. He can only, then, have done il in the
case of Swedenborg, because, without It, he could not have been qualified to
explain the correspondence between spirilu'al things and natural, which was ne
cessary lo the development of the spiriti^al sense of the Word; nor to restore
the lost knowledge respecting the nature of the life after death, of heaven and
hell: both which discoveries were indispensable lo the opening of the New Je
rusalem dispensation. When, therefore, Swedenborg gave proof that he en
joyed the power of free communication with the spiritual world, he gave proof,
at the same time, that he had truly received, as he had affirmed, a divine com
mission to promulgate the truths of this dispensation. Yet he nobly forbore to
appeal to this overwhelming testimony; becanse he knew that ihey whose minds
were so closed as to be incapable of believing the truth Ihrcugh its own Inhe
rent light, could not be made to believe it interiorly, and thus pcrmarenlly, by
merely external demonstrations. Doubtless, however, it was of Divine Provi
dence that occasions arose, which constrained him to give such demonstra
tions, and thai they were recorded by others; because such things serve for con
firmation of the truth, though they arc not the proper grounds of its original re
ception. When presented also upon testimony, and at a distanccof time, they lose
that compulsive character which thev possess when they take place immediately,
or nearly so, before our eyes: and thus they may then become useful lo draw at
tention to the truth, which, when known, may convince by its own evidence."

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 115
could not 'possibly understand the principles upon which his
Memorable Relations are written. But, it may be said,
even the well educated may be credulous. Credulous of
what ? Of the Memorable Relations of Swedenborg ? Ex
perience, in general, has proved the contrary. It is only
after a painful struggle of mind, after a conviction that it is
impossible to resist the force of the internal evidence, that
the readers of Swedenborg's writings are, in general, led to
receive his Relations ; so that, instead of these Relations
operating at first as an evidence in support of his views,
these Relations generally require the strongest evidence in
support of them. Besides, credulity and the gratification
of curiosity go, to a certain extent, hand in hand. For if a
man were curious to know the mysteries of the other world,
and a narrative were placed before him, pretending to af
ford all the information he wanted, but which, nevertheless,
he previously believed to be the creation of a distempered
fancy, it can scarcely be said that, in reading it, his curios
ity would be gratified. There is, indeed, a curiosity which
might be gratified on such an occasion; but I now speak of
that which arises out of a desire of positive knowledge, and
repeat that, if a man were curious to know the mysteries of
the other world, no narrative would satisfy that curiosity,
which he did not believe to contain some degree of truth.
So far as he believed it to be a fiction, so far he would be
indifferent to its perusal; and, unless he had other motives
to excite, him, would consider it only lost time to peruse it.
In proportion, then, as the narratives of Swedenborg are ill
adapted to gratify the credulity of readers in general, they
seem equally ill adapted to gratify their curiosity.*
* It may be useful, perhaps, here to refer the reader to what some authors
have written on the subject of, wliat they call, a laudable curiosity, a subject
which appears to he omitted in the Essays, in the discussion of this question.
In his first Bampton Lecture, Bishop Heber observes, " So far is the assertion
incorrect, that a contemplation of the mysteries of Christianity is unfavorable to
the Christian character, that, if il be more philosojjhlcal and more efficacious to
furnish motives than rules for conduct; If it be possible to purify the passions
by employing them on the worthiest objects, and, by contemplation of the Divine
-perfections, to raise the soul, in some sort, to the Deity; no surer way can be
found to improve and strengthen the spiritual part of our nature, than the grati
fication of that natural and laudable curiosity after things unseen, by which the
soul of man, as if conscious of her future destiny, delights to expatiate, so far as
advance is possible, in those boundless fields of inquiry which are connected
with the ways and attributes of the Almighty, the secrets of his government,
and his intercourse with our intellectual being.
" Such inquiries, conducted with hecoming modesty, may be expected at
once to elevate and to humble the soul; to elevate her powers by exercising
them on the noblest objects ; to humble her self-estimation by the sense of those

116 INTERCOURSE WITH
Far be it from me to affirm, that there have not been
some, who have been credulous of the Memorable Relations
of Swedenborg, or that others have not been rationally con
vinced of their truth solely by their perusal; I only say,
that, in general, these persons form the exception, not the
rule. We know that, in the early ages of Christianity,
there was no lack of credulity, both in regard to the work
ing of miracles, and to intercourse with another world.
History supplies us with lamentable instances of the fact.
The enthusiasm, folly, and fanaticism, to which alleged su
pernatural privileges gave rise in those days, have no paral
lel in the history of the progress of Swedenborg's writings;
but, because of the credulity and visionary fancies which
then prevailed, would a person be justified in arguing
against the reality of the visions seen by the apostles ? Be
cause some, or even most,- alleged visions were untrue,
were all therefore false? Because some believers were
credulous, were there ndne sober-minded ? or did no super
natural privileges therefore exist? What has the credulity,
or the incredulity, of the individual, to do with the real fact?
Surely the evidence of a fact is not affected by the belief
or unbelief of those to whom the evidence is communicated.
Where, indeed, the evidence rests upon the testimony of
individuals, their credulity or incredulity becomes an im
portant question; but where the facts are proposed to us
solely on the authority of their own internal evidence, it is
to this authority alone that the appeal can justly be
made. " Besides the objections," says Bishop Butler,
"against the evidence for Christianity, many are alleged
against the scheme of it; against the whole manner in which
it is put and left with the world ; as well as against several
particular relations in Scripture; objections drawn from the
deficiencies of revelation; from things in it appearing to
men foolishness; from its containing matters of offence, which
have led, and must have been foreseen would lead, into strange
enthusiasm and superstition," &c.-— Yet, from all this, what
narrow limits which must confine her hardiest flight, by the comparison eter
nally presented lo her notice, between finite and infinite wisdom.
" Spiritual pride, indeed, and metapliysical pedantry, can only arise from,
and are certain syin|)ioras of, speculations not carried sufficiently far, inquiry
too soon cunKmted. They who skim the surface may think that all is known to
Ihem ; but he who strives lo sound the depths of ocean may receive, il is true, a
rich repayment of his lime and labor, but must desist at last with a feeling vei'y
dlffiireiit from pride. Our finite successes shrink into nothing when brought in
contact with immensity; and we cannot rejoice that we have penetrated so far,
without recognizing the weakness which has prevented oiu" proceeding farther."

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 117
does the learned prelate justly conclude? — " After all,"
says he, " that which is true must be admitted; though it
should show us the shortness of our faculties, and that we '
are in no wise judges of many things, of which we are apt
to think ourselves very competent ones. Nor will this be
any objection with reasonable men," &c. (chap, iii, part 2.)
That Swedenborg's visions may to some appear to be at
tractive, is not denied. It seems, however, that, whether
attractive or repulsive, they are alike objectionable: ob
jectionable, because they are attractive ; objectionable,
because they are repulsive. If they are repulsive, " He
hath a devil and is mad; why hear ye him?" If they are
attractive, "they gratify curiosity and a love of the marvel
lous, being written only with a view to allure converts."
Now there is one thing with regard to the attractive narra
tives of Swedenborg, which is rather remarkable. In most
of the cases, if not iiiall, in which they might seem to cap
tivate the imagination, a special guard against this evil is
introduced, and the reader warned that, if, in perusing
them, he gives reins to the imagination, he is deceiving
himself, and wholly misunderstanding the subject. What
is more natural than for the enthusiast to imagine, that
heaven, as a paradise, must be full of the most gorgeous
paradisiacal-scenery ? — and how would his fancy naturally
depict to itself its varied pastures, its flowing rivers, and
the gloried of its celestial inhabitants? Here, then, is the
very case jn point. On this subject. Your Grace has justly
said, the enthusiast would be sure — "to dream largely."
Now what is the fact? One of the longest Memorable Re
lations in Swedenborg's writings is introduced for the pur
pose of exposing the folly of those ideas of heaven which
it is asserted that he entertains; and on'the faith of which,
he is denominated an enthusiast. In introducing quota
tions from his works upon this subject, I trust it will be dis
tinctly understood, that I am not calling upon the reader
to believe in them as containing genuine facts. He is at
liberty to receive or to reject them, just as he pleases. My
present object in introducing them, is, not to prove the Me
morable Relations to be true, but what is urged against
them to be untrue; and I leave every impartial mind to
conclude, how far the successive refutation of objections
against a narrative, may be any indirect evidence in its
favor; particularly, where those objections are founded
upon principles, which are said to be the sure marks of one
that is false.

118 INTERCOURSE WITH
In the Memorable Relation, then, to which we have re
ferred, an angel is represented as saying, (Conj. Love,
page 77, vol. i,) " Thou knowest, that every man who had
desired heaven, and had formed conceptions in his mind
about its happiness, is introduced, after death, into that par
ticular happiness which he had framed in his imagination;
and when he experiences what such happiness is, that it is
only according to the vain imaginary delusions of his own
fancy, he is then led out of error and instructed in the
truth:" And what is the truth in which he is instructed?
The truth is this, — (Conj. Love, vol. i, page 92,) — "Heav-
venly joy and eternal happiness consist not in external para
disiacal delights, unless they are attended also with such as
are internal. External paradisiacal delights reach only the
senses of the body; but such as are internal reach the af
fections of the soul; and if the former be without the latter,
they are void of all heavenly life, inasmuch as they have
no soul or spirit in them; and every delight, without
its corresponding soul or spirit, continually grows more
languid and faint, fatiguing the mind more than labor.
There are in every part of heaven paradisiacal gardens, in
which the angels find much joy; and so far as it is attend
ed with a delight of the soul, so far the joy is real and true.
Hereupon they all asked, 'What is the delight of the soul,
and whence is it derived?' The angel replied, 'The de
light of the soul is the delight of love and wisdom proceed
ing from the Lord; and whereas love is an operative prin
ciple, and is operative by wisdom, therefore they are both
fi.xed together in the effect of such operation, which effect
is use. The delight arising from such use entereth into
the soul by influx from the Lord, and descendeth through
the superior and inferior parts of the mind into all thfe sen
ses of the body, and in them is complete and full, becom
ing hereby a true joy, and partaking of an eternal nature
from the eternal fountain whence it proceedeth.' " — Again,
in the Arcana Coelestia, 6428, it is said, "They who think
of the glory of heaven from natural light not yet illuminated
by celestial light. . . . cannot form any other idea concern
ing it, than as concerning the glory of the world; inas
much as, while they read the prophetic revelations, partic
ularly of John in the Apocalypse, all things in heaven are
described as being inost magnificent ; but when they are
told that the glory of heaven exceeds all the magnificence
of the world, insomuch that this latter can scarce be com
pared with it,' and that yet this is not the glory of heaven, but

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 119
that the glory of heaven is the divine principle which beams
forth from each single thing which appears there, and is the
perception of things divine and consequent wisdom; that this
glory, however, is only for those in heaven who make no ac
count of that magnificence in comparison with wisdom, and
attribute all wisdom to the Lord, and none at all to themselves,
this glory of heaven, when it is viewed by natural light. . . .
is in no wise acknowledged." Again, "All things there, to
every single object, appear in their most beautiful spring
and bloom, with an astonishing magnificence and variety,
and they are living by virtue of their being representative;
for there is nothing but what represents and signifies something
celestial and spiritual. Thus the objects presented to view
affect not only the sight with pleasantness, but the mind
with happiness. But (with regard to the beauty of mere
external appearances) the angels behold such things with
other eyes, not being delighted with the paradises, but ivith Ihe
representatives, and thus, with the celestial and spiritual things
which give them birth," 1622. — Again: '"These things (the
beauty of the external objects) are respectively of small
account; they who are principled in the intelligence itself,
and the wisdom, in which those things originate, are in
such a state of happiness, that the things which have been
mentioned are esteemed by them of but little -importance,"
4529. — Again, after a description of some of the appearan
ces in heaven, an angel is represented as saying, (Ibid.
page 106,) "Ye may possibly conceive that such things be
witch our eyes, and infatuate us by their grandeur, and that
we consider them as constituting the joys of our heaven; but
this is not the case, inasmuch as, oiir hearts not being in such
things, they are only accessory to the joys of our hearts; and
therefore, so far as we contemplate them as accessory, and
as the workmanship of God, so far we contemplate in them
the divine omnipotence and benignity." — ^Again, in anoth
er part it is said, (Ibid, page 108,) "At the sight of all these
things, the companions of the angels exclaimed, ' Behold
heaven in form ! Wheresoever we turn our eyes, we are
struck with an influx of somewhat celestially paracl^siacal,
which is not to be expressed.' At this the angel rejoiced,
and said, 'AH the gardens of our heaven are representa
tive forms or types of heavenly blessednesses in their ori
gins; and because the influx of these blessednesses ele
vated your minds, therefore ye exclaimed. Behold heaven
in form! But they who do not receive that influx, regard
hese paradisiacal gardens only as common woods or for-

120 INTERCOURSE WITH
ests. All they receive the influx, who are under the influ
ence of the love of uses; but they do not receive it, who
are under the influence of the love of glory, not originating
in uses.' Afterwards he explained and taught them what
every particular thing in the garden represented and signifir
ed." — To these quotations only one more shall be added,
(Ibid, page 102.) "When they of the first assembly had
heard these relations, they all likewise acknowledged that
they had never entertained any other notion of heaven, than
of a local blessedness independent of their internal disposi
tions; and that to be admitted therein, would be to enter
upon the fruition of never ceasing delights. Then the an
gel addressed them in the following words: 'Ye see now
that the joys of heaven and eternal happiness have not relation
to place, but to the state of the life o/" man; and a state of
heavenly life is derived from love and wisdom. And whereas
use, or profitable service, is that which containeth love and
wisdom, and in which they are fixed and subsist, therefore
a state of heavenly life is derived from the conjunction of
love and wisdom in use. It is the same thing if we call
them charity, faith, and goo^ works; inasmuch as charity
is love; faith is truth, whence wisdom springeth; and good
works are uses. Moreover, in our spiritual world there
are places as in the natural world; otherwise, there could
be no habitations and distinct abodes. Nevertheless, place
with us is not place, but an appearance of place according
to the state of love and wisdom, or of charity and faith.
Every one who becometh an angel, carrieth his own heaven
within himself; inasmuch as he carrieth in himself the love
of his own heaven; for man, from creation, is a very small
effigy, image, and type, of the great heaven, and the hu
man form nothing else. Wherefore every one cometh
after death to that society in heaven, to whose general
form he beareth a particular agreement in his particular
form. Consequently, when he entereth into that society,
he entereth into a form corresponding to himself; thus he
passeth from himself into a self-society, as it were , and
from a self-society, into himself; and enjoyeth his own life
in that of the society, and that of the society in his own
life. For every society in heaven may be considered as
one common body, and the constituent angels as the simi
lar parts thereof, from which the common body deriveth its
existence and support. Hence it follows, that they who
are principled in evils, and in falses originating in evils,
have formed in themselves an effigy of hell, which suffer-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 121
eth torment in heaven, from the Influx and violent activity
of one opposite upon another. For infernal love is oppo
site to heavenly love; and, consequently, the delights of
each are in a state of discord and enmity, and whensoever
they meet, endeavor to destroy each other."
Now, when it is considered, that these are not mere iso
lated assertions, but that they contain the principle upon
which all Swedenborg's alleged visions of heaven and hell
are written; that some of these visions are devoted express
ly to the purpose of exposing the folly of those ideas of
heaven which are attributed to Swedenborg; that, in nu
merous places, he has demonstrated how, to those who are
not prepared for its beatitudes by inward purity, heaven, so
far from being a place of happiness, is a place of insuffera
ble agony, — there is no difficulty in concluding, that the
objections urged in the Essays are entirely inapplicable to
Swedenborg's writings; because a perusal of his works
clearly shews, that there is not only no ground for these
objections, but not even the slightest shadow of such
ground ; and, consequently, that if there be any imagi
nation exercised upon the subjjjct, it must be the im,agina-
tion of those who attribute to Swedenborg the creations of
their own mind. Indeed, a review of the arguments against
his narratives will shew, that one of the objections against
them, has been the absence of that very characteristic
which Your Grace has justly attributed to the writings of
the enthusiast. The dry matter-of-factness (as it has been
called) of his Memorable Relations, has been complained
of, as throwing a damp and chill upon the imaginative pow
ers, and investing with too lowly a garb ideas which the
poet would have arrayed in all the splendor of rhetorical
costume; while the extreme simplicity of the style, in gene
ral, is apt to make the ordinary reader forget the grandeur
and immensity of the idea which the writer is unfolding.
A more inapplicable objection, therefore, could scarcely be
urged; than the one which attributes the glowing descrip
tions of the enthusiast to the narratives of Swedenborg. I
entirely agree with Your Grace, that in the case of pre
tended intercourse with the other world, the impostor and
enthusiast would have addressed themselves to the curiosi
ty, credulity, and natural imaginations of their followers;
and it is precisely because Swedenborg has not done this,
that I would take up the argument in the Essays, and use
it as demonstrative evidence that, in this respect, at least,
11

122 INTERCOURSE WITH
Swedenborg was not an enthusiast, nor the dupe of a dis
tempered fancy.
But the Essays refer us to the case of St . P^ul. They
speak of the celestial vision with which he had been favor
ed, and observe, that he alludes; with the utmost possible
brevity, to his being caught up into paradise and hearing
unspeakable words, without relating any particulars of the
vision: this circumstance the reader is naturally led to con
trast with Swedenborg's "copious and distinct revelations,"
his "visit to the celestial abodes," &c., of all which it is
said " he gives minute descriptions :" it is directly contrast
ed, likewise, with the narratives of Mahomed; and the Es
says observe, — " It is truly edifying to compare this with
Mahomed's long and circumstantial description of his pre
tended visit to heaven, filled with a multitude of needless
particulars, calculated to gratify an appetite for the mar
vellous;" the narratives of Swedenborg being thus obviously
classed with those of Mahomed. Now, with regard to the
minute descriptions of the celestial abodes, pretended to be
given by Swedenborg, pardon the liberty I take in observ
ing, that I am not aware thgit any such are to be found in
any part of his works. Swedenborg tells us that there are
three heavens,nhe celestial, the spiritual, and the natural;
and that of these, the third heaven or the highest is the ce
lestial, being the same with that into which St . Paul de
clares he was caught up. The celestial abodes are the
abodes in the celestial heavens ; and into these Swedenborg
observes that he was rarely permitted to enter; whence, so
far from giving long and minute descriptions upon this sub
ject, he is silent with regard to most of what he there saw
and heard; declaring, like St. Paul, that it would be incom
prehensible or incredible; Consequently, on the point upon
which the Essays have contrasted the writings of St. Paul
with those of Swedenborg, there is much more of remarka
ble coincidence than of contrast. With regard to the
abodes in the spiritual heavens, little is state'd, compared
¦with what Your Grace justly observes an enthusiast or im
postor would probably have done; and what is stated, is
stated in a way, which, as I have already shewn, and shall
in the sequel have further to shew, renders it impossible for
it to have come either from an enthusiast or impostor.
But the Essays remark, — " He (the Christian) may ask
them, (infidels,) how it came to pass that no one of our sa
cred writers has given a full, minute and engaging account
of all that is, according to him, to take place at the end of

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 123
the world; of all the interesting particulars of the day of
judgment; of the new bodies with which men will arise,
and of the glories that shall be revealed in heaven; or has
given any account at all, or, at least, any from which a de
cisive conclusion can be drawn, of the condition in which
men are to remain during the interval between death and
the resurrection."— Now I should be exceedingly sorry to
detract froin any legitimate argument against either Maho-
medanisni or infidelity; yet I cannot think the cause of
Christianity is advanced, by resting it upon principles which
are untenable ; for might not the Christian thus be repUed
to by some other fellow Christian himself ? ' How can you
start this objection, when you admit that there are many
portions of Scripture which you do not understand; and if
you do not understand them, how do you know but that they
may possibly contain information upon some of those very
subjects which you have here specified; as, for instance,
the end of the world, and the day of judgment ? — subjects
which, at least, as some of our commentators admit, appear
to be alluded to in the book of Revelation.'
Besides, there is another point of view in which the ob
jection should be considered, before it can be fairly urged.
We believe it to be demonstrable from Scripture, that by
the end of the world, is meant only the end of the existing
dispensation or church; and by the day of judgment, the
destruction of that church, and the establishment of anoth
er; that hence, the popular ideas respecting the end of the
world, and the day of judgment, have not that foundation
in Scripture which is commonly supposed; and if so, it is
not likely that a sacred writer, under the influence of inspi
ration, should detail the particulars of that which, as popu
larly conceived, was never designed to exist.
But the Essays observe, " .It is plain that nothing could
have been more, gratifying to.the curiosity of all who had
an interest in the subject, nothing more likely even to al
lure fresh converts, than a glowing description of the joys
of heaven; it would have been easily believed,. too, by those
who gave credit to the -writer, as it is plain Paul supposed
the Corinthians did; it would have been very easy, again,
for an impostor to give loose to his fancy, in inventing such
a description; and to an enthusiast it would have been una'
voidable; he who was passing off his day-dreams for revela
tions on himself as well as on others, would have been sure to
dream largely on such a subject. Why then did not Paul do
any thing of the kind? I answer, because he was not m

124 INTERCOURSE WITH
impostor, nor an enthusiast, but taught only what had been
actually revealed to him, and what he was commissioned to
reveal to others."
It is asked. Why St. Paul did not do any thing of the
kind ? May I answer this question by asking, ' ' Why is it
that St. John did?" But it will be said, St. John did not
give a full, minute, and engaging account. St. John wrote
in types or symbols, and a type will contain as much in a
short compass, as, if explained, volumes could comprise.
Had Swedenborg given the symbols only, without their exi
planation, he might, in most instances, have been as con
cise as the prophets. To draw the comparison fairly be
tween the two, the interpretations of the symbols in Scrip
ture ought to be included; and if this be done, the argu
ment, I presume, will be seen to be invalid. But the nar
ratives of the prophets, it is said, are not minute. Now I
reply, that some, at least, appearto be quite as minute as
those of Swedenborg; and this for a good reason. If the ob-
. jects presented to the spiritual vision be symbolical, then, for
the purposes of interpretation, a minute description of these
objects is as necessary, as, for the same purposes, a minute
transcript of a hieroglyphical sentence; for if one hiero
glyph were omitted, the meaning of the whole might be
altered or left imperfect. This we may see more partic
ularly exemplified in St. John's description of the New Je
rusalem. The symbolical nature of visions of the third beavenj and
the difficulty of their being Comprehended except by celes
tial minds, seem to justify a conclusion different from the
one" stated in the Essays, — that the narrative of St. Paul's
vision would have been calculated to allure converts, and
have been readily believed by those who gave credit to the
apostle . Is there not reason to presume the contrary ? that
the narrative might have tended rather to repel than allure?
that it might have contained things apparently absurd, cer
tainly incredible, and, to most of the Corinthians, incom
prehensible .' — that, as such, the opponents of St. Paul
might have taken advantage of the circumstance to under
mine his authority, and to call in question the credit he al
ready enjoyed? At all events, the occasion upon 'which
St. Paul alluded to the vision, was one upon which his own
authority, as an apostle, was disputed; and we have al
ready observed, that it is contrary to the Divine Order, un
der the Christian dispensation, to adduce visions, as mere
external evidence, with a view to allure converts, or -to gain

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 125
credit. There is no end to the abuses to which such a pro
ceeding might give rise. This, indeed, is tho very ground
upon which Dr. Middleton has objected to the visions re
corded in the early ages of the church ; and every reason
able person must see the force of the objection. Had,
therefore, St. Paul related the particulars of his vision, with
a view to the confirmation of his doctrines, or of his own
authority in the church, he would have laid himself open to
the objectign, which has been so forcibly urged against
many of the recorded visions of the early ages of Chris
tianity. Besides, whoever attentively reflects upon the
character of St. Paul, will see a very great difference be
tween his mind and that of St. John; the former having a
tendency to vain-glory, the latter, a tendency to humility.
St. Paul admits, therefore, that a thorn in the flesh was
sent him, to prevent his being exalted above measure by
the privilege conferred upon him; and it is obvious, that
his silence on the particulars of his vision accorded well
with his desire to overcome this personal infirmity, and to
avoid, as far as possible, even the appearance of glorying.
Moreover, the vision of St. Paul seems to have had refer
ence solely to himself; because it was granted with a view
to support and encourage him under his various trials, and
not for the purpose of benefiting or instructing the church
in general. Hence, on the words, " which it is not lawful
for a man to utter, " a modern commentator* thus writes:
•'Because the apostle had not the authority to declare the
mysteries revealed to him; this having been done, not so
much for the sake of the church, as for that of the apostle him
self, who had these convincing proofs of the divinity of the
Christian doctrine vouchsafed to him, that he might be ena
bled to bear cheerfully all labors and all afflictions." In ad
dition to this it may be observed, that some commentators
are of opinion that St. Paul was positively forbidden'f to de
clare the particulars of his vision; for that he says, it was not
lawful for him to utter what he had heard and seen, as if
he had received an express command to be silent on the
subject; and this, too, in all probability, for some of the
reasons that we have stated, — reasons which were altogeth
er local and personal, or relative to the existing state of
the church, but from which no sort of conclusion can be
drawn, that God would, at no future time, grant, to his ser-
* Bloomfield's Synopsis.
"f See Hammond and Bloomfield's Synopsis.
11*

126 INTERCOURSE WITH
vants the privilege of heavenly vision, or, if he did, that
none to whom it was granted, should be allowed to declare
what they saw. Indeed, the case of St. John refutes such
a position. Why, then,' was St. Paul silent as to his vision in the third
heaven? Because he was not commissioned to reveal to
others what he had heard and seen. Why was St. John
not silent? Because the Lord said- to him, "What thou
seest write in a book, and send it unto the seven churches
which are in Asia." The question, therefore, I respect
fully submit, does not depend upon any antecedent views
we may entertain of the propriety or impropriety of a full,
minute, or engaging account; but upon the fact of what
the writers themselves actually saw, and were divinely
commissioned to reveal to others; and, therefore, if the
foregoing objection be in any manner urged against Swe
denborg, it can be valid only on the ground, that he never
had any intercourse with the spiritual world, or never had
any divine commission to communicate what he saw, —
which is merely begging the question.
But I now come to the consideration of the second ob
jection, namely. That further knowledge with respect tp
the other world is forbidden ; and that any desire to attain
it originates in folly and presumption.
The Essays make mention, in their reference to this
subject, of "the idle and arrogant pretensions of human fraud
and folly;" and I confess, that the frequent occurrence of
delusion and imposture, in cases of pretended revelations,
affords just cause of the greatest regret; nor can I wonder
that, constituted as is the human mind, these evils should
have given rise to a strong prejudice against the writings
of Swedenborg, and predisposed the minds of even pious
and learned men to presume, without inquiry, that all
alleged communications of knowledge respecting the other
world, except such as are in Scripture, are equally false,
delusive, and presumptuous. I cannot wonder, likewise,
that even the visions recorded in Scripture should come to
be treated with great unconcern by the generality of Chris
tians; and that many should be very willing to take out of
Scripture, if they could, those pages in it, upon which in
tercourse with the spiritual world stands recorded. What,
however, in these matters distinguishes the wise from the
foolish hearer ? What, but that the one is blindly led by
his prepossessions; the other, at least, reserves to himself
the right of rational inquiry ? the one idly floats down the

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 127
Stream of popular opinion; the other is willing to search
and see whether these things are so? It is to such a one
that I appeal; and, for his own sake, entreat him to scru
tinize and sift the pretensions of Swedenborg, in order to
ascertain whether they are really false and delusive, and,
as such, had their origin in fraud, folly, or presumption.
Much is stated in the Essays with regard to presumptu
ous knowledge and inquiry, and it may be well, in answer
ing the objection founded upon this evil, to consider what
is advanced upon the subject.
After speaking of this tendency of the human mind, and
of consequent attempts to explain unrevealed mysteries, it
is remarked, "Little as there-is revealed to us of the con
dition of our first parents in Paradise, thus much (and let
Christians never forget it) is plainly taught us, that they
fell from their happy state through the desire of forbidden
knowledge. It was by seeking from men to become 'as
gods, knowing good and evil,' that they incurred that loss,
to retrieve which God was made man, in Christ Jesus;
who 'took upon him the form of a servant, and humbled
himself unto death, even the death of the cross,' to redeem
us-, the children of Adam, whom want of humility had
ruined, and to open to us- the gates of eternal life, which
presumptuous transgression had shut. How, then, can we
hope to enter in, if we repeat the very transgression of
Adam, in seeking to be wise above that which is written?
By inquisitive pride was immortal happiness forfeited; and
the path by which we must travel back to its recovery is
that of patient and resigned humility."
Now, certainly the wickedness of an inquisitive pride can
scarcely be exaggerated. I agree, therefore, in all that is
said upon this part of the subject, and sincerely desire to
be guarded from a sin so fatal. But how comes it to pass,
that this presumptuous knowledge, of the attempt at which
Sv^edenborg and his followers are sometimes thought to be
guilty, is such as exposes the direful evils of presumption?
How comes it, that the inquisitive pride, which is some
times laid to his eharge, leads "him to acknowledge princi
ples of child-like humility ? -How comes it, that the sup
posed arrogance of his self-intelligence brings him to the
conclusion, that man of himself is nothing but evil, that in
order to be saved he must be regenerated; while many,
who are reputed to be more humble and unpresuming, in
form us, that this is a mistake, that man is not so far gone
from his original state, and that he is much better than

128 INTERCOURSE WITH
many would consider him to be? Surely an attempt to
knowthe human heart, to purify its nature, and for this
purpose to aim at more Divine light, could not have been
the crime for which Adam was cast out of Paradise. Nay,
it is replied. The crime or delusion of Swedenborg, consists
in his laying claim to an open intercourse with another
world, and pretending to a knowledge of mysteries which
are beyond the grave. But, allow me to observe, this
knowledge was not that which occasioned man to fall, but
rather the knowledge from which he fell. How often do
well-meaning persons reason backward upon this subject !
as if the darkness in which we live was man's natural con
dition, and the light which we endeavor to attain was the
occasion of his fall; as if open communion with heaven
was the curse, and the closing of heaven the blessing; as
if the presumption consisted in aiming at that Divine
knowledge from which man fell, and the humility in contin
uing in that ignorance into which his presumption cast
him! How is it, however, that the presumptuous know
ledge, at which Swedenborg is supposed to aim, acts as a
check to the presumptuous inquirer, and makes him not the
receiver, but the unbeliever?
With regard to the subject of forbidden knowledge, it is
certainly true, that our first parents fell in consequence of
aspiring to it; but the question is, what that knowledge is
which was forbidden. All knowledge is, I apprehend, for
bidden, and Divine knowledge in particular, when we seek
it from a wrong principle . . However calculated it may bo
to purify the heart, if received in a right state of mind, we
know that, if received in a wrong one, it has the contrary
effect. Our Savior therefore said, even with regard to th^
truths of salvation, "I thank thee, O Father, Lord of
heaven and earth, that thou hast hid these things from the
wise and prudent, and revealed them unto babes;" for
assuredly it is a mercy, that God should conceal even the
practical truths of salvation from those, who, if they re
ceived them, would only profane and corrupt them. In
this case, then, even the truths of the Gospel may become
a forbidden knowledge; just as the tree of life was ulti
mately as much forbidden, as the tree of knowledge of good
and evil. While man ate of the tree of life, he was for
bidden to eat of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil;
and while he ate of the tree of the knowledge of good and
evil, he was forbidden to eat of the tree of life. Let us in
quire into the reason of this.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 129
Solomon says, that wisdom is a tree of life, that is to
say. Divine wisdom. Now, what was the tree of the know
ledge of good and evil ? Was it of the same nature with
that of the tree of life, but only of a higher order? It must
be so, if it correspond to the knowledge which the Essays
maintain is forbidden. For when they speak of forbidden
knowledge, it does not appear that they mean a knowledge
essentially evil; but knowledge divine, which it is presum
ed God has withheld. ' Thus, not only in this, but often in
the publications of other aiithors, when treating of this sub
ject, it appears that the tree of life and the tree of know
ledge of good and evil are confounded with each other; and
we are supposed to be guilty of desiring to partake of the
tree of knowledge of good and evil, when, in fact, we are
but desiring to partake, from a right principle, of the tree
of life. The consequence is, that the argument, as applied
to the writings of Swedenborg, appears to be altogether
mistaken. "Ye shall- be as gods," said the tempter,
"knowing good and evil." This was the end and object of
their knowledge, to become as gods, to exalt their own
self-hood, and to consider self as the source of wisdom.
Here was a presumptuous principle. Why, then, was
Divine knowledge forbidden to them, in this state? Be
cause the principle was forbidden, from which the know
ledge was sought; for the more the knowledge of good is
sought from a principle of self, the more is the knowledge
of evil increased ; since evil is nothing but good perverted,
as falsehood is nothing but trath perverted. It was in
mercy, therefore, that God forbade his creatures to enter
into Divine knowledge, from an evil principle: as long as
they were in that evil principle, they were designed to con
tinue in darkness, till the period should arrive when man
should be restored, and, -abandoning his evil state, should
have a right to the tree of life. The- tree of the knowledge
of good and evil is, therefore, the tree of the knowledge of
good from an evil or selfish and sensual state; this being
the state in which man is arrogant and presumptuous;
relying upon his self-intelligence, and thus presuming to
be as God. In this case, what is the nature of his know
ledge? Are not its principles sensual and earthly, confin
ed to the mere conditions of time and space? Are not his
ideas and feelings merely natural? And what has the nat
ural man ever done in regard to Divine wisdom? what,
but to pervert and corrupt it? It is, therefore, the mere
science or knowledge of Divine truth separate from Divine

130 INTERCOURSE WITH
life, and conjoined with a selfish and sensual nature, that is
called the tree of the knowledge of good and evil ; and it
was to prevent the attempt to enter into Divine mysteries,
or partake of the tree of life, from this state, that man was
driven out from the gates of Paradise. Hence it was the
state of man that caused even Divine knowledge to be for
bidden, and not the nature of the knowledge itself; while,
on the other hand, it was the nature of the knowledge
itself (which was good profaned and truth falsified) that
was the cause for which the tree of knowledge of good and
evil was forbidden .
Now, Swedenborg maintains, (what, I submit, must be
disproved before he can be refuted, ) that it is in conse
quence of this tendency in mankind to the profanation of
good and the falsification of truth, that God, in his mercy,
has hitherto hid from them, both the Divine Wisdom con
tained in His Word, and the mysteries of heaven; and that
in his mercy he will, as far as possible, continue to with
hold them from all, to whom this knowledge would be per
nicious. If, therefore, any one should be deterred from
entering into the Internal Sense of the Word of God, or
receiving that knowledge with regard to the other world,
which is now placed in his power, then I have only to ob
serve that, whatever be the causes which operate to influ
ence him, he may be fulfilling the designs of Providence in
a way in which he little suspects: and, as such, we should
be the last persons to endeavor to persuade him to enter
through' those gates which, in the Divine mercy, had been
closed upon him.
To these observations it may be well to add a few ex
tracts from the Arcana Coelestia, in illustration of those
passages of Scripture to which we have been adverting: —
" 126. But of the tree of the science of good and evil, thou
shalt not eat of it, for in the day that thou ecitest thereof, dying
thou wilt die. These words, together with the foregoing,
signify, that it is allowable to know what is true and good,
by perception from the Lord, but not from self and the
world ; or, that it is not allowable to inquire into the myste
ries of faith, by what appertains to sense and science, where
by its celestial principle dies."
" 128. The worldly and corporeal man says in his hea^t,
' If I am not instructed concerning .faith, and the things re
lating to faith, by things of sense, so that I may see them,
or by things of science, so that I may understand them, I
will not believe;' and he confirms himself in his incredulity

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 131
by'this persuasion, that natural things cannot be contrary
to spiritual things; wherefore, he is desirous of being in
structed from things of sense, concerning things celestial
and divine; nevertheless, this is as impossible as it is for a
camel to go through the eye of a needle. The more he de
sires to grow wise from such a ground, the more he blinds
himself; till at length he comes to believe nothing, not even
the existence of any thing spiritual, or of eternal life. This
is a necessary consequence of the principle which he lays
down ; and this is to eat of the tree of the knowledge of
good and evil, which causes a greater death the more a
man eats thereof But whoso wishes to grow wise by a
wisdom not derived from the world, but from the Lord,
says in his heart,^thathe ought to believe the Lord, that is,
the things which the Lord hath spoken in the Word, be
cause they are truths; and this is the principle by which he
governs his thoughts; and then he confirms himself in such
belief, by things rational, scientific, sensual and natural;
and removes from his mind whatever does not tend to such
confirmation." " 129. It is in every one's power to see, that man is
gover.ned by the principles he assumes, be they ever so
false, and that all his science and reasoning favor such prin
ciples; for innumerable considerations'that tend to support
them, are ever ready to present themselves, and thus he is
confirmed in his false sentiments; wherefore he who as
sumes it as a principle, that nothing is to be believed be
fore it is (from sense and science) seen and understood,
can never believe ; inasmuch as spiritual and celestial
things are incapable of being seen with the eyes, or con
ceived in the imagination. But the true order is, that man
be wise with a wisdom derived from the Lord, that is, from
his Word; in which case, all things succeed in their right
course, and then, also, he is enlightened in things rational
and scientific; for man is never forbid to learn the sciences,
inasmuch as they contribute to the use and delight of life;
nor is he who is under the influence of faith forbidden to
think and speak as the learned do in the world; but then
he must be guided by this principle, to believe the Word of
the Lord, and to confirm spiritual and celestial truths by
natural truths, in terms familiar to the learned world, as far
as lies in his power; wherefore his principle must be de
rived from the Lord, and not from himself The former is
life, but the latter is death."
"301. Lest now he put forth his hand, and take also of the

132 INTERCOURSE WITH
tree of lives, and eat and live for ever. When men become
inverted as to the order of their life,, and are unwilling to
confess their life and wisdom to be derived from any other
fountain, but from themselves and proprium, then, whatever
they hear respecting faith, they reason about it, disputing
whether it be so or not; and whereas, such reasoning is
grounded in themselves, and in the things of sense and
science in themselves, they must needs be led thereby to
deny the things of faith; and in denying, to blaspheme and
¦profane them ; till at length they become so indifferent to
ward them, that they do not scruple to mix what is profane
with what is holy, . , In the other life .... the separation
of profane things thus joined with holy things, cannot pos
sibly be effected but by infernal torment, of so terrible a
kind, that if man was aware of it, he would be as cautious
of falling into such profanation, as of falling into hell itself,"
" 302. This was the reason why the Jews, as being a peo
ple so prone to profanation, never had the mysteries of faith
revealed to them; .so that it was never directly decilared to
them, that they should live after death, or that the Lord
should come into the world to save them; nay, they were
kept in so great ignorance and blindness, and are still kept
so, that they did not know, nor do they know at this day,
that any internal man exists, or that there is any thing in
ternal; for had they known these truths, or did they know
them at present so as to acknowledge them, they are a
people of such a nature that they would profane them; and
thus preclude themselves from all hope of salvation in
another life. This is what is meant by the Lord, in John,
— 'He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their heart,
that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand
with their heart, and be converted,, and I should heal them.'
This is the reason, too, why the Lord spake to them by
parables, and did not explain their meaning to them; lest,
as he himself says, 'seeing they should see, and hearing
they should hear and understand.' For the same reason,
likewise, all the mysteries of faith were hid from them, and
concealed under the representatives of their church; and
for the same reason, the style of the prophetic writings was
in like manner dark and obscure." A further and melan
choly illustration of these principles, we shall have to
adduce as we proceed.
I come now to the consideration of a third popular ob
jection, which is. That such knowledge, with respect to the
other world, leaves no room for the exercise of faith.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 133
The Essays, however, observe in one place, "The sys
tem furnishes abundant matter of faith;" in another place,
"It may be said, indeed, that the trial of our faith, humil
ity, and candor, in assenting on sufficient authority to mys
terious doctrines, is a worthy and fit purpose for which
such doctrines may be revealed. This is undoubtedly
true, and the purpose may even be reckoned a practical
one, since so good a moral effect results from such belief.
If, therefore, none of the doctrines necessary to be revealed
for other practical purposes, were of such a mysterious
character as to serve for trials of faith also, we might per
haps expect that some things should be proposed to our
belief, solely and singly for this latter purpose. But if
both objects can be fully accomplished by the same revela
tion; if our faith be sufficiently tried by the admission of
such mysterious doctrines as are important for other prac
tical ends also; then the revelation of any further mys
teries, which lead to no such practical end, is the less
necessary, and consequently to be expected." This ar
gument, as applied to Swedenborg, is good only upon the
ground, that his revelations serve to try our faith, but have
no other practical purposes; and this ground it is upon
which, I presume, the objection is maintained, that "his
system furnishes abundant matter of faith, and food for
curiosity, but has little or no intelligible reference to prac
tice." Nothing is more remarkable in the history of the objec
tions urged against the writings of Swedejiborg, than their
contradictory nature. The force of the argument just
quoted, consists in this, that the pretended revelations of
Swedenborg present to us only a trial of faith. Now, a
not unfrequent objection against him is, that he leaves no
room for this trial; that, even in his revelations, he endea
vors to explain every thing, to introduce reason too much
into divine things, to make divine mysteries too rational
and inteUigible, and thus to abolish blind faith to too great
an extent: and, were I disposed to advocate the cause of
faith, in the manner in which sometimes it is done, this is
a line of argument I should adopt; for if it be true, that a
state of darkness is best suited to a state of probation, then,
inasmuch as we are, in this world, undoubtedly placed in
a state of probation, a higher degree of knowledge is tin-
suited to our condition; and, consequently, there is a good
a priori argument against any attempt to Introduce further
light. The very supposition, however, that Swedenborg's
12

134 INTERCOURSE WITH
revelations afford abundant matter only for faith, credulity,
or belief, without adequate evidence, appears to be, in some
cases, inconsistent with the idea of his aiming at presump
tuous knowledge, inasmuch as a presumptuous knowledge
supposes the understanding of that, which a blind faith
presumes to be unintelligible. It is true that St. Paul says,
"we walk by faith and not by sight;'' nevertheless, there
is one sense in which faith itself is sight, inasmuch as the
Christian has faith in the truths of salvation, because he
wills and understands them; his eyes having been opened,
he is enabled to say, "one thing I know, that whereas I
was blind, now I see." Faith, therefore, may be the same
with knowledge, namely, with a saving knowledge; in
which case, the Christian does not yield an assent to that
which he does not understand, but to that which he does.
Know what he may, there will always be something beyond
his knowledge; the more he knows, the more will he see
that the less he knows; and the more scope therefore will
he have, for exercising a confidence in his Savior, with
regard to that, the nature and design of which he does not
yet perceive. A state of absolute ignorance, therefore, is
not so consistent with a state of probation, as a state of
light. There is nothing that tries us like truth. It is only
in proportion as we know the truth, and endeavor to prac
tise it, that we become subject to temptation. Knowledge,
therefore, not ignorance, is, in this sense, the best suited
to a state of probation. The Christian, who is far advan
ced in spiritual truth, has many more trials than the one
who is comparatively ignorant; and the farther he advan
ces, the greater are his trials, until he has finally found his
rest. It is true that, for most wise and merciful purposes,
spiritual darkness occasionally overtakes him; but then it
comes to him not as the slate in which God designed him
to live, but as one of the trials of that state, and as one of
the means which God uses for the purpose of introducing
him, even in this world, into a greater degree of light.
For this spiritual darkness is produced by the operation of
infernal powers, and God never designed that we should
live continually under their influence; although out of evil
he brings good, from darkness he educes light. So far,
however, from the present darkness of the Christian world
being to them a state of trial or probation, the case is un
fortunately the reverse; "they love darkness rather than
light." It is true, the Christian does not thus love it, but
that he desires further light. Unhappily, however, he is

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 135
told, that it is presumption to desire it; that it is aiming at
forbidden knowledge; and that he ought to be content with
his state. Certain, however, it is, that in proportion as
we are ignorant of God, and of the nature of Heaven and
Hell, we are ignorant of our own hearts; and the Almighty
could no more design us to be ignorant of Him, and of the
nature of Heaven and Hell, than he could design us to be
ignorant of ourselves. As, however, we shall have occa
sion to advert to this subject, more or less directly, in other
parts of our letter,.- —
Let us proceed to the consideration of the fourth objec
tion, which is very nearly connected with the foregoing; —
That were such knowledge useful, God would long since
have revealed it.
This argument is very common, and arises out of, what
I humbly conceive to be, a fundamental error with regard
to the Divine Providence, or His moral government of the
world. All the dispensations of Providence are introduced,
not arbitrarily and independently of human nature, but in
relation to its state. This principle, like others, is in gen
eral theoretically admitted, but practically denied. God
does not impart or withhold divine knowledge from an ar
bitrary exercise of his will; but, whether he imparts or
withholds, he does so in relation to the state of human
nature. The same law, therefore, by which he regulates
his dispensations in general, operates in regulating the de
gree of divine knowledge imparted, under a given dispen
sation, to any single individual. He adapts his general
dispensations of knowledge to the general state of the
world; and his particular dispensations of knowledge,
under the general, to the state of the individual; and as
individuals may not be in a proper state to receive that Di
vine Wisdom which would othenvise be imparted to them,
so also may any number of individuals, or the church.
When Adam was driven out of Paradise, he was prevented
from eating of the tree pf life; and why? Because, as we
have seen, he was not in a proper state to partake of it.
He himself, therefore, and not God, was ihe primary cause
of Divine Wisdom being withheld from him. But suppose
that, having left paradise, he should reason within himself
and say, "I am in darkness, it is true; but this is the state
in which God designed me to live: had he thought fit for
me to know more, he would have revealed it." — Who does
not see that, in this reasoning, there is both truth and un
truth? Truth, because it certainly is the design of Provi-

136 INTERCOURSE WITH
dence that he should not know more, so long as he contin
ues in that evil principle which was the occasion of his fall;
untruth, because it was not the original design of Provi
dence that man should be separated fi-om him, and conse
quently live in ignorance. If he argues from his ignorance
as a state originally designed by God, is he not attributing
to Divine Providence the consequences of bis own evil?
There is no doubt that, had further knowledge been use
ful to mankind at the establishment of the Christian dispen
sation, God would have revealed it; but what would not
have been useful to the world eighteen centuries ago, may
be useful to it now. The state of one portion of the world,
at least, has immensely changed since that period. The
progress of science is itself a proof of a revolution in the
intellectual faculties; and education has made, and in all
probability will continue to make, the human mind more
receptive of natural and spiritual truth, than it had ever
been previously. Experience, however, has proved, that
when men have been' accustomed to a given degree of
light, however feeble, a greater degree becomes unpleas
ant. They love that to which they are habituated, only
because they have been habituated to it. It is, in this re
spect, the same with spiritual as with natural light; after
having long been withheld, its return is painful. We
prefer the shadows' and dimness of obscurity. It is more
adapted to the weakness of our vision. The longer it lasts,
the more are there among us to testify in its favor. We
begin to see advantages arising from it, which we should
not enjoy in a state gf light. A state of darkness, we say,
for instance, appears to be best suited to a state of proba
tion. The duller our vision, the more opportunity have we
for the exercise of faith; the more reason have we to be
humbled by a sense of our ignorance; and the more occa
sion have we to be thankful for our humility. Thus, in
the case of the boy born blind and couched by Mr. Ches-
elden, we read that, "Before he was couched, he expected
little advantage from seeing, worth undergoing an opera
tion for, e.xcept reading and writing; for he said, he
thought he could have no more pleasure ih walking abroad,
than he had in the garden, which he could do very safely
and readily. And even bhndness, he observed, had this
advantage, that he could go any where in the dark much
better than those who can see; and after he had seen, he
did not soon lose this quality, nor desirfe a light to go about
the house in the night." — We observe, then, that, ante-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 137
cedently to argument upon the subject, there is a predis
position in human nature to reject any greater light than
that to which it is habituated; and therefore, in reasoning
upon the subject, every one is bound to bear this circum
stance in mind; and, while he is opposing what he consid
ers to be false knowledge, to beware lest, at any time, he
be unconsciously misled by the evil tendencies of his own
nature, and oppose that which is true.
. When, therefore, in the Essays, the Christian would
refer the infidel to Scripture, and bid him ask why Scrip
ture has said "nothing of the new bodies with which men
shall arise, of the glories that shall be revealed in heaven,
or has not given any account at all (or at least any from
which a decisive conclusion can be drawn,) of the condi
tion in which men are to remain during the interval be
tween death and the resurrection," might it not be replied
to the Christian by some fellow-believer, "You yourself
have admitted, in arguing against the infidel, that the dis
pensations of God are adapted to the state of the world; if,
therefore, no revelation of these circumstances has been
made, it may argue that mankind have not hitherto been in
a state fit to receive it; that, in such a case, a revelation
might have been useless, or even injurious; but it does not
prove that the state of man v/ill never change; and, conse
quently, that there may not be a time when such a revela
tion may be useful, and even necessary. — Indeed, this is
the same kind of a priori argument, which Paley has urged
against the unbeliever, at the commencement of his evi
dences of Christianity; where he has reasoned from the
slate of mankind to the probability or improbability of a
Divine revelation. The silence of Scripture, therefore, if
it be silent, may serve to shew the unfitness of man, at a
given period, to receive further light; but not a predeter
mination of God, under no circumstances whatever to im
part it.
The question, therefore, is, whether mankind be in such a
state as to render a revelation respecting another world dcr
sirable; whether there may not be thus an a priori argu
ment in favor of such a revelation. I believe there is; nay,
that there is an absolute necessity for such a revelation.
At all events, the reader should know, that this is the
ground upon which Swedenborg places the question; that
practical utility is insisted upon by him, as the sole end and
origin of all his alleged revelations with regard to the other
world. He declares, what observation and experience
12*

138 INTERCOURSE WITH
verify, that, throughout Christendom, there is a vast mass
of scepticism with regard to the existence of a future state;
nay, of positive infidelity. That even among the better
portion of Christians, there is much avowed ignorance with
regard to its nature, consequently, many false and delusive
views prevailing, which are misleading their tens of thou
sands; and that this revelation was made by the mercy of
the Lord, in order that mankind might no longer abide in
that deplorable darkness, doubt, and delusion upon the sub
ject, in which they had been living. The removal of error,
therefore, is one grand object of Swedenborg's professed
revelations; and, assuredly, this removal is a work of prac
tical utility.
Now, I do not call upon the reader to believe in the fol
lowing extracts from Svpedenborg's works, in regard to
Heaven and Hell, as containing truths; he is quite at liber
ty to reject them, and to consider them as a delusion: it
will be sufficient for my argument, if I quote them only for
the purpose of shewing, that, not the gratification of curi
osity or a spirit of presumption, but, practical utility,- was
the end for which his revelations on that subject were
written; and if the quotations be a proof of this fact, it is
all I intend by introducing them. Swedenborg observes,
then, (Heaven and Hell, Article 312,)
" It hath been given me to hold consort with the angels,
and, likewise, to discourse with those who are in hell, and
this now for several years, sometimes continually from
morning to evening, and thus to gain information concern
ing Heaven and Hell, which is granted with a view to pre
vent the man of the church from continuing any longer in
his erroneous faith concerning resurrection at the day of
judgment, and the intermediate state of the soul, as also
concerning angels and the devil; which faith, inasmuch as
it is a faith in what is false, involves darkness; and, with
those who think on the above subjects from their own proper
intelligence, induces doubt, ami at length denial: for they
say in their hearts, how can so extended a heaven, with so
many constellations, with the sun too and the 'moon, be de
stroyed and dissipated? And how can the stars at that
time fall from heaven to the earth, when yet they are great
er than the earth? And how can bodies, eaten up by worms,
consumed by putridity, and dispersed before every wind, be
gathered together again to their soul? Where, in the mean
time, is the soul, and what is its quality, when without the
sense which it had in the body ? — not to mention several

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 139
similar inquiries, which, inasmuch as they relate to things
incomprehensible, cannot become objects of faith, and in
several instances destroy faith concerning the life of the
soul after death, and concerning heaven and hell, and, with
those subjects, others appertaining to the faith of the church.
That they have destroyed faith, is evident from those who
say. Who hath ever come from heaven, and told us that it
is so? What is hell?; — and is there any such place? What
is meant by man being tormented in eternal fire ? What is
the day of judgment, which hath been expected for so many
ages.'' — not to mention several other cases, which imply a
denial of all such things. Lest, therefore, they who enter
tain such ideas, (as is the case with great numbers, who,
by reason of their worldly wisdom, are called learned and
well informed,) should any longer disturb and seduce the
simple in faith and heart, and should induce infernal dark
ness respecting God, heaven, eternal life, and other things
in connection with them, the interiors of my spirit have
been opened by the Lord; and thus it hath been given me
to discourse with all whom I have ever been acquainted
with in the life of the body, after their decease, Sec. &c.
Several of those who were recently dead, when they saw
themselves living men as before, and in a similar state, (for
after death every one's first state of life is such as it had
been in the world, but is successively changed with him,
either into heaven or hell,) were affected with new joy at
finding themselves alive, and declared that they had not be
lieved this; but were much surprised that they should have
lived in such ignorance and blindness, concerning the state
of their life after death, and, especially, that the men of the
church are in such ignorance and blindness, when yet they,
above all others in the universal terrestrial globe, might
have been enlightened on those subjects. On this occa
sion, they first discovered the cause of that blindness and
ignorance: that it is owing to external things, which relate
to the world and to the body, occupying and filling their
minds to such a degree, as to render them incapable ofbe
ing elevated into the light of heaven, and of viewing the
things of the church beyond doctrinals; for, from corporeal
and worldly things, when they are loved in the degree in
which they are loved at this day, there is an influx of mere
darkness, which obstructs the passage to higher light."
There is one more extract which I will add, though it be
rather a long one, because il bears directly upon the subject
of practical utility, and contains a further reply to the argu-

140 INTERCOURSE WITH
ments adduced in the Essays, concerning the silence of
St. Paul, and the alleged silence of Scripture, in regard to
some of those subjects of which Swedenborg has treated.
In this extract, Swedenborg affirms, (Universal Theology,
Article 768,) " That the coming of the Lord is not a com
ing to destroy the visible heaven and the habitable earth,
and to create a new heaven and a new earth, according to
the opinions which many, from not understanding the spir
itual sense of the Word, have hitherto entertained. It is,"
says he, "the prevailing opinion at this day, in every
church, that the Lord, when he comes to the last judgment,
will appear in the clouds of heaven, with angels, and the
sound of trumpets; that he will gather together all who are
then dwelhng on the earth, as well as all who are deceased,
and will sejsarate the evil from the good, as a shepherd sep
arates the goats from the sheep; that he will then cast the
evil, or the goats, into hell, and raise up the good, or the
sheep, into heaven; and, further, that He will, at the same
time, create a new visible heaven, and a new habitable
earth; and that on the. latter, He will cause a city to de
scend, which is to be called the New Jerusalem, and is to
be built according to the description given in the Revela
tion, (chap, xxi,) of jasper and gold; and the foundation of
its walls, of every precious stone; its height, breadth and
length being equal, each twelve thousand furlongs; and
that all the elect are to be gathered together into this city,
both those who are then alive, and those who have died
since the beginning of the world; and that the latter will
then return into their bodies, and enjoy everlasting bliss in
that magnificent city, as in their heaven. This is the pre
vailing opinion of the present day, in all Christian churches,
on the coming of the Lord and the last judgment." — 769.
" In regard to the state of souls after death, both universal
ly and particularly, it is the common belief, at this day,
that human souls, after death, are mere aerial beings, of
which it is impossible to form any idea but as of a vapor or
exhalation, and that such being their state and nature, they
are reserved to the day of the last judgment, either in the
middle of the earth, where (as it is called by some) is their
Pu, (^8,) or in the limbus of the ancient Fathers. But on
these points there are various opinions; some suppose them
to be ethereal or aerial forms, and thus that they are like
ghosts and spectres, certain of them dwelling in the air,
others in woods, and others in waters. Some, again, sup
pose that the souls of the deceased are translated to the

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 141
planets or to the stars, and there have their abodes allotted
to them; and some, again, that after thousands of years
they return back into material bodies; but the general sup
position is, that they are reserved for the time when the
whole firmament, together with the terraqueous globe, will
be destroyed; and that this is to be effected by fire, either
bursting from the centre of the earth, or cast down from
heaven in an universal blaze of lightning; that then the
graves will be opened, and the souls that were reserved
will be clothed again with their bodies, and be translated
into that holy city, Jerusalem, there to dwell together on
another earth in purified bodies, some in a lower region,
some in a higher; for the height of the city will be twelve
thousand furlongs, the same as its length and breadth,
(Rev. xxi.)" — 770. "When a clergyman or layman is
asked, whether he firmly believes all these things, as that
the antediluvians, along with Adam and Eve, and the post-
diluvians, with Noah and his sons, and also that Abraham,
Isaac, and Jacob, with all the prophets and the apostles,
are, in like manner, as the souls of all other men, still reserv
ed in the middle of the earth, or flying about in the ether,
or air; and also, whether he believes that their souls will
be again clothed with their bodies, and again enter into
connection with carcasses eaten by worms, by mice, by fish,
or, (as in the case of Egyptian mummies,) by men, and with
skeletons parched in the sun, and reduced to powder; and,
further, whether he believes that the stars of heaven will
fall upon the earth, which yet is smaller than any of them;
if clergymen or laymen, I say, be asked whether they be
lieve all this, or whether such conceits are not mere para
doxes, which, like all other contradictory notions, are dis
pelled and dissipated by right reason, some of them will
make no reply ; some will insist that such points are mat
ters of faith, to which the understanding must be kept in
obedience; some, again, will argue, that not only these
things, but also many others, which are above the compre
hension of reason, are works of Divine omnipotence; and
when they mention faith and omnipotence, sound reason is
banished, and either disappears like a thing annihilated, or
becomes hke a spectre, and is called insanity: to this they
will add, 'Are not such opinions agreeable to the Word?
and ought not that to be the rule and measure of our
thoughts and speech?' " — 771. " That the word, as to the
letter, is written by appearances and correspondences,
and thus, that there is a spiritual sense contained in each

142 INTERCOURSE WITH
expression, in which sense truth appears in its light, whilst
the sense of the letter is in shade, has been already shewn
in the chapter on the Sacred Scripture. Lest, therefore,
the members of the New Church should wander, like those
of the old, in the shade of the literal sense of the Word,
particularly on the subjects of Heaven and Hell, and of a
life after death, and on this of the coming of the Lord, it
has pleased the Lord to open the sight of my spirit, and
thus to let me into the spiritual world, permitting me not
only to converse with spirits and angels, and with my rela
tions and friends, nay, with kings and princes who have de
parted out of the natural world; but also to behold the stu
pendous sights of heaven, and the miserable scenes of hell;
demonstrating, by this, that man does not live after death
in any region of the earth called Pu, nor flit about Wind
and dumb in air, or in emptiness, but that he lives a man
in a substantial body, and in a far more perfect state, if he
goes among the blessed, than when he lived before in a ma
terial body. To prevent man from., plunging deeper into
this false opinion, of the destruction of the- visible heaven
and the habitable earth, and thereby of the spiritual world,
in consequence of that ignorance which has given rise to so
much naturalism and atheism; and, to prevent such natu
ralism and atheism from spreading, as a mortification in a
limb, through man's external mind, whence his speech
originates, in like manner as they have already begun to
affect and take root in the interior rational mind, especially
among the learned, I have been enjoined by the Lord to
publish some of the various circumstances- of what I have
seen and heard, as well concerning Heaven and Hell, as
the Last Judgment; and also to unfold the Apocalypse,
which treats of the Lord's coming, of the former heaven, of
the new heaven, and of the Holy Jerusalem; which, when
read and understood, will enable every one to see what is
there meant by the coming of the Lord, by the new heaven,
and by the New Jerusalem."
Now, whether the narratives of Swedenborg, with regard
to Heaven and Hell, be true or untrue, enough has been
said to convince every candid and impartial mind, that, in
publishing them, he had at least a practical end in view. In
the time of St. Paul, the perversions of truth above alluded
to, did not exist as they do now. The doctrines of Chris-_
tianity. had then only begun to be preached; the corrup
tions of these doctrines were the work principally of sub
sequent ages. There could not have been, therefore, in

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 143
his time, those reasons for further revelation upon the sub
ject, which there are now. I am convinced that this argu
ment will weigh with every candid and impartial person,
who is not predetermined, at all hazards, to reject every
thing that militates against his own views. At all events, I
submit, that the extracts above quoted, are a complete re
futation of the assertion, that the alleged revelations of
Swedenborg have little or no intelligible reference to prac
tice. Such an assertion can be supported only upon the
ground, that the subject of Heaven and Hell is one of no
importance to mankind; that it matters not what views they
entertain upon it; and, consequently, that all which can be
said upon it, whether true or false, is equally non-practical.
Such a principle, the distinguished author of the Essays
cannot mean to advocate ; and if he does not, his argument
is at an end.
This brings us to the last objection, — That we are not
warranted by Scripture to presume that any further revela
tion will be made.
Swedenborg informs us, as we have partly seen from
what has been just quoted, that a state has been superin
duced upon the church, which called for Divine interfer
ence. Now, it is not necessary to the present argument,
to assume that what he has said is true; it will be sufficient
to observe, that the degeneracy of the church is a subject
which the Essays have omitted; an omission which is the
more remarkable, as the author has there addressed him
self to the unbeliever; and it is a point upon which the lat
ter would particularly fasten, before the argument could
have any weight with him. It is acknowledged, that the
Essays do not profess to meet all the objections of infidels,
nor is it to be expected that they should; but, in the par
ticular arguments which are adduced, a fact is omitted,
which, if true, most materially affects the conclusion, at
least in regard to Swedenborg. Certain it is, that the ob
jection we are now considering, is of no avail with a con
siderable portion of the Christian community. I say not
how far the expectations are justifiable by Scripture; but
this I say, that no small portion of the clergy believe that
plain indications are given in Scripture of a further revela
tion, and that such a revelation has been required by the
state of the church. This conviction prevails, not only
among many of the clergy, but among many of the laity;
and, I ask, which expectation is the more rational, that the
Jews are to return to Jerusalem; that the Messiah is to

144 INTERCOURSE WITH ^
appear among us in person; and that the saints are to reign
with him a thousand years upon earth? — or, that the state
of man will undergo a progressive amelioration; that edu
cation will gradually extend, and ignorance disappear;
that revelatipn will sanctify science, and convert it from
the sordid uses of the world, to that of opening new won
ders of Almighty wisdom; that the spiritual, moral, and
intellectual faculties of man will thus all be enlarged ; that
the mysteries of the Divine dispensations will be more fully
revealed; that, at the sound of the Gospel-trump, the dead
shall be awakened from sin to newness of life, and thus to
inward communion with God and his holy angels; that the
kingdom of heaven shall be established within the soul;
and that the tabernacle of God shall be with men; that he
shall dwell with them; that they shall be his people, and
God himself shall be with them and be their God? Do the
nations lie so dead in their graves that their state is hope
less? What was our Lord's gentle rebuke to Mary?
"Said I not unto thee, that if thou wouldest believe, thou
shouldest see the glory of God?" — That with the means
heretofore used, such an event is improbable, I grant; but
that it is improbable, if other means are adopted, is what
we can scarcely pronounce, until we first know what those
means are. And this I will say, that, when I look to the
awful and sublime truths upon this subject ci»mmunicated
by Swedenborg; to the searching influence they exercise
over the heart; to the stupendous means they reveal, as
employed by God in the regeneration of the soul; to the
silent, gentle, heavenly peace they diffuse from above; and
when I hear that name associated with those of the lowest
fanatics, or the grossest impostors; the sorrow of my heart
finds its vent only in those words of the Savior, "Father,
forgive them, for they know not what they do!"
Such, then, are the principal objections [which are com
monly urged in limine against any further revelations with
regard to another world ; and I trust that, however I may
have failed in producing hitherto any impression in favor
of the possibility of additional revelations, I have not said
any thing to justify the reader in believing, that I have
been following profane and old wives' fables. If, however,
he thinks so, I beg of him to suspend his judgment for a
while, and to read what remains to be adduced, in the spirit
of that prayer in which he says to God, "Thy kingdom
come, thy will be done on earth as it is in the heavens."
Beside these positive objections to the alleged revelations

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 145
of Swedenborg, there are innumerable obstacles which
stand in the way of their reception, a few of which it may
be desirable to notice. First, selfish and worldly princi
ples; secondly, ignorance of the state of our hearts; thirdly,
ignorance of the nature of the intermediate state; fourthly,
unbelief in the proximity of the spiritual world; fifthly, er
roneous views of divine operations; and, lastly, false phi
losophy. The nature of these obstacles I propose separately to
consider; and, in so doing, shall avail myself of the op
portunity of gradually unfolding Swedenborg's views with
regard to the spiritual world.
We begin, then, with the first obstacle, or selfish and
worldly principles ; by which I mean such as pertain to the
natural man as distinguished from the spiritual.
Whether the revelations of Swedenborg are true or un
true, one thing is certain, that, in proportion as a man is wed
ded merely to the things of time and sense, he is unable
rightly to understand them. I do not here speak of the higher
mysteries he has unfolded in the Word of God, but simply
of those principles of his philosophy of mind, which are in
immediate connection with his alleged revelations concern
ing the nature of heaven and hell . For the same state
which prevents a man from understanding the spiritual
sense of Scripture, prevents him also from understanding
the constitution of his own mind, and vice versa; and if he
is ignorant of the constitution of his own mind, he must be
ignorant of the laws and constitution of the heavenly and
infernal kingdoins, since the human mind is itself either a
heaven or a hell; and thus, according to the principles of
Swedenborg, a knowledge of the laws and constitution
of heaven is no other than a knowledge of the laws and
constitution of the mind of the true Christian.
In v/orks in general upon this subject, we see precisely
the same error committed as in works of theology. Au
thors attribute that mystery to the subject which they might
have attributed to themselves, and which arises from their
own wrong method of investigation. They contemplate,
for instance, the phenomena of the mind, before the mind
has been taught how to originate phenomena; they refer to
the subjects of consciousness, before the mind has been
taught how, and of what, to be conscious. To come to a
knowledge of the faculties of the mind, independently of
that which constitutes the faculty, or of the objects upon
which the faculties are exercised, is impossible. No fac-
13

146 INTERCOURSE WITH
ulty of reflection will enable the mind to see that which is
not yet in it: no faculty of mind can see itself from itself;
nor can we contemplate lower faculties from lower, but
only from higher. Hence we cannot see the natural fac
ulties merely from the natural, but only from the spiritual;
and as the powers of the natural understanding are enlarg
ed by the acquisition of natural truths, so can the powers
of the spiritual understanding be enlarged only by the ac
quisition of spiritual truths. What should we think of any
attempt to understand the structure and functions (if the
human eye, independently of any knowledge of the laws of
optics, or even of the existence of light? And who, I ask,
or what, is the real light of the soiil? Is it not He, and
He alone, who lighteth every man that cometh into the
world? And what is this light? Not a merely natural, but
a spiritual, a celestial, a Divine light. Contemplated in
this view, the constitution of the human mind is seen un
folded, not only as to its spiritual, but as to its natural pow
ers;* and when the mind is thus revealed to itself, then,
* It Is well observed in His Grace's sermon on the Shepherds at Bethlehem,
"We should ralher point out lo objectors that what is revealed is practical and
not speculative; that what the Scriptures are concerned with is, not the phlr
losophy of the human mind in itself, nor vet the philosophy of the Divine nature
in itself; but (that which is properly religion) the relation and the connection
of Ihe two being.s; what God is to us, what he has done and will do for as, and
Wli.at we are to do and to be in regard lo Him." To this remark is appended
the following note extracted from Hind's History: "All religious inquiry,
strictly speaking, is directed to the nature of God as connected -with man; or,
again, to the nature and conditionof man as connected with God. Metaphysi-
(;al. discussions on the Divine n.-iture, similar to those in which an attempt is
made to analyze or arrange the principles of the human mind, aro sometimes
Indeed confounded with religious views, but are really compatible with the most
complete denial of all religion. Religious obligation arises not from the abso
lute nature of God, but from Its relation to us." — No author exposes the folly of
such speculations more than Swedenborg; hence his philosophy differs from
that of others, in pointing out the reciprocal relations between the Creator and
the creature; so that it cannot be contrasted with practical religion, but must
be identified with it. This is tlie distinguishing feature of his works. The
philosophy of the human mind in itself, without relation to God, and the ])hi-
losophy of the Divine nature In itself, without relation to man, he maintains to
be only philosophy falsely so called, nay, altogether a delusion. If the reader
will piirdon Mr. Law's pleasantry un so serious a subject, the following extrac^
may illustrate to him the nature of the principles for which, here and in the
sequel, we contend. "Modern metaphysics," says he, **has no knowledge of
the ground and nature either of spirit or body, but supposes them not only with
out any natural relation, but essentially contrary to one another, and only held
together, in a forced conjunction, by tlie arbitrary will of God. Nay, if you
was to say — that God first creates a soul out of notliing, and, when that Is done,
then takes an understanding faculty and puts it into It; after that adds a will,
and llien a memory, (all as Independently made as when a tailor first makes the
body of a coat, and then add sleeves or pockets to it;) — was you to say this, the
schools of Descartes, Malebranche, or Locke, could have nothing to say against

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 147
and not till then, in reading the narratives of Swedenborg
with regard to Heaven and Hell, it has ihe internal evidence
of its own being in demonstration of the truth of what it reads:
but when the mind is closed, when it is shut up in igno
rance of itself, it neither has, nor can have, any such evi
dence ; the heaven it reads of, is as unreal to it as its
own heavenly state ; the hell it reads of, is as incompre
hensible to it as the mystery of its own evil nature. How
unwisely do we find persons arguing upon this subject!
' Look, ' says one ' to the constitution of the human mind ;
what do you know even of yourself? and if you are igno
rant of that which you yourself are, and of the objects
about and around you, how can you be so presumptuous as
to expect to know things of a higher nature?' But may I
not reply, 'My Christian friend, if you are so much in the
dark upon the subject, as you say you are, how do you
know that your ignorance of higher things may not be itself
the cause of your ignorance of lower; and hence, that you
may be confounding consequences with causes?' If a man
will not receive light, of course he cannot see; if he will
not receive that which cometh from above, of course he
cannot perceive the nature of that which is below. Sup
pose a person shut up in the dark should say, "If I see not
the objects about me, nor even my own limbs, how pre
sumptuous must I be to think of knowing any thing of an
object which is so many millions of miles distant as the orb
of the sun!" Surely, if he would consent to admit into his
chamber the light of the sun, that which he imagines to he
so remote, would illustrate to him the objects which are
near; and, above all, would enable him to see himself
Take, for example, the idea of eternity. Most persons
think it impossible for us, in the present world, to be able
to form any conception of what it is; and they argue, that
if it be so difficult for us to form a just conception of the
nature of time and space, how much more difficult must it
be to form an idea of eternity! — Certainly, so long as a
man's ideas are buried in the conditions of time and space,
it is impossible that he should have any just idea of either;
it. And the thing Is unavoidable; for, as all these philosophers were so far
from knowing the ground of nature, how it is a birth from God, and all crea
tures a birth from nature through the working will of God, in and by the pow
ers of nature, as they were so far from knowing this, as to hold a creation out
of nothing — so they were necessarily excluded from every fundamental truth
concerning the origin either of body or spirit, and their true relation to one
another. For a creation out of nothing leaves no room for accounting why any
tiling is as it is. (Law's Spirit of Love, first pari.)

148 INTERCOURSE WITH
but if he is able to elevate his mind above these conditions,
it is not impossible: the difficulty does not lie in the object
of t'be thought, but in the thought of the object, that is to
say, in the natural and sensual state of the mind which
thinks; for if a true idea of eternity could be obtained, and
expressed clearly in words, the merely natural mind would
no more comprehend it, than if the attainment of the idea
were impossible; and not only so, but the ideas which it
would attach to any words describing things eternal, would
render the description absurd. The merely natural man
can form no other idea of eternity than as of an endless
duration of time; hence, when he speaks of predestination
from all eternity, he introduces into his idea of predestina
tion from eternity, the very idea which ought to be excluded;
for in eternity there is no time, neither is there any duration,
such as is suggested by the succession of his natural
thoughts. Deprive, however, the natural mind of the
natural idea, and it can form no idea at all; whereas, a
spiritual mind may have a clear and distinct idea upon the
subject. The more clear and the more distinct, the more
correct; though it may never be adequate to the subject.
How, then, is the true idea of eternity to be attained? —
Not by any principles of self-intelligence ; not by any ab
stractions of thought in the merely natural mind, however
profound; but by an elevation of the soul out of the merely
natural into a spiritual sphere; by a life above the conditions
of mere time and space. Until this be effected, the mind
remains merely natural; and how can a man abstract his
thoughts from that which he himself is ? It would be like
abstracting himself from himself If we are the creatures
of time and sense, our thoughts must be formed according
to those conditions. The simple-minded Christian, there
fore, "whose life is hid with Christ in God," may arrive
more easily at the true idea of eternity, than the profound-
est intellectual, but merely natural mind that ever existed.
The idea of time we know to be suggested by the succession
of our natural thoughts and affections, or states of mind;
in like manner, the idea of eternity is suggested by the
succession of spiritual thoughts and affections, or states of
mind, according to the order in which they take place in
the process of regeneration. This process, however, is un
known; and the very principle upon which it is founded is
denied. What is the consequence? The only possible way
in which a person may arrive at a true idea of eternity, is
closed against him ; and' no wonder, therefore, that the

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 149
subject should be supposed to be involved in impenetrable
mystery. We have already observed, that, in the course
of man's regeneration, one state of good and truth gives
birth to another. This order, then, of succession, or of
spiritual generation and birth, is that which suggests the
true idea of eternity; being the same with that of pro
gression in the spiritual life. Hence, as the sun of our
system is the centre of our motions, as all time in this world
is measured by motion, so the one great centre in the
spiritual world is the Sun of Righteousness, and all the
heavens about Him move in relation to Him as their centre;
their motions being but progressions towards Him, which
progressions are determined by the spiritual state or quality
of the angel. Here, then, is presented to us an idea which,
however obscure, confused, and indistinct, to the natural
mind, is nevertheless clear, instructive, and consolatory, to
the spiritual; being an illustration of those words of the
Lord, "I am Alpha and Omega; the Beginning and the
Ending; the First and Last; which was, and is, and is to
come, — The Almighty."*
Again, let us contemplate what Swedenborg has said of
Infinity, Immensity, or that in the spiritual world which
corresponds with space in the natural. However true to
the nature of things be the idea which he has suggested,
and however edifying, it is one which, to the natural mind,
may easily appear to be the itifallible sign of a distempered
fancy. For what are the ideas of such a mind with regard
to heaven? Many have been the masters in Israel, who
have not been reluctant to assign to it some locality in the
visible material heavens; or some region on the outskirts
of the visible universe, the path to which lies beyond the
various suns and systems, where, as they imagine, the
armies of the Holy One are encamped, and Jehovah has
set up his throne of glory. What is all this, but the coun
terpart to those millenarian fantasies, by which the natural
imagination is sated with marvels, while the inward
thoughts of the heart and its affections are left untouched?
They who can allow their feelings to be rapt into specula
tions of this kind, which set at defiance all divine order,
and all the laws of sound philosophy, we cannot but con
sider to be enthusiasts indeed. Whatever loftiness may
seem to attach itself to such a view of the subject, it is that
* For a fuller and clearer idea of this subject, the reader is referred to
Swedenborg's Treatise on Heaven and Hell.
13*

150 INTERCOURSE WITH
of the natural imagination only, or such as belongs to the
conditions of mere space; and, if we introduce the merely
natural idea of space into the spiritual world, 1 see not but
we must introduce the merely natural idea of time; since
we cannot separate the one from the other. The whole
view of the subject is, indeed, that of the merely natural
man; which has no more foundation in reality, than the
mirage which excites the wonder of the traveller, and then
disappears. Even some who profess these views, acknow
ledge them to be contrary to the visible order of nature ;
whereas the views which, as receivers of the writings of
Swedenborg, we not only profess, but know to be truth, if
there be any truth in the nature of things, is in the most
perfect accordance with the laws of divine order; and,
surely, this is some little evidence in its faVor.
Any one who contemplates visible nature, must perceive
in it a uniformity of arrangement, and hence universal
order. Now, organization itself, particularly that of the
human body, is the concentration, as it were, and embodi
ment of this order; every particular part of the body hav
ing its locality according to its use,, and hence, according
to its nature and quality; so that from this locality may be
deduced the use, or nature and quality, of the part. On
the same principle, in the other life, situation is according
to nature and quality, or, in other words, according to
state; and there being no inert matter there to suggest any
other idea of distance, or one irrelative to state, it necessa
rily follows, that things which are there of a similar nature
appear to be near to each other; things which are of a dis
similar nature, to be remote; that angels who are most the
image and likeness of the Lord, appear to be the nearest to
Him; and they who are least so, the most remote; that
angels who most nearly resemble each other in the nature
and quality of their affections and thoughts, are in the
nearest consociation with each other; while those who less
resemble them, appear proportionably distant; angelic
society being founded on the principle of unity in affection
and thought. Hence we see how it is, that situation,
locality or place, is, in the other world, according to state;
how it is, that distance and space there do not depend, as
here, upon the number of leagues or miles between the
objects, irrelatively to their state (as some worthy divines
would lead us to suppose,) but upon the nature and quality
of the objects themselves. For the laws and constitution
of heaven are in perfect accordance with those of the hu-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 151
man body, as also with those of the spirit of man, which,
as we shall have occasion to mention, is an organized
human form, and, in its Divine original, a form of heaven.
For heaven is the body of Christ, even as the church, of
which the archetype is the Divine Human of the Lord;
and all in that body have their relative situations according
to their natures and qualities. This we see exemplified
even in the church below, which has been called by St.
Paul, the mystical body of Christ ; in which every member
has its place according to its use and office, and thus, "as
we have many members in one body, and all members have
not the same office, so we, being many, are one body in
Christ; and every one, members one of another." Heaven,
therefore, even as the church upon earth, is the body of
Christ, but without a material clothing ; and the church of
Christ upon earth, is heaven veiled over with materiality.
The Sun. of that heaven is the Lord Jehovah, for it is one
which hath no need either of our visible sun or moon to
shine in it, "for the glory of God doth lighten it, and the
Lamb is the light thereof" Every one is in the enjoy
ment of the glory of this Sun according to his reception of
its beams, the wise being in the glory of their ineffable
wisdom, the foolish being in the darkness of their ineffable
folly; a darkness that is outer, in consequence of their
external and sensual state; — a state by reason of which
they are not in the body of Christ, and hence not in that of
heaven and the church, but in the body of the dragon, that
"old serpent, which is the Devil and Satan." Even while
upon earth, therefore, the Christian is in heaven; already
is he in blessed consociation with the angels of God;
already, a citizen of the Jerusalem which is above. Hence,
even to the members of the church upon earth, the apostle
declares, "Ye are come unto mount Zion, and unto the
city of the living God— ^the heavenly Jerusalem, and to an
innumerable company of angels, to the general assembly
and church of the first-born which are written in heaven,
and to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men
made perfect," &c.
Swedenborg, then, having shewn how the organization
of the body, when in its divine order, is an outbirth of the
form or body of heaven, and how all the angels have their
respective places in heaven, as the several members of the
body of Christ, according to their quality and office, de
nominates the various regions of heaven according to the
names of the various parts of the body, and the angels ac-

152 INTERCOURSE WITH
cording to the offices they fulfil; these offices originating
from the nature and quality of the angels themselves, ac
cording to their appropriation of the good and truth which
proceed from the Lord. This is the principle acknowledged
by every sound divine to be that upon which the church of
Christ upon earth is constituted; it is that which is main
tained by the apostle; — it is that upon which every nation
upon earth is formed into a social system; it is that which
is in most perfect accordance with the order of the visible
universe; it is that which speaks with a voice, though
silent to the natural sense, yet loud to the spiritual, that,
" the heavens declare the glory of God:" yet this law is so
divine, so true to the order of creation, so firmly maintain
ed by the apostle, nay, though obscurely, by some of the
best and wisest men of the church, has been a standing jest
even with well-educated and reputedly religious persons.
"But, I wot that in ignorance they did it, as did also their
rulers." The Jews of old knew not. the truth when it came in per
son: is it impossible that Christians of these days should
not know it, now that it comes in spirit? Verily! it com
eth in clouds; yet every eye shall see it, and they also
which pierced it ! Let no one think that, in rejecting the
principles of Swedenborg, he is only rejecting faith in a pre
tended prophet. Who is Paul? Who is Apollos? Who
is Cephas? In following the gospel they preached, we
follow not them, but the Gospel of Jesus Christ, even as
he said, " He who receiveth youreceiveth me, and he who
receiveth me receiveth him that sent me." Whether Swe
denborg were a prophet or not, is a matter of no conse
quence. It is trifling with the subject to place it upon this
ground. The point with which we are concerned is,
whether his principles are true: if they are, no matter who
may be the mortal by whom they are communicated. God
does not reveal his dispensations to the world, immediately
from heaven, but mediately through his servants. He has
a right to choose whom he will, nor have we a right to ques
tion his choice. The principles of Swedenborg we consider
would be true, even though we knew nothing of the individ
ual, or even that such a person had ever lived. To make it,
therefore, a mere personal question, or to rest even upon
any personal pretensions of a messenger, the truth of a
message which appeals to us by its own internal evidence,
is a proceeding which can no more be allowed in religion,
than it can be allowed in science. ' I would not affirm or

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 153
deny that, in denominating Swedenborg a "pretended pro
phet," this is aground upon which the principles of Swe
denborg were meant to be opposed in the Essays; but it is
one upon which opposition is generally raised; the very
circumstance of his supposing that he was a messenger of
the Lord to communicate to the church tidings with regard
to heaven and hell, being itself looked upon as the infallible
sign of a distempered fancy, and a self-evident refutation of
the truth of what he had to communicate.
But I now come to the consideration of a second obsta
cle, and one which arises out of the former; I mean, igno
rance of the state of our hearts. Let us see how this ope
rates in preventing the reception of the narratives of Swe
denborg. The observation is not uncommon, at least among some
portion of the Christian community, that were all the evils
of a man's heart disclosed to him at once, he would not
know himself; and that were a faithful portrait of his nature
held up to his view, he would disclaim it as false and delu
sive; so apt are men not to acknowledge their evils when
pointed out, and yet to confess in their prayers, that they.
are — "wretched, and miserable, and poor, and blind, and
naked." — One cause of this error and ignorance is, that
mankind have not yet learnt the true distinction between
what is natural and what is spiritual; that they mistake
merely natural for spiritual virtues; natural understanding,
for spiritual perception. Let a man conternplate himself
separately from all the endowments of his merely natural
mind, whether inherited by birth or acquired by habit,
and view himself solely in the Divine light. Though
few are able to do this, how many would acknowledge
that, were it done, they would see what previously they
were little aware of! Suppose, then, a description of
their character, as seen in this light, were placed before
them while in their merely natural state, will they not re
ject it? And why? For the very reason of its being such as
they professed to believe that,, under such circumstances,
it would be seen to be; namely, something altogether new
and different from what they previously suspected. The
fidelity of the portrait is the cause of its rejection. Now,
Swedenborg maintains, that when the self-hood of man is di
vested of its external appearances, and laid open to view
in spiritual light, it appears so deformed that it is impossi
ble to conceive any thing more so; that he, therefore, who
sees his own self-hood, when in the spiritual world, is

154 INTERCOURSE WITH
struck with horror at himself, and wishes to flee from him
self, as from a devil . Any one who practically denies the
truth of this principle, however he, may theoretically have
admitted it, must, of course, deny the truth of any narra
tive which is founded upon it; and here, therefore, we have
an illustration of one cause of the rejection of the narra
tives of Swedenborg; a cause which is to be found in a
practical ignorance, it may be also, a theoretical denial, of
the moral principles of our nature. Evil and good are so
mixed together in this world, even in the same character,
that there is no point on which a man is more liable to be
mistaken, that in forming a judgment with respect to his
real spiritual condition. The mixture of good with evil
makes evil appear better than it ia; and the mixture of evil
with good makes good appear worse than it is. Hence,' in
this world, we never see virtue in all its beauty, nor vice in
all its deformity; the beauty of holiness surpasses our un
derstanding, and the deformity of sin is altogether incredi
ble; consequently, when the two are presented to us un
mixed as they are in the other world, the narrative which
So presents them, is as unintelligible, or incredible as the
principles of v/hich they treat, nay, as the state of the
reader is to himself; in fine, the whole account necessarily
appears to be extravagant and visionary. This is the real
cause of that semblance of caricature which some have at
tributed to Swedenborg's narratives. For it is one of the
laws of the spiritual world, as explained by him, that, before
passing to their final destiny, the good are deprived of their
evils and the ^evil pf their goods; that "He that hath, to
him is given more abundantly; and he that hath not, from
him is taken even that which he hath;" consequently, that
after a spirit has passed through this change, he appears to
be almost another; nevertheless, that he is virtually the
same, the only difference being, that he appears in his real
character, that the interior principles of his mind, which
he had formed to himself in the world, have become openly
visible, and that he is seen as he is; that hence, the inter
mediate state is a scene of the most astonishing disclosures,
I will add, of the most incredible exhibitions, of human char
acter; that many who had here- been reputed to be, first,
are there seen to be last; and many who were here re
puted to be last, are there seen to be first.
. Here, then, we see one instance of the practical utility
of Swedenborg's communications with regard to the state
of man after death. They teach us how to analyze our

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 155^

nature, and to distinguish the good in us from the evil; they
shew us our real characters, and expose the mistaken prin
ciples upon which we judge of ourselves, and which, in
this world, are misleading their tens of thousands. As
suredly, it is a great advantage to be able thus to contem
plate evil separately from good, and good separately from
evil, since we can thus arrive at a better knowledge of
each; but as this separation cannot take place , except in
another world, I see not how we could better arrive at this
knowledge, than by a narrative respecting that world.
The order of things in the world of spirits, is thus so
entirely different from that which prevails in this v/orld,
that when discovered to us in our present state, the mind is
not prepared for the contrast; and, judging from those
habits of thought we have acquired (for we have no others
from which to judge,) and these being founded upon the
principles of order prevailing in the present life, the very
truth of the narrative beiximes to us a prima facie evidence
of its falsehood, and we reject the whole as unreal, and fic
titious. Unreal undoubtedly it is, relatively to our present
estimations of things and modes of thinking ; unreal un
doubtedly it is, if we are never to undergo any change! —
"But our fathers, — where are they? and the prophets, — do
they live for ever?"
The intermediate state, then, being the scene of disclosure
of the human character, upon the principles we have stated,
it is necessarily a scene of disclosure of the quality and
state of the church upon earth. Now, it has before been
shewn upon what grounds Swedenborg has considered the
received doctrines of, the church to be untrue; and when
to these untruths are added evils of life, it cannot be sup
posed that his alleged revelation with regard to the other
world, places the church, in general, in a favorable point
of view.
We have considered the case in regard to evils of life;
let us consider it in regard to untruths, or falsifications of
doctrine. There are certain feelings and ways of thinking, with re
gard to worldly things, which are often received in society
as common sense. HencCj in the ordinary affairs of life,
if the professed member of the church possess a good
natural judgment, an unerring and quick discernment,
and if to these he add the outward appearance of religion,
he is received, in general, as a wise Christian; yet, notwith
standing, he may, in the spiritual ivorld, as Swedenborg

-156 INTERCOURSE WITH
shews, be the image of folly, or, if I may be pardoned the
expression, a, spiritual fool; for, as I have before men
tioned, in another world all merely natural good qualities
are separated from the spiritual, and a man's judgment is
there either strong or Weak, according to his views of moral
and spiritual things. If now, with every external accom
plishment, he. should, nevertheless, believe in the interces
sions of the saints and of the virgin Mary,-^when he passes
into the other world, losing his natural and worldly discern
ment, he exercises only his spiritual; hence, there being
then no wisdom without to conceal the folly within, all the
ignorant and absurd conceits with regard to spiritual things,
which, while upon earth, were inwardly harbored in his
mind, but outwardly concealed, speak trumpet-tongiied be
fore God and his angels ; and though in this world he was
esteemed a wise man, in the spiritual world he is seen to be
an idiot or a inadman.
These are awful reflections, — but I proceed.
Take the case ofa person who maintains the Triperson
ality in the ordinary sense; who would disavow Tritheism
more strongly than he ? Who would point to his creed
with more confidence, and say, "And yet there are not
three Gods, but one God?" Yet all this, in another life,
might pass for nothing, and he might be found to be a
Tritheist,. notwithstanding; for we are not^judged there by
outvvard creeds, but by inward thoughts; and Your Grace
has well shewn, how a creed may be one thing, and a
man's inward thought another. For the Protestant im
putes to the Romanist idolatry: the Romanist denies it by
pointing to his creed. We have no reason to suppose, but
that many Romanists are conscientious in thinking the
charge against them to be unfounded, and no more dream
that they are idolaters, than the Tripersonalist that he is a
Tritheist; nevertheless, we do not the less consider many
a Romanist to be an idolater. Swedenborg shews how the
case is the same in risgard to Tritheism. Hence, when the
Tripersonalist enters into the other world, and passes
through his appointed changes, he cannot there speak from
an outward creed, he can speak only from inward thought;
and, consequently, a person who was not accustomed to
attend to his inward thoughts, and who strenuously disa
vowed Tritheism in this world, might in the next maintain
it in all its enormity; nay, more, he might not suppose but
that he was uttering what was highly reasonable and in
wardly true; because nothing is true or false to him, but in

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 157
relation to the interior principles implanted in his mind
while upon earth.
Thus Swedenborg observes in the Apocalypse Explain
ed, art. 649, "Whilst the Divine principle (of the Lord)
is separated from His Human, His Divine (principle) is
not yet acknowledged inwardly, but only outwardly; and
to acknowledge it outwardly, is to acknowledge it only with
the mouth, and not in the heart, or with speech only, and
not in faith. That this is the case, may appear from Chris
tians in the other life, where the thoughts of the heart are
manifested. When it is granted them to speak from doc
trine, and from what they have heard from preaching, then
they, attribute Divinity to the Lord, and call it their faith;
but when their interior thought and faith are explored, it is
found that they have a different idea concerning the Lord,
which is as of a common man, to whom nothing divine can
be attributed. The interior thought of man is the real
ground of his faith; wherefore, such being the thought, and
thence the faith of his spirit, it is evident, that there is not
any acknowledgment of the Divine (principle) in the Lord
and from the Lord, in the Christian world, at the end of
the church. In a word, there is, indeed, an external ac
knowledgment of the Divine (principle) of the Lord, but
no internal; and external acknowledgment is of the natural
man alone, but internal acknowledgment is of his spirit it
self; and the external is laid asleep after death, but the
internal, being of his spirit, remaineth."
We have observed, then, that every one believes that,
in the spiritual world, the moral order of things will be dif
ferent from the outward order which prevails upon earth;
but, nevertheless, if we place before him a narrative which
embodies these principles, he will, generally speaking, not
believe it, for the reason of its presenting to view that in
which he professed to believe, which he thought he did
believe, but which, when realized, it is seen that he does
not; although, had he established in his mind the right
distinctions between good and evil, he would have the evi
dence of his own heart and understanding for the truth of
that which was presented to him, and, as such, would give
it full credence. Now, in another life, good and truth
being separated from the evil and the false, and all angels
being thus the form of their own good and truth, and all
devils the form of their own evil and false, it follows, that
any narrative respecting angels and devils, founded upon
this principle, must involve no other than a complete sys-
14

158 INTERCOURSE WITH
tem of morals, and of the laws of our mental constitution.
The only difference between a narrative of this kind, and
such a system presented separately from the narrative,
would be, that the former would treat of principles as em
bodied in real existence, and the latter would treat of them
in the abstract. Now, if certain principles in the abstract
be true, they cannot be rendered false by embodying them
into action, or by forming them into a dialogue; for even
were the persons fictitious, still the principles would be
true : at all events, we -may contemplate the principles in
dependently of the persons; hence we may contemplate the
principles contained in Swedenborg's narratives, indepen
dently of the angels or devils in whom they are supposed
to be realized; and if, in perusing these nairratives, the
reader admits the truth of the principles, but denies the
reality of the persons, be is at liberty to do so; though I
see not what he will gain by it, as the persons are only the
personations of the principles. On the other hand, if any
one denies the principles, of course he rejects the narrative
altogether; and in this case, let him not think that he is
only denying the existence of imaginary persons, or only
rejecting visions as visions; far from it, — he is rejecting
principles, — principles involving the vital distinctions be
tween light and darkness, good and evil, holiness and sin,
heaven and hell. He must not, therefore, deceive himself
with the idea that, in this case, he is only repudiating the
dreams of some visionary, who is demanding assent without
adequate evidence; he is rejecting that which affects the
foundation of all belief in another world, all belief in re
wards for the righteous, and punishments for the wicked.
For what, in the works of Swedenborg, is heaven shewn
to be ? It results, as we are told, from the Divine Human
of the Lord, whence also results the form of heaven; and
as this Divine Human is Divine goodness and truth, so has
every angel his locality in the body of heaven, according to
his appropriation of these principles. Heaven, therefore,
is only the realization of these principles in the creature,
as hell is their negation and perversion; angels being the
personations of heavenly principles, and devils of such as
are infernal. To reject, therefore, Swedenborg's narratives
of heaven and hell, is to reject not persons merely, but
principles, — the essential principles of good and evil, — ^yea,
the very Divine Human of the Lord Himself Suppose
Newton, in presenting his Principia to the world, declared
that the truths it contains were revealed to him by spirits;

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 159
should we be justified in rejecting the work because we dis
believed in the source from which it was declared the work
had proceeded? Surely, we should let the principles it
contains stand or fall by their own merits; at all events, if
we rejected the principles because we disbelieved in the
persons as their alleged authors, is it not plain that we
should be rejecting the very laws of nature?
Not only in the Essays, but in the works of other authors,
there is, moreover, what I cannot but conceive to be an in
consistent mode of reasoning. Writers, in general, main
tain, that example is better than precept, that the practical
character of Scripture is seen in its not treating of virtue in
the abstract, but as embodied in action. Now, if example
have more influence than precept, living characters than
abstract principles, is it of no practical utility to contemplate
precept and principle as realized in living beings, rather
than as mere abstractions ?^As usual, however, the posi
tion is speculatively admitted, but practically denied; for
no sooner is the principle verified in practice, than the
whole is pronounced to be non-practical. Strange, that the
moment a principle is practised, it should be pronounced to
be speculative! the moment it is realized in the life and
being of the creature, it should be declared to be visionary !
Believe me, my Lord, there is no sincere receiver of the
writings of Swedenborg, but feels often deeply affected by
Swedenborg's narratives of the holiness, love, and purity of
the angels. I have known of those who, frequently, can
not read them without being affected even to tears; and
this by descriptions so simple and unpretending, that an
ordinary reader might see nothing in them; while, on the
other hand, the scenes which Swedenborg describes as ex
isting among lost spirits, have often awakened such feelings
of terror and pity, that the mind is alternately overcome by
horror at the sinfulness of sin, and lost in feelings of com
passion for the woes and darkness of the fallen. Are these,
my Lord, states of mind which are to be denounced as vis
ionary? Are they to be presumed, as having no beneficial
influence on our life and conduct? — If so, the moral sense
is only a name ; and an awakened conscience — the greatest
delusion. I come now to the consideration of the third obstacle to
the reception of Swedenborg's narratives, or, ignorance of
the nature of the intermediate state.
I say, ignorance; — although I might have said, a denial,
in numerous instances, of its being a state of conscious-

160 INTERCOURSE WITH
ness. As many, however, have considered the evidences
for and against the nature of this state to be nearly balanc
ed, and that Scripture is silent upon the subject; as, there
fore, they are only uncertain whether or not, after death,
our being be virtually extinct till the judgment day, I have
thought it better to use the term ignorance than denial; al
though there are professed Christians who are not reluc
tant to avow their denial, that the intermediate state is a
state of conscious existence. The ignorance which does
not arise from evil of life, or from perverted knowledge,
would be no impediment to the reception of Swedenborg's
alleged revelations on this subject; the real obstacle lies in
the cause by which a far more deplorable ignorance is pro-r
duced, — I mean sensual and worldly principles; principles
which produce the same kind of ignorance with regard to
the nature of heaven and hell. It is affirmed by some, that
Scripture is silent upon the subject of the intermediate
state; whereas, Swedenborg maintains that it is not alto
gether silent, but that the same cause which operates in
producing doubt with regard to the nature of this state, as
also of heaven and hell, operates in preventing us from un
derstanding- what Scripture has intimated upon the subject;
that, were the mind less influenced by merely natural ideas,
the state of man after death would, to a certain extent, be
so obvious, that we should not require for our instruction a
distinct revelation on the subject.
It is lamentable to observe, how the theology of some di
vines is ever gravitating toward the e.xtinction of our be
ing. The curse of death which Adam underwent, they con
sider to be that of annihilation ; hence they maintain that,
when it is said, "all in Christ shall be made alive," the re
storation of the soul from a state of annihilation is meant;
and even after they have labored to prove this position,
down they sink again into the doctrine of oblivion and vir
tual nonentity; for they maintain, either that the interval
between death and judgment is a state of sleep, unconscious
being, or absolute destruction of existence; or else, that we
have no reason, and, consequently, that it is presumptuous,
to conclude either one way or the other, on the subject.
Tell an unbeliever that, when the body dies, we know not
but the soul sinks into a state of sleep for an indefinite pe
riod, and perhaps there will be some little difficulty in per
suading him, that there is much difference between an in
finite and an indefinite duration of sleep; nor do I think
any argument will be with him of much avail, if we admit
that Scripture is silent upon the subject,

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 161
Now, it is one great object of Christianity to purify,
warm, and invigorate the affections. Suppose, then, we
assure a truly Christian mother, who was grieving over the
loss of her child, and whose only consolation was that
the Lord had called it, that it was quite possible the object
of her affections was in a state of unconscious existence,
and that we had no evidence from Scripture that he would
not so continue for myriads of ages; would not such a com
munication be revolting to her feelings? Is not the very
principle of love in her mind, immediately associated with
that of life ? Why, then, should Christianity first exalt and
animate her affections, and then trample them to the
ground? Would not such a religion be cruel? — ^But sup
pose that, knowing little of religion, she should have a
strong natural affection for her child; would it not induce
her to wish, to hope, and hence to believe, that her child
was somewhere in a state of conscious happiness? How is
it, then, that neither natural nor spiritual affection induce
some persons to come to the conclusion, that the intermedi
ate state is one of conscious existence? I know not, except
it be, that both are counteracted by false doctrine. For
how accordant with a disbelief or doubt, of an intermediate
state of consciousness, is the doctrine of the re-union of the
same material body to the soul? since certain it is, that,
until this re-union take place, the soul cannot enter into
her final destination; cannot be in heaven or in bell; no
state of preparation for either, now that she is departed, is
supposed to be requisite; so that the circumstance either
of her having nothing to do, or of its being unknown whe
ther she has any thing to do, harmonizes well, or at least is
not very inconsistent with, the supposition of a state in
which — nothing is done.
The belief, however, of the doctrine of the re-union of
the same body to the soul, has been permitted by Divine
Providence, as Swedenborg observes, for a good reason;
namely, that if mankind had not believed in the resurrec
tion of the body, they would often have not believed in any
resurrection at all. For it being denied by some, that the
soul or spirit is any distinct substance; it being asserted by
others, that there is no evidence as to what it is, so as to
enable us either to deny or affirm ; and with regard to most
persons, any thing relating to it being beyond their com
prehension; the doctrine of its resurrection would long
since have been rejected altogether, had not a belief in the
resurrection of the body been permitted; for the body being
14*

162 INTERCOURSE WITH
a carnal, natural, corporeal, and sensual object, and hence
more within the comprehension of the natural mind, the
members of the external church can the more readily be
lieve in its resurrection, and thus preserve in themselves
that idea of a resurrection, and hence of a future life, of
which, otherwise, they would have been deprived.
Upon this subject, permit me now to add an e.xtract from
those very revelations of Swedenborg, which have been al
luded to in the Essays, as aproof of a distempered fancy: —
" 4622. Arc. Ccel. The generality do not apprehend,
that spirits and angels have sensations much inore exqui
site than men in the world, viz. sight, hearing, smelling,
somewhat analagous to taste, and touch, and especially the
delights of the affections; yet, if they had only believed that
their interior essence was a spirit, and that the body, to
gether with its sensations and members, is adapted only to
uses in the world, and that the spirit and its sensations and
organs are adequate to uses in the other life, in this case,
they would come of themselves , and almost of their own accord,
into ideas concerning the state of their spirits after death; for,
in such a case, they would think with themselves, that the
spirit of each is that very man himself who thinks, and who
lusts, who desires and is affected; and, further, that all the
sensitive principle which appears in the body, is properly
of the spirit, and belongs to the body only by influx; and
these things afterwards they would confirm with themselves
by many bonsiderations, and thereby, at length, would be
delighted with the things appertaining to their spirit, more
than with the things appertaining to their body. In reality,
also, this is the case, that it is not the body which sees,
hears, smells, feels, but its spirit; wherefore, when the
spirit is stripped of the body, it is then in its own sensations
in which it had been when in the body, and this in a more
exquisite degree; for corporeal things, as being respectively
gross, rendered the sensations obtuse, which also became
still more so in consequence ofbeing immersed in earthly
and worldly things. This I can positively affirm, that a
spirit hath more exquisite sight than a man in the body, and
also more exquisite hearing, and, what will seem surprising,
a more exquisite sense of smelling, and especially of touch;
for spirits see each other,, hear each other, and touch each
other. He who believes in a life after death, might also
conclude this from the consideration, that no life can be
given without sense, and that the quality of the life is ac
cording to the quality of the sense; yea, that the intellec-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 163
tual principle is nothing but an exquisite sense of interior
things, and the superior intellectual principle, of spiritual
things; hence, also, the things ofthe intellectual princi
ple and of its perceptions, are called the internal senses.
With the sensitive principle of man immediately after death,
the case is this: as soon as man dies, and the corporeal
parts grow cold, he is raised up into life, and, on this oc
casion, into the state of all sensations, insomuch that, at first,
he scarcely knows any other than that he is still in the body;
for the sensations in which ho is, lead him so to believe ; but
when he perceives that he hath more exquisite sensations,
and this especially when he begins to discourse with other
spirits, he then takes notice that he is in another life, and
that the death of his body was the continuation ofthe life of
his spirit, &.C. &c. — But I am aware, that the things which
have been heretofore said, will not be believed by those
who are immersed in corporeal, terrestrial, and worldly
things, that is, by such of tliem as hold those things for an
end; for these have no apprehension of any thing but of
what is dissipated by death. I am aware, also, that neither
will they believe who have thought and inquired much about
the soul, and have not, at the same time, comprehended
that the soul is man's spirit, and the spirit is the very man
which liveth in the body; for these cannot conceive any
any other notion about the soul, than that it is some prin
ciple of thought, or of flame, or of ether, which only acts
into the organical forms ofthe body, and not into*the purer
forms which are ofthe spirit in the body; and thereby,
they conceive it to be such a principle as is dissipated with
the body; and this is especially the case with those, who have
confirmed themselves in such notions by views ofthe sub
ject, being puffed up through the persuasion of their own
superior wisdom."
Closely connected with ignorance of the nature of the
intermediate state, or unbelief in its being a state of con
scious existence, is also an unbelief in the proximity o^the
spiritual world. This is the fourth impediment to the re
ception of Swedenborg's alleged revelations with regard to
the spiritual world, which we proposed to consider.
We have mentioned above, that there are those who be
lieve that the spirit, upon its departure from the body, does
not enter into a state of consciousness; hence it follows,
that heaven and hell are at some incalculable distance.
There are others who profess to be uncertain upon the sub
ject. Both parties appear to agree that a state of uncon
sciousness after death, however long, will appear, at the

164 INTERCOtlRSE WITH
judgment day, to be very short. — In reply to this we would
observe, that at present it appears to be very long. The^ues-
tion is, not what it will appear to us at some future, and, it
may be, remote period; but what it appears to us now.
Once remove from the minds of men the present application
of a truth, and we remove its practical application. No
matter, they will say, what the time may appear to us at
a far distant period; a thousand years, it may be millions of
ages, appear to us noiv very long. This constant tendency
to confine our belief only to the future, produces a practi
cal unbelief with regard to the present. Why, says Arch
bishop Tillotson, (Sermon 14,) do men say they will repent
at some future period ?— -Solely because it is future; when
the future comes to be present, they will have the same rea
son for deferring their repentance. They will consent to a
future repentance, but not to one that is present. So it is
with the world in general, with regard to heaven and hell.
They will admit the e.xistence of a heaven and hell, which
are future and afar off; but they will reject all that is said
about them, if considered as present and near. Now, all
that Swedenborg has said on the subject, tends to oppose
this evil; but those doctrines which are apt to defer every
thing to the future, tend to encourage it. Procrastination
will harmonize well with a speculative, but not with a prac
tical belief. Hence, we see those who theoretically believe
in the ministration of spirits, reject the doctrine when it is
brought Itome to them, and made practically to apply to
their conduct. They will receive it as an article of specu
lative belief; but they reject it as a rule of practice. So
long as it is in a state of theory, they, will consider it
orthodox; make that theory practical, and they reject it as
visionary. Why is the doctrine of Swedenborg, with
regard to the ministration of spirits, rejected? Frequently,
only for the reason, that he has treated as matter of fact,
what with many is merely possibility, it may be, probability;
that he has imparted a truth and reality to what they pro
fess to be their creed. Place much of what he has said
about the other world, in a speculative point of view, and
many will consider il to be reasonable; present it to them
as matter of fact, and it is absurd; afar off, it is true; at
home, it is false.
In illustration of this circumstance, allow me to select
the observations of one writer out of many who might be
quoted; I mean Archbishop Tillotson, who cannot be ac
cused of enthusiasm, and who observes (Sermon 75,) "It is
very probable that good angels are ready to do good offices,

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 165
just contrary to those of evil spirits; that is, to employ their"
best diligence and endeavor for the salvation of men ; and
that they are very sedulous and officious to restrain, and
pull back from sin, and to excite and solicit them to that
which is good; and, in a word, to do all they can to help
forward the repentance and conversion of sinners. And
this may reasonably be collected from that passage of our
Savior, where he tells us, that 'there is joy in the presence
ofthe angels of God over one sinner that repenteth. ' And
if they be so glad of the repentance of a sinner, we may
easily imagine how forward they are to further and promote
so good a work. And when sinners are brought to repent
ance, we have no reason to doubt, but that the angels are as
ready to assist their progress in goodness." Now, what
has Swedenborg imparted to us upon this subject? A veri
fication of the fact. Yet it is rejected. As long as it is
said to be very probable and highly reasonable, who objects
to it? Put the theory in action, and there are no words to
express the folly of doing so, and the absurdity of the
theory itself Men will believe in a spiritual world afar off,
but not in one that is close to them. They will believe in a
spiritual world which they may one day visit, but not in a
spiritual world which they are already in. They will believe
in an eternity that is to come, but not in one in which they
are now living; an eternal future is their belief, but not a
present eternity; they are believers, in fine, in what they
conceive is to be, and unbelievers in that which is. ¦ This, my
Lord, is one ofthe moral barriers which is raised, not only
against Swedenborg's doctrine of the ministration of spirits,
but against that of every one, who shall venture to contem
plate as actual that which is received as speculative. And
this predisposition to speculative belief and practical unbe
lief, belongs not merely to one individual or another; it is
an inherent tendency of human nature; it influences every
one more or less; even the learned and pious are not proof
against it, for it is one of the consequences of our fallen
nature. Let a man once be deeply impressed with the conviction
that while he is living in this world, it is his body only
which is in time and space, and moves from one outward
place to another; that his spirit is not in time, but in eternity ;
not in the outward and visible world of space, but in the
inward invisible world of spirits; that even now his spirit is
inwardly associated with good and evil angels, as, in the
outwarci world, he is associated externally with good and evil

166' INTERCOURSE WITH
y
persons; and it is impossible,«that he could feel that repug
nance to the very thought of communion with another world,
which so many actually feel. For if the spirit of man never
was (like the material body in which it lives,) a tenant of
this outward world of space and time, and never will or
can be; if the world of spirits be as near to the spirit, as the
world of matter to the body; if good and evil angels are as
near to us inwardly, as good or evil men in this world are
near to us outwardly; if angels are much more closely con-
sociated with us than any earthly relations possibly can be;
if they take an interest in all our thoughts and feelings ; if
we cannot breathe a breath, or stir a step, or lift an arm, or
think a thought, or feel an affection, without the mediation
of the spiritual world, why should we reckon it so strange
a thing that, at least in some particular instances, God
should allow this to come to the consciousness of the indi
vidual; especially when many admit, that this was actually
the state in which man was originally created ? Why is
it any more a species of madness in Swedenborg to see the
spiritual world, than it is in the departing souls ofthe right
eous ? Why is it an insane fancy in the one ; and holy conso
lation to the other? — a reality in the dying; a delusion in the
living.' — a blessed privilege to the departing saint; a pre
sumptuous crime in the living Christian?
That the mind and spirit are not (like matter) in time and
space, is, however, a speculative doctrine, the article of a
theoretical creed ; nor need those who assent to it alter their
practice in consequence of admitting it to be true. Now what
is the result of this speculative faith and practical infidelity?
I say it with sorrow; experience has shewn that such unbe
lieving believers are among the most determined opponents
to the narratives of Swedenborg; since, as they have-always
given themselves credit for Christian faith, and yet their be
lief has produced no practical effects upon their mind, their
hearts are often more inaccessible than even those of pro
fessed unbelievers; for, in the words of Your Grace,* "As
those who have been long accustomed to encounter dangers,
or to witness suflerings, without giving way to the corres
ponding emotions of fear or pity, are far more callous to
such emotions than those who have not been conversant
with scenes of that kind; so those who have been long fa
miliarized to the thoughts of religion without applying it to
their lives, are far more incurably hardened than if they
had never heard nor thought any thing upon the subject."
* Essay 4, Sect. 8.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 167
- «¦
It may be said, however, that a man is not to be consid
ered an unbeliever in the world hereafter, merely because
he does not believe in Swedenborg's accounts of hell. Cer
tainly not; upon one condition, that Swedenborg's accounts
of heaven and hell are untrue; for if they are true, I pre
sume it will be granted, that he must be considered, in
some sense, an unbeliever. A man believes in a God; he
does well: but is the God in whom he believes the true God,
or an idol of his own imagination? A man believes in a
future re^vard for the righteous, and punishment for the
wicked; he does well: but are the heaven and hell in which
he believes, such as really exist, or only the creature of his
own imagination? Is he a believer in the true God, in
heaven and hell as they really are ? Or, after all, is he a
believer only in himself, that is, in his own ideas of. God,
heaven and hell; and, consequently, an unbeliever in the true
God, in heaven and bell, as they really exist? If heaven be
a state of good, and hell a state of evil; if the distinctions
between heaven and hell are thus no other than the distinc
tions between good and evil; the heaven which is so de
scribed, is as real as the good of which it consists; the hell
which is so described, as real as the evil of which it consists.
To reject, therefore, the reality of such descriptions of hea
ven and hell, is to reject the reality ofthe principles of good
and evil in which they consist; for heaven and hell are only
the realization of those principles; and it remains for those
who reject them, to prove how they can do so, and yef be be
lievers in Christianity. I speak not of those who reject them
in ignorance, and who, consequently, receive that as true
in the Bible, which they are taught to believe is false in the
¦writings of Swedenborg. I speak only of those who re
ject Swedenborg's writings after examination; of whom, I am
happy to say, there are but few.
I know it has been objected, that he has contemplated as
real essences, what are only ideal abstractions; that he has
given, as every madman does, a local habitation and a name
to mere idealities; that his thoughts and feelings had be
come so vivid, as to be endowed with an imaginary being;
and that, in this state, he mistook them for real existences.
Now it is fully granted, that wherever such a state exists,
it is the mark of a distempered mind. But, I would ask, Is
it not equally the mark of a distempered mind, to mistake
for mere imaginary existences things which are real ? Are.
the eternal distinctions between good and evil, real or ideal?
Are good and evil, in themselves, mere idealities? Are

168 INTERCOURSE WITH
heaven and hell empty abstractions? Are they no where
substantiated? Are we wise only when we have ideas of
heaven, and foolish when we realize that heaven in our
own hearts? Does not the essence of a Christian's life
consist in his realizing, in his own being,' that of which he
at first forms only an idea? Is it not his folly to treat as
ideal that which is real, and to mistake the shadow for the
substance ? If the principles of good and evil, as laid
down by Swedenborg, be true, his narratives of heaven
and hell must be true; there is no alternative. ' We have
the same evidences for their truth, as we have for the 'ex
istence of any heaven and hell at all. If the laws of gravi
tation laid down by Newton be true, the constitution of our
system must be a realization of those laws. We cannot
consider those laws to be true; and a belief of their reahza-
tion in nature to be the mark ofa distempered mind.
If, now, a man realizes a good and truth in his own
heart, he so far realizes within it a heaven; for the heaven
to which he is to go, is no other than the heaven which he
has formed within himself. If his own experience assure
him, that, by a life of goodness and truth, he has realized a
heaven within himself, he is a standing witness to himself
that there is a heaven corresponding to the life of good and
truth which he has lived: and to tell him that this is a fancy,
an imagination or the mark of a distempered mind, is only
to tell him that his fancies have more foundation in fact than
other peoples' truths; his day-dreams more of reality than
other peoples' waking meditations; his madness more
soberness and truth than other peoples' sanity. Like
Cicero, speaking of the immortality of the soul, he will
say, "If it be an error, it is one which I willingly believe;"
or, like the apostle. If we are fools, "we are fools for
Christ's sake."
As, however, we shall have again to advert to the dis
tinction between what is real and what is ideal, we shall
now proceed to the consideration of the fifth obstacle, or
that which arises from erroneous views of the Divine ope
rations. It is a common observation,* that all good feelings and
*Note to the American Edition. — 'No reference appears to be made in the fol
lowing paragraphs to the doctrine of Immediate Influx; Mr. Clissold, proba
bly, not regarding It as pertinent to the course of his argument. But as the
omission may, perhaps, lead to an erroneous impression with those unacquainted
with S\yedenboi'g's writings, it seems proper to state that they teach that there
is both immediate and mediate influx into the minds of men ; immedrate from
the Lord into every angel, spirit and man; and also mediate through the spirit
ual world. (See A. C. 6058, 6472.)

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 169
thoughts are produced in us by the operation of the Holy
Spirit, — an observation Which is perfectly true; but these
operations are often considered to be immediate. What is
the consequence? The ministry of angels, or the interme
diate operation ofthe spiritual world is,, in this case, entirely
overlooked; for if the Almighty infuses into us good dis
positions and thoughts immediately, or without the interme
diate operations of the spiritual world, then is the ministry
of angels unnecessary. In this case, a belief in their at
tendance upon man may be a speculative article of faith,
but it is one which is practically useless; for if the Holy
Spirit does not work by their means, then are they not con
cerned in His operations; consequently, all our ideas of
what is the part which is actually taken by good spirits in
the work of man's salvation, become obscure and confused;
the result of which is, that persons are led to think little of
the subject (as they naturally do of every thing, which only
perplexes their minds, and on which they imagine no deter
minate knowledge can be obtained;) hence, they as natu
rally pass into a state of indifference with regard to it, then
of doubt, and, finally, of unbelief — Besides, conceiving that
their thoughts and feelings are produced immediately by
the operations ofthe Holy Spirit, and resolving all the men
tal changes through which they pass, into the immediate in
fluence of his power and the immediate exercise of his will,
they are apt to look upon their experiences as so many un
connected facts, wholly independent one of the other. The
relation between cause and effect is thus destroyed, conse
quently,, all idea of divine law; inasmuch as they consider
the only law to be God's inscrutable will, which, as they
think, acknowledges no law at all. The case is the same
with regard to their views of the other world. For what
suggests to us the idea of the wisdom of God? Is it not
the profound adaptation of means to an end; the vast chain
of end, cause, and effect, extending through creation; and,
hence, the uninterrupted relation of the whole to the part,
and the part to the whole ? Destroy the idea of relation,
and all idea of order is destroyed: hence, all idea of law,
and all idea of wisdom. Such, then, is what they do in re
gard to the spiritual world, Wbo consider the operations of
God to be immediate; the consequence is, they become pro
portionably ignorant of God, and more particularly of the
nature of His dispensations in regard to the soul; for in
nothing is His wisdom more displayed, than in the eternal
and immutable laws, according to which the soul is regene-
15

170 INTERCOURSE WITH
rated . Now Swedenborg has shewn, from the laws of analo
gy, how God no more infuses into us immediately the feelings
and thoughts of which we are conscious, than the sun acts
immediately upon our bodies; and that were His operations,
in the manner we have mentioned, direct or immediate, we
should not be vivified, but consumed, since the result would
be the same as if we fell into the sun. Hence, it is as neces
sary that there be intermediate heavens between our finite
spirits and the Infinite, as it is that there be intermediate
atmospheres between our bodies and the solar orb. When,
therefore, God worketh in us to will and to do, he worketh
in us by the ministry of his holy angels; our affections and
thoughts are, consequently, so many effects, the causes of
which are to be found in the spiritual world; the spiritual
world being connected with the natural, as cause is connect
ed with effect. If the cause ceases, the effect ceases; if a
man, therefore, were removed from the influences ofthe spir
itual world, the source of all feeling and thought would be in
tercepted. Like a member excised from the body, he would
cease to live ; for God is to heaven what heaven is to the soul,
.p.nd what the soul is to the body. In a similar manner, to a
wicked man the ministration of evil spirits is equally neces
sary; since, without them, he would have no power to will
or to do what is evil; hence, constituted as men generally
are, the influence of good and evil spirits is absolutely re
quisite to the existence of their being, and of their freedom
in choosing and executing good or evil. It is a maxim
with Swedenborg, and one the truth of which reflection will
verify, that thought originates from affection; hence, that
the operation of the spiritual world is mediately upon our
thoughts, and immediately upon our affections. The affec
tions, however, are those of which we are most ignorant ;
because they are not objects of thought, but the sources
from which thought originates. Hence arises a proportion
able ignorance with regard to the operations of the spirit
ual world, and the nature of the influences under which we
act; which are often so subtle, so far removed from -the
sphere of our consciousness or inward discernment, that we
are apt entirely to mistake their nature, or, in the language
of our Savior, not "to know what manner of spirit we are
of" The nature of the affections is, therefore, one grand
subject of Swedenborg's philosophy; and, in proportion as a
man knows these, and makes them the subject of purifica
tion, so in proportion is he inclosercommunion with angelic
beings, and through these with the Lord. The character,

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 171
therefore, of the spiritual beings with whom man is in con
nection, depends entirely upon the nature of his affections,
being heavenly or infernal according as his affections are
holy or sinful. As his affections are ever varying, and those
of the Christian ever progressing from less to more pure,
so is a good man accordingly, even in this world, associated
with different orders of heavenly beings, and ever passing
from a lower to a higher order of angels. Similar is the
law which obtains with regard to a wicked man; who, the
more he confirms himself in evils of life, the deeper he
sinks, even while upon earth, into the regions of infernal
society. The society, therefore, which each forms to him
self while in this world, is the society into which he passes
when he removes into the next.
Hence Swedenborg observes, (Arcana Coelestia, 4067,)
" In order that it may be comprehended how the case is,
in regard to goods and truths appertaining to man, it may
be expedient to reveal what is known scarcely to any one.
It is, indeed, known and acknowledged, that all good and
all truth are from the Lord; and it is also acknowledged by
some that there is an influx, but of such a nature as to be un
known to man; yet, whereas it is not known, at least is not
acknowledged in heart, that about man there are spirits and
angels, and that the internal man is in the midst of them,
and is thus ruled by the Lord, this influx is little believed,
although a belief in it is professed. There are innumera
ble societies in another life, which are disposed and arrang
ed of the Lord, according to all the genera of good and
truth; and societies which are in the opposite principle, ac
cording to all the gertera of what is evil and false; inso
much that there is not given any genus of good and
truth, nor any species of that genus, nor any specific differ
ence, but what have such angelic societies, or to which an
gelic societies correspond; and, on the other hand, there
is not given any genus of what is evil and false, nor any
species of that genus, nor even any specific difference,
which have not corresponding diabolical societies. Every
man is in the society of such as to his interiors, that is, as
to his thoughts and affections, although he is ignorant of it;
and hence cometh all that man thinketh and willeth; so
that if the societies of spirits and angels in which he is,
were taken away, in that instant he would cease to have
either thought or will; yea, in that instant he would fall
down absolutely dead. Such is the state of man, although
*he believes that he hath all things from himself, and that

172 INTERCOURSE WITH
there is neither hell nor heaven, or, at least, that hell is far
removed from him, and also heaven. Moreover, the good
appertaining to man appears as somewhat simple, or as one ;
nevertheless, it is so manifold, and consists of such various
principles, that it can in no wise be explored, even as to
general principles only. The case is the same with evil ap
pertaining to man. But such as the good is appertaining to
man, such is the society of angels with which he is associ
ated ; and such as the evil is appertaining to man, such is
the society of evil spirits with which he is associated. Man
invites to himself such societies, or places himself in the so
ciety of such, inasmuch as like associates with like; as, for
example, he who is covetous, invites to himself the socie
ties of such as are principled in a like lust; he who loves
himself in preference to others, and despiseth others, in
vites to himself like spirits; he who takes delight in revenge,
invites such as are principled in a similar delight; and so in
other cases. Such spirits communicate with hell, and man
is in the midst of them, and is ruled altogether by them, in
somuch that he is no longer under his own power and guid
ance, but under theirs; although he supposes, from the
delight and consequent liberty which he enjoys, that he rul-
eth himself But he who is not covetous, or who doth not
love himself in preference to others, and doth not despise
others, and doth not take delight in revenge, is in the soci
ety of like angels, and by them is led ofthe Lord; and in
deed, by freedom, to every good and truth to which he suf
fers himself to be led; and as he suffers himself to be led
to an interior and more perfect good, so he is led to inte
rior and more perfect angelic societies. The changes of his
¦state are nothing else but changes of societies. That this is
the case, is evidenced to me by continual experience, which
bath now been enjoyed several years; whereby the circum
stance is become as familiar to me, as somewhat which man
hath been accustomed to from his infancy."
Such, then, is the communion with angels, in which
every true Christian lives, although he may not be gifted
with any open vision of the societies with which he is sur
rounded; such is that inward consociation with angels,
which the Church of Christ enjoys even upon earth, as we
have already stated to be announced by the apostle —
"Ye are come unto Mount Zion, and unto the city of the
living God, the heavenly Jerusalem; and unto an innume
rable company of angels, to the general assembly and
church ofthe first-born, which are written in heaven; and

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 173
to God the Judge of all, and to the spirits of just men made
perfect," &c. &C. &c. On this subject, Swedenborg else
where observes, (Arc. Coel.)
"2796. The various states which were assumed by the
Humanity of the Lord, when upon earth, must needs be
unknown to man; inasmuch as he never reflects on chang
es of states, notwithstanding such changes take place con
tinually, both as to things intellectual or the thoughts, and
as to things ofthe will-principle or the affections. The rea
son why he does not reflect on these changes, is, because
he believes that all and singular the things appertaining to
him, follow by natural order, and that there is no superior
principle which directs them; when, nevertheless, the case
is this, that all and singular the things appertaining to man
are disposed by spirits and angels, and that hence come all
states and changes of states, and thus they are directed by the
Lord towards ends, to eternity; which ends the Lord alone
foresees. That this is the case, hath been made known to
me most clearly by the experience now of several years. It
hath been given, also, to know and observe what spirits and
angels were attendant upon me, and what states they oc
casioned; and this I can positively declare, that all states,
even to the smallest particulars thereof, are from this
source, and that they are thus directed by the Lord. It
hath been also given to know and observe, that, in each par
ticular state, there are several others which do not appear,
and which, when they are together, appear as one common
state; and that those states are directed and disposed to
states which follow, in an orderly series. These things
with man are ofthe Lord's operation; but with the Lord
Himself, during his abode in the world, they were effected
by and from Himself; because He was Divine, and the
very esse of His Life was Jehovah. To know the changes
of state as to things ofthe understanding and ofthe will in
man, and in what order they follow each other, and through
what series they pass, and thus how they are bended by the
Lord to good as far as is possible, is angelical. The wis
dom ofthe angels is such, that they perceive these things
most minutely ; and hence it is, that the things here reveal
ed in the internal sense, concerning the changes of state
with the Lord, are clearly and' distinctly perceived by the
angels, inasmuch as they are in the light of heaven from
the Lord; and they are also, in some small degree, intelli
gible to the man who lives in simple good. But they are
obscure, and as nothing, to those who are principled in evil,
15*

174 INTERCOURSE WITH
and also to those who are in the deliriums of (their own)
wisdom; for these latter have obscured and extinguished
their natural and rational light by various things, which
have induced darkness, howsoever they may believe them
selves to be in a superior light to others."
"2886. The case with man, as to his affections and as to
his thoughts, is this. No person whatsoever, whether man,
spirit, or angel, can will and think from himself, but from
others; nor can these others will and think from themselves,
but all again from others, and so forth; and thus each from
the first source or principle of life, which is the Lord.
That which is unconnected doth not exist. Evil and false
principles have connection with the hells; whence comes
the power of willing and thinking with those who are in
those principles, and also their love, affection, and delight,
consequently, their freedom. But goodnesses and truths
have connection with heaven; whence comes the power of
willing and thinking with those who are principled therein,
and also their love, affection, and delight, consequently,
their freedom. Hence it may appear, what is the source
of the one freedom, and of the other. That this is the real
case, is perfectly well known in another life; but, at this
day, it is altogether unknown in the world."
The last obstacle to which we shall here advert, as stand
ing in the way ofthe reception of Swedenborg's narratives,
is False Philosophy.
The particular difficulty to which we advert may, per
haps, best be illustrated by the following quotation. — After
speaking ofthe paradisiacal objects in heaven, Swedenborg
observes, (Arcana Coelestia, 1626) : "Thus John saw the
New Jerusalem, which is described by him in these words:
'He carried me away in the spirit, to a great and high
mountain; and shewed me that great city, the Holy Jeru
salem, having a wall great and high, and having twelve
gates. The building of the wall was jasper, and the city
'ivas pure gold, like unto clear glass. The foundations of
the wall were adorned with all manner of precious stones.
The first foundation was jasper; the second, sapphire; the
third, chalcedony; the fourth, emerald; the fifth, sardonyx;
the sixth, sardius; the seventh, chrysolite; the eighth,
beryl; the ninth, topaz; the tenth, chrysoprasus; the elev
enth, jacinth; the twelfth, amethyst.' (Rev. xxi, 10, &c.) —
not to mention similar descriptions by the prophets. Innu
merable such objects are seen by angels and angelic spir
its in clear day; and, what is wonderful, they are perceived

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 175
with all fulness of sense* This, a person who has extin
guished spiritual ideas by the terms and definitions of hu
man philosophy, and by reasonings, can never believe,
when yet it is most true: that it is true, might be evident to
every one from this consideration, that such things were
so frequently seen by the prophets."
Both in this passage, and in numerous others, Sweden
borg refers to those whose minds are given to the abstrac
tions of human reason, as more particularly incredulous
not only of his narratives, but of others to the same effect
presented to us in Scripture. Let us inquire into the rea
son of this; let us ascertain whether, on the supposition of
a true revelation being made concerning the objects exist
ing in another world, habits of abstraction would at all tend
to make human philosophers unbelievers.
There is a something which convinces me prima facie
that it would. The reason is, that, more particularly in
regard to mind, philosophers do not so much contemplate
real existences as abstractions from them. They are more
conversant with ideas of qualities or properties abstracted
from substances, than with ideas of substances themselves.
Now, whether they aro right or wrong in this particular; it
is not necessary to consider; it is sufficient to say, that the
very habit of abstracting qualities and properties, is apt to
produce a tendency in the mind to forget substances alto
gether; so much so, indeed, that the mind at length finds
it can do very well without them, till at last it virtually
rejects them. I say, virtually rejects them; for, although
it may allow that such things are, it never admits them as
a legitimate subject of thought, and as much repudiates
them as if they were not. The mind thus contemplating
* The subject of Swedenborg's visit to the celestial abodes, being alluded to
in the Essays, as one which is of no particularly useful or practical tendency.
It may be observed, that our Savior says, " In my Father's house are many
mansions;" hence, tis the reward of every one is according to his works, so
his place of abode, or his mansion In heaven, will be more or less glorious In
proportion to his degree of purity or holiness; since, according to Swedenborg,
-the former is the outward representative of the latter. Hence we see, how a
narrative concerning the celestial abodes, may have a direct relation to princi
ples of life and conduct. A similar observation applies to the raiment of an
gels, and to all other particulars connected with them; narratives of which may
thus Involve principles of angelic purity and holiness ; and I would fain believe
that, as man is, in this world, in a state of preparation for an angelic life here
after, whatever has a relation to pt^ciples of angelic purity and holiness is in
itself highly practical, and therefore ought to be considered by him to be such.
The only ground upon which he could regard such principles as non-practical,
is, that he had no care or concern upon the subject.

176 INTERCOURSE WITH
every thing as abstracted from a substance, and, in this
state, being brought to reflect on itself, comes to a conclu
sion in accordance with its previous habits; hence mind
itself is contemplated as an abstraction, a quality, an
ideality, an unsubstantial something which approaches so
nearly to nothing, as almost to amount to a negation of its
existence. How few, for example, in the present day,
think of applying the term substance to mind? Whether,
in so doing, they are right or wrong, certain it is, that the
very constitution of mind which they have superinduced
upon themselves, must necessarily make them tend to
reject any narrative which should profess to contemplate
as real, and substantial, that which they have been accus
tomed to contemplate as ideal and unsubstantial ; and noth
ing but the passages in Scripture which seem to attribute a
spiritual body, and a human form, to the spirit of man after
departing from the body, could prevent them from falling
into absolute unbelief with regard to the existence of the
spirit of man hereafter, as a substantial human form.
Need I go farther in illustration of this remark, than the
following observation made by the late Professor Stewart.
Speaking of the words, substance, and essence, he re
marks, ' 'Instead of defining mind to be a thinking sub
stance, it seems much more logically correct to define it, a
thinking being. Perhaps, it would be better still to avoid,
by the use of the pronoun that, any substantive whatever;
Mind is that which thinks and wills," — (Enc. Britannica,
Dissertation 1, Note I, page 243.) Here the terms es
sence and substance, as applied to mind, are summarily
discarded; the latter term being specifically mentioned in
another place, (note, page 58,) as implying "a greater
degree of positive knowledge concerning the nature of
mind, than our faculties are fitted to attain." The spirit
of man is thus left without either substance or being; nay,
without spirituality, which, we are afterwards told, is not
"a positive but negative idea, signifying only immateri
ality;" and, as it were to preclude all possibility of our
knowing anything about the soul, it is said, "The charac-
teristical merits of Descartes' Meditations, do not consist
in the novelty of the proofs contained in them of the spirit
uality of the soul (on which point, Descartes has added
little or nothing to what had been advanced by his prede
cessor;) but in the clear and decisive arguments, by which
they expose the absurdity of attempting to explain the men
tal phenomena, by analogies borrowed from those of mat-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 177
ter." Without reference to the merits or demerits of
Descartes, the sura of the argument is, that we ought not
to apply the term substance to mind; that it would be bet
ter not to apply the term being; that the term spirituality
conveys only a negative idea; and that no analogies from
matter to mind are admissible in explaining the mental
phenomena. — How forcibly do these observations remind
us ofthe words, "The world by luisdom knew not God;" for
be it remarked, the very same observations are applicable,
nay, are actually applied, by many writers, to the Deity
himself; and thus, in regard both to God and man, the one
as an Infinite, the other as a finite spirit, the abstractions
of human philosophy leave us equally in the dark; and
philosophy, by its wisdom, knows as little ofthe soul, as, it
is said, by its wisdom it once knew of God. Now, what
does Swedenborg affirm? That a plain simple mind, be
lieving in the Lord and in a future state, and living accord
ing to that belief, though, in other respects, ignorant and
without the advantages of education, has a truer idea ofthe
nature ofthe soul, of God, and ofa future state, than such
philosophers as we have mentioned. For the simple-minded
person, when thinking of the soul or spirit, thinks of it as
of a substance with a human form; and this, as Sweden
borg shews, is the real fact. It is true that, in entertain
ing these ideas, an uneducated mind will think of form as
occupying our visible space, and that he will imagine to
himself something seeming to have the attributes of matter;
still, if the outward image he thus conceives be only an
external sign, in his natural mind, of a more inward and
spiritual thought, his idea is much nearer to the truth, than
that of philosophers, who contemplate the soul as having
nothing analogous to matter, as being without form or sub
stance; and who, consequently, fall into doubt and uncer
tainty, or, it may be, absolute unbelief, with regard to every
thing relating to the soul, to the spiritual world, or to vis
ions, as they are described in the Word of God; for it is
impossible to reconcile the .scriptural idea of soul and
spirit,' which imply body, substance, and form, with a phi
losophy which repudiates all. If the person believe in
spite of the philosophy, well; but so far as the philosophy
itself is concerned, it is not only sceptical, but infidel.
Alas! well may Swedenborg call such ideas, or, rather,
absence of all ideas respecting the soul, — not the progress,
but the regress,-^not the revival, but the perdition, — of all
sound philosophy. It is an ancient proverb, that as the tree

178 INTERCOURSE WITH
falls, so it lies; that we go into the other world with the
same character of mind, the same habits of feeling and
thought, which we had acquired to ourselves in this. What
is the consequence? Do we imagine that, when we have
entered into the other world, and carried our sceptical
habits with us, they will necessarily be removed by the
evidence ofthe senses? Such is not the law ofthe human
mind in our present life. Where habits of scepticism are
superinduced, and confirmed, they can influence even the
senses, and make a person doubt the reahty of any thing he
sees. Has not the system of idealism verified this fact ? —
a system, according to which nothing is considered as hav
ing a real, but every thing, in spite of the senses, an ideal
or unsubstantial existence.
Now, where a person speaks from internal conviction,
or from a conclusion to which he has arrived by the exer
cise of his rational powers, the conclusion to which he thus
comes, is the real interior thought of his mind. If, there
fore, he is taught any thing in religion contrary to this, and
he says it is so, because it is a matter of faith, the article
of a creed, and, therefore, that he ought to believe it; this
is a mere external admission, — a truth which has no root
in his mind; because, when left to himself and to his own
principles, he comes either to the opposite conclusion, or
to a state of doubt upon the subject. This latter is, there
fore, his real creed, and not the former; this it is which is
the habit of thought superinduced upon his rational facul
ties, not the former; these are the principles upon which
his mind has been constituted, not the former; and here,
therefore, we see the consequences of that species of met
aphysics or philosophy, which, in regard to mind, deals
only in abstractions, and rejects realities.
Why, then, have I adverted to this subject? Because
the study of this kind of philosophy has had a considerable
influence over the higher classes in this country; and, if I
mistake not, over the minds of many divines, who, in their
education, have been taught to receive these principles as
genuine philosophy. What is the consequence.^' The
very idea of a vision comes to be ridiculed; whoever pro
fesses to have seen one, is at once set down as, necessa
rily, a person of disordered imagination;* all sorts of
• Dr. Middleton, in his "Free Inquiry," attempts to shew the falsity of an
alleged vision In the early ages ofthe church, on the ground, that It represented
the soul in a corporeal human form.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 179
learned hypotheses are invented to account for the phe
nomenon; while arguments are brought forward against
the narratives of Swedenborg, which, if true, overthrow
the authority of Scripture at once, and reduce all the
prophets to the character of madmen, visionaries, or im
postors. For, with what sort of feeling can readers turn
from any book, which they are taught to believe contains
true philosophy, and where the mind is treated of only as a
quality, or abstract thinking principle, to another book
which they are taught to believe contains no true philoso
phy, and where the mind is treated of as a substance and
form? Surely, it is a substance and form, or it is not; if
it be, there must be something radically wrong, or radically
deficient, in that philosophy which excludes the idea. Sup
pose, however, a person reads the writings of Swedenborg
under the impression, that the mind is only an abstract
thinking principle, what will be his natural suggestions?
That Swedenborg is considering as real, that which is un
real; that he is mistaking qualities or properties, for sub
stances; abstractions, for actual existences; and hence,
that he is giving proofs of that sort of distempered fancy,
which mistakes its ideas for realities. Assuredly, if it be
the mark of a distempered mind to attribute a real exist
ence to that which has none, it is equally the mark of a
distempered mind, to deprive a real existence of that, in
virtue of which alone it is reaK I am convinced, that one
ground of prejudice against the writings of Swedenborg, is,
that he considers the mind of man as a substance and form;
and that, in consequence, he is led into modes of expres
sion so different from those which are commonly adopted,
that the learned of modern days consider his language
either as unintelligible, or as betraying a creative fancy.
A modern physiologist observes, that we must not call
the mind a substance; because, to do so, is a species of
materialism? Why is it a species of materialism? Sure
ly the materialists are they who do not apply the term
substance to the soul, and not those who do; inasmuch
as they are unable to form any other than a material idea
of substance. Is it not confessed to be a fundamental
doctrine of theology, that God is a substance? — that, al
though there are three persons, there is one substance? Is
this materialism? If not, why is it materiahsm to call the
soul a substance ? Or how is it, that a Divine substance can
exercise its influence upon that which is no substance?
Truly, if we allow this doctrine of unsubstantiality to pre-

180 INTERCOURSE WITH
vail, it must lead to a direct negation of the real existence
of God, and of the soul; for every man of common sense
will ask, how can that be real which is unsubstantial? Must
not its existence, after all, be ideal? It is against these
doctrines, my Lord, that Swedenborg raises the voice of a
divine philosophy. Call it speculation, theory, fancy, or
what other names our opponents may please,* we cannot
cease, as sincere Christians, to protest against principles,
the only tendency of which is, to undermine the foundation
of all true religion, and all true philosophy.
Not only, however, does Swedenborg maintain that the
soul is not a mere quality, not a mere property, not an
abstract thinking principle, but a distinct substance and
form, — in fine, a spirit dwelling within the body; but that
thought, or idea, is only a variation of that form; hence,
that thought implies a thinking substance, as much as sight,
or hearing, implies a seeing and hearing substance; that it
is as absurd to contemplate thought as a sometjjing inde
pendent of the substance of the soul or spirit, as it is to
contemplate sight or hearing as a something independent of
the substance of the eye or the ear. Hence, that when a
man thinks, more particularly when he thinks freely from
his own affection, his thought is a variation ofthe form of
the substance of bis soul; that, if he be a good man, this
form is a form of heaven, an image and likeness of God;
and that the more he goes oh to perfection, the more heav
enly and perfect is his spiritual form, and hence his spirit
ual thought; that if he be a wicked man, his form is the
form of hell; and the more wicked he is, the more infernal
are the form and thought of his spirit. Thus we see, that
in every thought there is either heaven or hell; in fine,
that every thought contains within itself the whole man,
however simple or uncompounded it may appear to us.
Our thoughts in general, however, present to us an appear
ance somewhat' like the motions of the hand on the face of
a dial. How simple does the motion appear! Yet when
we come to look within, the higher we trace the motion
toward the spring, or the more interiorly we examine the
machine, particularly if it be complex, the more compound
ed do we perceive the motion of the hands to be. Thus,
*The Oxford Tracts speak of Swedenborgianism, as a mixture of imposture
and del-usion. The observation is one, which might naturally be expected to
come from a theological school, one of whose distinguishing tenets is, that as
the Scripture Is the written Word of God, so tradition Is the unwritten Word of
God.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 181
the case is the same with regard, to the human spiritual
body, as with regard to the human natural, or material
body. Lift only an arm, move but a finger, — what endless
machinery, what a complexity of operations is requisite to
produce this single motion! Analyze this motion, and we
resolve it into endless particulars, which, when compound
ed, appear simple and uncompounded. In both cases, the
less instructed is the mind, the more simple or uncompound
ed will the subject of examination appear.
Before concluding this part of the letter, it may be re
quisite to make another observation.
We commonly pray to God, that he will send us the
influence of His Holy Spirit, and inspire us with holy
thoughts. But what do we mean by this influence? It is
well known, that it is a term to which no distinct idea is
generally attached. Literally, it means inflowing, commonly
called by Swedenborg influx . But if the mind and thought
be an abstraction, what influx or influence* can there
be into an abstraction ? How can there be an influence into
that which has no substantial existence ? And if substance
be considered as pertaining only to that which is material,
how can that which is unsubstantial have any influence
Upon that which is unsubstantial? There was a time when
the term influence conveyed a clear and distinct idea;
when authors spoke of divine influence into the soul; but
now that our notions have become more external, and, par
ticularly in matters of theology, dwell' more upon the out
side of things, it is more convenient to speak of influence
upon than of influence intb; the former expression being
well adapted to signify the operation ofa power from with
out, but not the operation of a power from within; that is
to say, it seems to harmonize more with the idea of what
is external, than of what is internal. Thus the term influ
ence, which once expressed a clear idea, now expresses an
obscure one; and any attempt to regain the clear idea in
place of the obscure one, is' too often considered to be pre
sumption. It involves, we are told, a theory. What the
ory ? The theory that the soul is a real spiritual substance,
* Speaking ofthe various uses ofthe terms influx and influence, Stewart ob
serves, " In all these cases there will be found, at bottom, one common idea,
the existence of some secret and mysterious connection between two things, of
which connection it Is conceived to, be Impossible or unwise to trace what Ba
con calls the latens processus." Dissertation I., note A A, The course of this
alleged impossibility and impropriety we have already intimated.
16

182 INTERCOURSE WITH
into which the Divine Spirit flows, as The Substance of all
substances. No wonder that when such obscure ideas, as we have
pointed out, are introduced into theology, the whole sub
ject should be overclouded with darkness and mystery ; and
theology, like the sciences of old, become loaded with
occult expressions and occult ideas, which, while it is im
agined they convey a positive knowledge, because we are
familiar with the terms, leave the mind precisely in the
darkness in which it was before .
"It is impossible, (says Swedenborg, in one of his de
scriptions of the spirhual world, Arcana Coelestia, 6053,
6054,) that any thing should be known, or even thought,
respecting influx, and the commerce of the soul with the
body, unless we know what the soul is, and also somewhat
concerning its quality. If the soul be a thing unknown,
nothing can be said concerning its influx and intercourse;
for how can the communication of two parts be a subject of
thought, when the mind is in total ignorance concerning
the quality of one of them? That ignorance prevails as to
every quality of the soul, especially in the learned world,
may be manife.st from tliis consideration, that some believe
it to be a certain ethereal principle; some, a principle of
flame or fire; some, a principle of pure thought; some, a
principle of general vitality; some, a principle of natural
activity ; and a still further proof of the prevailing igno
rance concerning the nature of the soul, is, that various
places in the body are assigned it; some place it in the
heart; some in the brain, and in the fibres there; others,
in the striated bodies; others, in the ventricles; others, in
the small gland; and some, in every part; but, in this case,
they conceive of a vital principle, such as is common to
every living thing ; from which considerations it is evident,
that nothing is known concerning the soul; and this is the
reason why all that has been asserted on the subject,
is grounded in mere conjecture. And whereas it was
impossible, thus to form any idea respecting the soul,
the generality of mankind could not but believe, that
the soul is a mere principle of vitality, which, when
the body dies, is dissipated*; and hence it is, that
? A modem -physiologist, who speaks of Swedenborg as a monomaniac,
instructs his pupils, by way of contrast perhaps to Swedenborgian fancies and,
speculations. In the following more sound and Christian principles :-^"!SeeIng
tliat the brain thinks, and feels, and wills, as clearly as that the liver has the
power of producing bile, and does produce It, and a salt the power of producing a
certain form, and does crystallize, he leaves others at liberty to fancy an hypotbcsia

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD". 183
the learned have less belief in a life after death than the
simple; and, in consequence of such unbelief, neither can
they believe in those things appertaining to that life, which
of its power being a subtle, material, immortal substance {qy. or fluid,)
exactly as they fancy life to be a subtle fluid, or perhaps, though vei'y extraordi
narily, the same subtle fluid (if subtlety is. immateriality and immortality;)
elucidating the subject no more than in the case of life, and equally increasing
the number of its difficulties; as though we were not created beings, or not al
together ignorant what matter ia, or of what it is capable and incapable; as
though matter exhibited nothing but extension, impenetrability, attraction,
and inertness ; and as though an Ahnighty could not, if it seemed good to him,
have endowed it, as he most evidently has, with tl)e superaddition of life, and
even of feeling and will.. . . .The physical inquirer, finding the mind a power of
the brain, and abstaining from hypothesis, must conclude that, in the present
order of things, when the brain ceases to live, the power necessarily ceases;
that, in the language of Scripture, dust we are, and unto dust we all return ; that
our being is utterly extinguished, and we go back to the insensibility of the
earth whence wc were taken. Our consciousness of personality can afford no
reason for imagining ourselves immortal and distinct from earth, more than
brutes; for this tlie fly possesses equally with the philosopher, about whose
head.it buzzes." — All the arguments inproofof the immortality of the soul, as de
duced from the moral government of God, tlie improveableness of our characters,
&c., he very summarily dismisses, as partly originating in a desire to explain eve
ry thing. ' He says, that at death we are utterly extinct ; but, "nevertheless, that
we are i-equired, as Christians, to believe in the resurrection, which is a miracle,
and, as such, is contrary to the real order of things. Tliat it is then our bodies
that rise, fov that the Christian doctrine teaches the I'esurrection of, what
we obviously are, bodies, that is, material bodies, endowed with the su
peraddition of life, feeling, and will.^Such is the sound philosophy which this
author substitutes for the speculations of Swedenborg; in support of which, he
calls to his aid the lucubrations of Bishop Law, Bishop Watson, Locke, and other
eminent writers. Here, tlien, we have an illustration ofthe following comment of
Swedenborg on the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. Arc. Ccel. 196.
"The sensual man, or he who believes only his senses, denies the existence of
spirit, because he does not see it. ' It is nothing,' says he, * because I am not
sensible of it. What I see and toirch, that I am persuaded has existence.' The
scientific man, or he who forms his conclusions from the sciences, says within
himself, * What is spirit but a casual vapor, or heat, or some other thing (which
he denominates by some term appertainingto science,) and which vanishes as
soon as such vapor, heat, &c. is extinguished'? Have not other animals
their bodies, senses, and something analogous to reason'? and yet we pro
nounce them to be mortal, and the spirit of man to be immortal !' Thus be
reasons himself into a denial of the existence of a spirit. In like manner, phi
losophical men, who wish to have more discernment than others, speak of spirit
in terms which they themselves are unacquainted with; as is evident from their
^Jisputing about them, contending that not a single expression is applicable to
spirit which is at all grounded in any thing material, organical, or extended;
thus they remove it from their ideas in such a manner, that it entirely vanishes
in respect to them, and becomes — a mere nothing. Nevertheless, the wiser sort
of these philosophers assert spirit to be a thinking principle; but, in their rea
sonings about this thinking principle, in consequence of separ-ating it from the
idea of snbstantiality, tjiey at length conclude that it must needs vanish when
tlie body dies. Thus, all who ground their reasonings in mere sensual, scien
tific, and philosophical principles, deny the existence of spirit, and, in so doing,
they become altogether incredulous as to whatever is asserted in relation to spirit
and spiritual things. Not so the simple in-heart; if they are questioned con
cerning the existence of spirit, they declare their unfeigned belief therein, be-

184 INTERCOURSE WITH
are the celestial and spiritual things of faith, and love. This
is also evident from the Lord's words in Matthew: ,'Thou
hast hid these things from the wise and intelligent, and hast
revealed them unto infants,' (xi, 25.) And again, 'seeing
they do not see, and hearing they do not hear, neither do
they understand,' (xiii, 13;) for the simple think no such
thing concerning the soul, but believe that they shall live
after death; in which simple faith, lies concealed, although
they are not aware of it, a belief that they shall live there
as men, shall see angels, shall discourse with them, and
enjoy happiness.
"Asto what concerns the soul, of which it is said that it
shall live after death, it is nothing else but the man himself,
cause the Lord hath said that they should continue to live after death. Thus
they do not extinguish their rational principle, but cause It to live by the 'Word
of the Lord."
Arc. Ccel. 10,099. " Most of tlie learned, at this day, have no other idea
concerning things successive, than as what is continuous, or, what coheres by
continuity. In consequence of having this idea concerning the succession of
things, they cannot conceive what Is the discrimination between the exteriors
and Interiors of man, consequently, neither between the body and the spirit of
man ; wherefore, when they think of those things from those Ideas, they
cannot at all understand that the spirit of man, after the dissipation or
death of th^ body, can live under a human form. — But things successive are not
connected continuously, but discretely; that is, distinctly according to degrees;
for inferior things are altogether distinct from exterior. Insomuch that exterior
things may be separated, whilst interior things still continue In their life.
Hence It is, that man can he withdrawn from the body and think In his spirit;
or, according to a form of speakingin use amongst the ancients, can bo with
drawn from things sensual, and elevated towards things interior. The an
cients, also, knew, that whpn man is withdrawn from the sensual things which
are of the body, he is withdrawn or elevated Into the light of his spirit, thus into
the light of heaven. Hence, likewise, the learned ancients knew, that when
the body was dissipated they should live an interior life, which they called their
spirit: and, whereas they regarded that life as the very human life itself, ihey
thetice also knew that they should live under a human form. Snch was the idea
which they had concerning the soul of man; and since that life was In affinity
with life.divine, they hence perceived that their soul was immortal ; for they
knew that that part of man which was In affinity with life divine, and 'hns con
joined to it, cannot in any wise die. Biit this Idea concerning the soul and
Concerning the spirit of man, after those ancient times, disappeared ; by reason,
as was said above, of the want of a just idea of things successive. Hence, also,
it is, that they who think from modern erudition, do not know that there is a
spiritual principle, aud that this is distinct from what is natural; for they who
have an idea of things-successive as of what is continuous, cannot conceive of
what is spiritual any otherwise than as of somewhat more purely natural;
when yet they aro distinct from each other, like what is prior and what is
posterior, thus, as tiiat which begets and that which is bcgotlen ; hence it is,
that by persons of such erudition the discrimination is not apprehended
between tiie internal or spiritual man, and between the external or natural;
thus neither between man's internal thought and will, and his external
tlioughl and will. Hence, also, they are unable to comprehend any thing con
cerning faith and love, concerning heaven and hell, and concerning the life of
man after death,"

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 185
who lives in the body, that is the interior man, who by the
body acts in the world, and who gives to the body to live;
this man, when he is loosed from the body, is called a spirit,
and appears in this case altogether in a human form; yet
cannot in any wise be seen by the eyes of the body, but by
the eyes of the spirit ; and before the eyes of the latter ap
pears as a man in the world, hath senses, viz. of touch, of
smell, of hearing, of seeing, much more exquisite than in
the world; hath appetites, cupidities, desires, affections,
loves, such as in the world, but in a more excellent degree;
thinks also as in the world, but more perfectly; discourses
with others; in a word, he is there as in the world, insomuch
that, if he doth not reflect upon the circumstance of his
being in the other life, he knows no other than that he is
in the world, which I have occasionally heard from spirits;
for the life after death is a continuation of the life in the
world. This, then, is the soul of man which lives after
death. But, lest the idea should fall upon somewhat un
known by using the term soul, in consequence of the con
jectures and hypotheses concerning it, it is better to say the
spirit of man, or, if you prefer it, the interior man; for it
appears there altogether as a man, with all the members
and organs that man hath, and it is also the real man him
self in the body. That this is the case, may also be mani
fest from the angels seen, as recorded in the Word, who
were all seen in the human form; for all the angels in
heaven have a human form, because the Lord hath,
who after his resurrection appeared so often as a man.
The ground and reason why an angel and the spirit of a
man is a man in form, is, because the universal heaven frorn
the Lord hath (a tendency) to conspire to a human form,
whence the universal heaven is called the greatest created
human form; and whereas the Lord lives in every individu
al in heaven, and by influ.x from the universal heaven acts
upon every individual, therefore every angel is an image
thereof, that is, a form most perfectly human; as, in like
manner, is man after death."
Thus have we presented a very general outline of Swe
denborg's ideas, in regard to the soul or spirit of man,
which is here done for two reasons; first," because the dis
belief that the soul is a substance and form, is often the
ground of disbelief in Swedenborg's alleged revelations;
for how can any one who believes the soul to be extinguish
ed at death, and that, independently of the body, it has
neither form nor substance, give credit to a narrative which
16*

186 INTERCOURSE WITH
treats ofthe soul as possessing both, and living, immediate
ly after its separation from the body, in a higher exercise of
its powers than it did before ? The second reason for which
this general outline is furnished, is, because it is proposed
to add a few brief remarks upon the subject of analogy; and
it would have been useless to speak of any relations be
tween two things, of one of which we are wholly ignorant;
it being but empty sound to speak of analogy between that
which has substance and form, and that which has neither;
or between two things, of one of which we are wholly
ignorant. As, I am sorry to say, there is no little tendency, in
some classes of the Christian community, to treat the sub
ject of analogy, as explained by Swedenborg, either with
unconcern or ridicule, perhaps I cannot better introduce
the few remarks which are intended to be made upon it,
than by the following quotation from the work of an
author,* who was an ornament to the Church of England.
- " God made the universe and all the creatures contained
therein, as so many glasses wherein he might reflect his own
glory. He hath copied forth Himself in the creation; and,
in this outward world, we may read the lovely characters
of the Divine goodness, power, and wisdom. In some
creatures, there are darker representations of God, there
are the prints and footsteps of God ; but in others, there are
clearer and fuller representations of the Divinity, the face
and image of God; according to that known saying of the
schoolmen, Remoticires similiiudines creaturai ad Deum di-
cuntur vestigium y propinquiores vero imago. But how to
find God here, and feelingly to converse with Him, and,
being affected with the sense ofthe Divine glory shining
out upon the creation, how to pass out ofthe sensible world
into the intellectual, is not so effectually taught by that
philosophy which professed it most, as by true religion.
That which knits and unites God and the soul together,
can best teach it how to ascend and descend upon those
golden links, that unite, as it were, the world to God. That
Divine wisdom that contrived and beautified this glorious
structure, can best explain her own art, and carry up the
soul back again, in these reflected beams, to Him who is the
fountain of them. Though good men all of them are not ac
quainted with all those philosophical notions, touching the
* Select Discourses, Chap. 8, by John Smith, Fellow of Queen's College,
Cambridge.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 187
relation between the created and the uncreated being; yet,
may they easily find every creature pointing out to that Being
whose image and superscription it bears, and climb up from
those darker resemblances ofthe Divine wisdom and good
ness, shining out in different degrees upon several creatures,
uiOTieq a.va^6.dixoig rial as the ancients speak; till they sweetly
repose themselves in the bosom of the Divinity: and, while
they are thus conversing with this lower world, and are
viewing ' the invisible things of God in the things that are
made' in this visible and outward creation, — they find God
many times secretly flowing into their souls, and leading
them silently out of the court of the temple into the holy
place. But it is otherwise with wicked men. They dwell
perpetually upon the dark side of the creatures, and con
verse with these things only in a gross, sensual, earthly,
and unspiritual manner. They are so encompassed with
the thick and foggy mist of their own corruptions, that they
cannot see God there, where he is most visible — ' The light
shineth in darkness, but darkness comprehendeth it not;' their
souls are so deeply sunk into that house of clay which they
carry about with them, that, were there nothing of body or
bulky matter before them, they could find nothing to exer
cise themselves about.
" But religion, where it is in truth, and in power, renews
the very spirit of our minds; and doth in a manner spirit
ualize this outward creation to us; and doth, in a more ex
cellent way, perform that which the Peripatetics are wont
to affirm of their intetlectus agens, in purging bodily and
material things from the feculency and dregs of matter,
and separating them from those circumstantiating and
straitening conditions of time and place, and the like; and
teaches the soul to look at those perfections which it finds
here below, not so much as the perfections of this or that
body, as they adorn this or that particular being, but as
they are so many rays issuing forth from that first and es
sential perfection, in which they all meet and embrace one
another in the most close friendship. Every particular
good is a blossom of the first goodness; every created ex
cellency is a beam descending froin the Father of lights :
and should we separate all these particularities from God,
all affection spent upon them would be unchaste, and their
embraces adulterous. We should love all things in God,
and God in all things; because He is All in All, the Begin
ning and Original of being, the Perfect Idea of their good
ness, and The End of their motion. It is nothing but a

188 INTERCOURSE WITH
thick mist of pride and self-love, that hinders men's eyes
from beholding that sun which both enlightens them, and all
things else. But when true religion begins once to dawn
upon men's souls, and, with its shining light, chases away
their black night of ignorance^ then they behold themselves
and all things else, enlightened, though in a different way,
by one and the same Sun; and all the powers of their souls
fall down before God, and ascribe all glory to Him. Now
it is, that a good man is no more solicitous whether this or
that good thing be mine, or whether any perfections ex
ceed the measure of this or that particular creature ; for
whatsoever good he beholds any where, he enjoys and de
lights in it, as much as if it were his own; and whatever
he beholds in himself, he looks not upon it as his property,
but as a common good ; for all these beams come from one
and the same fountain and ocean of light, in whom he
loves them all with a universal love. When his affections
run along the stream of any created excellences, whether
his own or any one's else, yet they stay not here, but run
on till they fall into the ocean; they do not settle into, a fond
love and admiration, either of himself or any other's ex
cellences; but he owns them as so many pure effusions and
emanations from God; and, in a particular being, loves the
universal goodness. Si sciretur d, me Veritas, sciretur etiam
me illud non esse, aut illud non esse meum, nee it, me.
"Thus may a good man walk up and down the world, as
in a garden of spices, and suck a divine sweetness out of
every flower. There is a two-fold meaning in every crea
ture, as the Jews speak of their law, a literal and a mysti
cal; and the one is but the ground ofthe other: and,, as
they say of divers pieces of their law, so a good man says
of every thing that his sehses offer to him, 'It speaks to his
lower part, but it points out something above to his mind and
spirit.' It is the drowsy and muddy spirit of superstition,
which, being lulled asleep in the lap of worldly delights, is
fain to set some idol at its elbow; something that may joy
it, and put it in mind of God. Whereas, true religion
never finds itself out of the infinite sphere of the Divinity;
and wherever it finds beauty, harmony, goodness, love, in
genuity, wisdom, holiness, justice, and the like, it is ready
to say. Here and there is God. Wheresoever any such
perfections shine out, a holy mind climbs up by these sun
beams, and raises itself up to God.
"And seeing God hath never thrown the world from
Himself, but runs through all created essence, containing

THE -SPIRITUAL WORLD. 189
the archetypal ideas of all things in Himself, and from
thence deriving and imparting several prints of beauty and
excellency all the world over; a soul that is truly godlike,
a mind that is enlightened from the same fountain, and hath
its inward senses affected with the sweet relishes of Divine
goodness, cannot but every where behold itself in the
midst of that glorious unbounded Being, who is indivisibly
every where. A good man finds every place he treads upon
holy ground; to him the world is God's temple; he is ready
to say with Jacob, 'How dreadful is this place! this is none
other but the house of God. '
"It was a dangerous and unworthy spirit in that philos
ophy, which first separated and made such distances be
tween metaphysical truths and the truths of nature; where
as, the first and most ancient wisdom amongst the heathens,
was indeed a philosophical divinity or a divine philosophy,
which continued for divers ages ; but as men grew worse,
their queasy stomachs began to loathe it, which made the
truly wise Socrates complain of the sophisters of that age,
who began now to corrupt and debase it; whereas, hereto
fore the spirit of philosophy was more generous and divine,
and did more purify and ennoble the souls of men, com
mending intellectual things to them, and taking them off
from settling upon sensible and material things here below,
and still exciting them to endeavor after the nearest re
semblance of God, the Supreme Goodness and Loveliness,
and an intimate conjunction with Him, which, according
to the strain of that philosophy, was the true happiness of
immortal souls."
Such are the views of creation which were once taken
by a good man, and which are more fully and clearly un
folded by Swedenborg; but which, I am sorry to say, in
these days, are apt to be treated with unconcern or con
tempt, even by some who would desire to be thought both
learned and pious. There can be no doubt that this excel
lent man, like others before him, was aware of the exist
ence, and, in some measure, of the nature of the true
principles of analogy; although, like others of the same
school, he saw them but darkly. It was, I believe, re
served for Swedenborg to place the truth of these principles
in a clear light, and to establish them upon a solid basis.
I will therefore briefly advert to the doctrine of Sweden
borg upon this subject; although I fear that, in so doing, I
may not do justice to his views.
An examination into the subject will convince every im-

190 INTERCOURSE WITH
partial mind, that there are few things in theology upon
which more confusion of idea has prevailed, than upon the
•subject of analogy and metaphor; one being constantly
-mistaken for the other. This confusion exists, notwith
standing the 'distinction drawn by the reflecting few, that
^metaphor is addressed to the imagination, and analogy to
the reason ; that the former suggests a similitude cogniza
ble by the senses, the latter a relation apprehensible only
to the reason; hence, that in metaphor there is an imagined
similitude; in analogy, a real relation. In proportion as
the mind is unedttcated, metaphor will naturally be chosen
instead of analogy, nay, the two will be confounded; and
hence well meaning persons, unacquainted with science',
and of uncultivated reason, in consequence of having
adopted metaphorical interpretations of Scripture, and mis
taken them for analogical, have been a principal cause in
bringing spiritual interpretations into disrepute. Such in
terpretations, however, are not spiritual; they are merely
sensual and imaginary. The true spiritual interpretation
of Scripture is founded upon analogy, the relations of
which are real; whereas, those of- metaphor are often only
apparent, artificial, or arbitrary. This is one reason for
which spiritual interpretations have frequently been sup
posed, even by the learned, who have not always remem
bered the distinctions between analogy and metaphor, to be
necessarily vague, uncertain, and fanciful.
Now, however just may be the definition of analogy to
which we have alluded, it is a definition of analogy in its
secondary, not in its primary sense. Analogy implies, we
admit, in either sense, a real relation; but in its primary
sense, a relation not between one natural thing and another
natural thing, but between a natural thing and a spiritual
thing, such as the relation of the spirit to the body, or of
the spiritual world to the natural. The relation of analogyj
therefore, when considered in its strict signification, is not
the relation of one natural effect to another, of one natural
cause to another, and so forth; but the relation ofa natural
effect to its spiritual cause, or of the spiritual cause to its
natural effect; thus, the relation of a prior principle to a
posterior, of a higher to a lower, or vice versa. The order
of analogy is thus the order presented to us in the process
es of creation, generation, or production. It is by analogy,
in its primary sense, that we interpret the Word of God,
and the visible creation in relation to that Word; and by
analogy, in its secondary sense, that we interpret the phe
nomena of visible nature. The foundation of this distinc-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 191;
tion rests upon the principle, that the natural world, with
all its secondary causes, is but a world of eflfects, the spirit
ual world alone being the world of causes; hence the anal
ogy of the natural world to the spiritual is that of effect to
cause; whereas, all analogies between one natural thing
and another are analogies between one natural effect and
another; hence analogy in its secondary, not in its primary
sense. . If, in natural things, the principles of analogy are
the foundation of science, so are they, in regard to spirit
ual things, or, in their higher sense, the foundation of all
real theological knowledge. If, in the former case, they
are certain and immutable, much more so are they in the
latter; for the certainty of the former is derived from the
certainty ofthe latter; hence nothing is so certain and im
mutable as interpretations of the Word of God founded.
upon this principle. To attempt to shake them, is to attempt
to shake the fabric and constitution ofthe universe.
How is it, then, that analogy in its primary sense has
been almost so universally known? The answer is obvious.
Where analogies exist in the natural world, the relations
are cognizable by the natural reason, and our senses selr
dom fail to communicate to the mind some external idea of
the objects; but where analogies are to be traced between
natural and spiritual things, merely natural reason, however
assisted by the senses, can apprehend only one side of the
analogy; for a spiritual mind only can apprehend spiritual
things. In that mind only can they be realized, and, until
they are realized, neither can the object be known, nor
its relations traced; for how can the relation between
two things be traced, of the nature, or even existence,
of one of which we know nothing? Even in natural things,
the attempt to trace it would be almost impossible; al
though in cases in which we are ignorant of one of the
objects, we may sometimes form a distant and dark
idea of itj by means of certain other assignable rela
tions; but in spiritual matters, unless a man be truly
spiritual,' his mind is either a perfect blank, or a living per
version and contradiction of the principles which the exist
ence of analogy implies. Why, therefore, should we won
der at the ridicule cast upon Swedenborg's analogical in
terpretations of Scripture, or their alleged incomprehensi
bility? The wonder would be, if, constituted as the mind
is, the fact were otherwise; for the natural mind, as such,
cannot be analogical to itself; there cannot be an analogy
between one thing. Hence, if a person's mind be merely
natural, however learned it may be, it is but one object, or

192 INTERCOURSE WITH
but one side of the analogy, that is presented; and if it be
in evil, it involves' a negation and contradiction ofthe other
side; for the spiritual mind he does not possess; conse
quently, he has only one thing between which to trace an
analogy, that is to say, in the sense in which we have defin
ed it, he is not aware of any analogy at all; indeed, there
is no analogy, but rather a contradiction of it, between the
spiritual mind and the unregenerate natural mind; conse
quently, such a person will, nay, must, deny its e'xistence;
while, on the other hand, he will admit of the existence of
analogy in its secondary sense, because here the natural
mind is in its element, being employed only in tracing the
relations between natural things; hence, in this case, if a
man be intellectually disposed, he will pursue analogies in
their secondary sense, or, if he be more the creature ofthe
senses, he will betake himself to mere metaphor.
Analogy, in its primary sense, as existing between a natu
ral and a spiritual object, thus between a spiritual end or
cause and a natural effect, extends to all the relations be
tween them; hence, in this case, we are not at liberty to
single out some relations between the objects as analogical,
and to reject others; there being nothing in the end but
what is in some relation of analogy to the cause, nor in the
cause, but what is in some relation of analogy to the effect.
When, therefore, authors affirm that we must not pursue
an analogy too far, they are, almost invariably, upon the
principles we are now explaining, not pursuing any anal
ogy at all. Indeed, what they call a spiritual idea, is,
generallys not a spiritual idea, but only a natural idea of a
spiritual thing, the relations between which are not those
of end, cause and effect; for were they such, the two could
not be more or less related to each other; for the end can
not be more or less related to the cause, nor the cause to
the effect, since the relations between them are universal.
In illustration of these principles I would observe, that
" By the Word were all things made, and without Him was
not any thing made that was made." Here the Great First
Cause is the -Word or the Creator, the effect being the
creature or creation; hence the relation of creation* to
* For a fuller explanation of the application ofthe principle of analogy to
the interpretation ofthe 'Word of God, the reader Is referred to the writings of
Swedenborg ; he will also find the subject largely dwelt upon In a work entitled
the "Plenary Inspiration ofthe Scriptures," by the Rev. S. Noble. I men
tion this more particularly, because I have said nothing here upon the subject
of representatives and significalives, but have only touched veiy briefly on
Uie general principles of analogy.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 193
the Word is a relation of effect to cause, of a natural object
to its spiritual origin; that is to say, it is the relation of a
primary analogy. Thus all creation, so far as it is in divine
order, is a glass or mirror, wherein we may behold the cre
ating Word, the various objects which compose Creation
corresponding with the various truths which constitute the
Word; so that between every object of creation, and every
corresponding spiritual idea or truth, there is a relation of
end, cause, and effect, the end being in the cause, and the
cause in the effect; the object itself thus existing by, and
from, that which it symbolizes.
Thus Swedenborg observes, (Arcana Ccelestia, 2920,)
"It is known, or may be known, that there is a spiritual
world, and that there is a natural world. The spiritual
world, in its universal sense, is the v/orld where spirits
and angels dwell; and the natural world is that where men
dwell. In a particular sense, there is a spiritual world and
a natural world appertaining to every individual man; his
internal man being to him a spiritual world; but his exter
nal, being to him a natural world. The things which flow
in out of the spiritual world and are presented in the natural,
are, in general, representations; and, so far as they agree
together, they are correspondences." — 2991. "That nat
ural things represent spiritual, and that they correspond to
gether, may also be known from this consideration, that
what is natural cannot possibly have existence, except from
a cause prior to itself This cause is of spiritual origin,
and there is nothing natural which doth not thence derive
the cause of its existence. Natural forms are effects, nor
can they appear as causes, still less as causes of causes, or
principles ; but they receive their forms according to their
use, in the place where they are. Still, however, the forms
of effects represent the things appertaining to their causes;
yea, these latter things represent those which appertain to
their principles. Thus all natural things represent the
things appertaining to the spiritual, to which they corres
pond; and spiritual things also represe'nt the things apper
taining to the celestial, from which they are derived. "--299.3.
"In the vegetable kingdom, there is not the smallest thing
existing which doth not represent somewhat in the spiritual
world, and correspond thereto, as hath been frequently given
me to know by like commerce with the angels; the reason
whereof was also explained to me, and shown to be this, viz:
that the causes of all things natural are grounded in things
spiritual, and the principles of those causes, in things celes-
17

194

INTERCOURSE WITH

tial; or, what is the same thing, that all things which are in
the natural world, derive their cause from truth which is spir
itual, and their principle from good which is celestial; and
that natural things proceed thence according to all the differ
ences of truth and of good, which are in the Lord's kingdom;
consequently, from the Lord himself, who is the source of
all good and truth. These things must needs appear strange
to many, and especially to those who cannot, or will not,
ascend in thought beyond nature; and who do not know
what is meant by what is spiritual, and therefore do not ac
knowledge it."— 2994. "Man, also, during his life in the
body, is capable of feeling and perceiving very little of all
this; for the celestial and spiritual things appertaining to
him, fall into the natural things which are in his external
man, and there he loses the sensation and perception of
them. The representatives and correspopdences which are
in his external man, also, are such, that they do not appear
like unto the things in the internal -man to which they cor
respond, and which they represent; therefore neither can
they come to his knowledge, before he puts off those exter
nal things. Blessed, at that time, is he who is in corres
pondence, that is, whose external man corresponds to the
internal." — 2998. "Man is almost in total ignorance about
correspondence; neither does he believe that he has any
such connection with the spiritual world; when yet the truth
is, that all his connection is thence, and without such con
nection, neither himself, nor any part of him, could possi
bly subsist a moment; for thence is derived all his subsist
ence, &c." — 3000. "Hence it is, that all and singular the
things contained in the universe, represent the Lord's king
dom; insomuch that the universe with its heavenly constel
lations, with its atmospheres, and with its three kingdoms,
is nothing else but a kind of theatre representative of the
Lord's glory, which is in the heavens. In the animal king
dom, not only man, but also each particular animal, even
the least and vilest, are thus representative. For instance,
in the case of worms, which creep on the ground and feed'
on the leaves of plants ; these, when tlie time of their nup
tials approaches, immediately becomes chrysallises, and
presently are furnished with wings, and thereby are elevat
ed from the ground into the atmosphere; which is their
heaven, where they enjoy their delights and their freedom;
sporting one with another, and feeding on the choicest parts
of flowers ; laying their eggs, and thus providing for pos
terity; and on this occasion, inconsequence of being in fhe

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 195
state of their heaven, they are also in the fulness of their
beauty. That these things' are representative of the Lord's
kingdom, may be obvious to every one."
Such are the views of Swedenborg, so far as I am able
to exhibit them, with regard to the general principles of
analogy, or correspondence.
Since, then, the relation of analogy is a real relation,
and is that principle according to which the natural object
is created and made to subsist, it follows, that a complete
knowledge of analogy supposes also a complete knowledge
of the principles of natural things, or of the sciences in
general. Hence, also, we see how it is, that man cannot
have a key to the real interpretation of the Word of God,
without also having the key to the real interpretation ofthe
works of God; and, consequently, that the knowledge of
the true principles of the interpretation of Scripture, was
reserved for the age in which the true principles should be
known ofthe interpretation of nature.
To what end, then, are all the discoveries which are
daily made in the different sciences? To this end,. — that
the natural mind of man may be supplied with genuine
natural truths, by means of which it may be rendered capa
ble of being brought into correspondence with an enlight
ened spiritual mind. The mode by which this spiritual
mind is formed, and the natural mind brought into full cor
respondence with it, is no other than the mode by which
man's regeneration is effected, and by which he is rendered
a Spiritual-natural man, — a work, which, as we have before
stated, forms the leading subject of the revelations of Swe
denborg. For when the natural mind is void and empty,
by reason of ignorance, it has no ideas in which spiritual
truths can be represented ; and a spiritual truth without a
natural basis, appears to the mind as unreal, consequently,
as a mere — nothing; besides which, the natural mind, in
its unregenerated state, is so loaded with fallacies, that
there can be no correspondence between it and a spiritual
mind; consequently, there can be no influence or influx of
the spiritual mind into the natural, and hence, within man,
of the heavenly world into the earthly ; there being rather
within him an entire negation or perversion of all spiritual
things. When, however, the spiritual mind is formed
within, and the natural is brought into correspondence with
it, then it is demonstrable, both from the Word of God and
from the principles we have been explaining, that there
may be an influx from the spiritual world or angelic heaven

196 INTERCOURSE WITH
into nian's natural mind, nay, into the very region of his
perceptions; that nothing but a special act of Divine Prov
idence can withhold it; and that, in this case, the miracu
lous exercise of power is not in opening the spiritual
world, but in closing it.
Such, my Lord, is the true explanation of the principle
of Swedenborg's alleged intercourse with the spiritual
world. Being, from his earliest years, of. an humble and
pious disposition; a spiritual mind having been formed
within him; his natural mind, which, by the Divine bles
sing, had been sufficiently guided into the true principles
of science and philosophy, was capable of being brought
into such a correspondence with the laws of the heavenly
kingdom, that there could be an influx from the latter into
the former,* and hence, an intercourse between one and
the other. This is the state in which, as Swedenborg
shews, man was created to live. This was his first and
natural state; his present darkness being his last and un
natural state; his spirit being as truly designed to com
mune with heaven within, as his body, with the natural
world without. Thus, when the Word of God has filled
the internal man with spiritual truths, when the natural
mind is filled with natural truths, and when, by the process
of regeneration, the natural is brought into correspondence
with the spiritual, the whole man becomes regenerated, the
image and likeness of God, a heaven in its least form, a
temple of Divine light and love; and he; is a living fulfil
ment of that prophecy of old, "Beboldl-the tabernacle of
God is with men; and he will dwell with them; and they
shall be his people; and God himself shall be with them,
and be their God."
I am quite aware that these views may be misunder
stood: allow me, therefore, to enter into a farther explana
tion of them.
Revelation from the spiritual world to the mind of man,
may be of two kinds; revelation, by inward perception, and
revelation by open vision. The former supplies us with
an internal evidence; the latter, with an external; the
former cannot interfere with the exercise of man's volun-
* I am here speaking of that intercourse with heaven which Is the result of
the regenerate life, because this is.the main point to be considered. Sweden
borg's Intercourse with the spiritual world, which probably was, in some re
spects, designed to be peculiar to him, il is not necessary more particularly to
consider. When the former Is granted, there will be no difficulty with regard
to the latter,

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD, 197
tary powers; the latter, without the former, may. The
former, or inward perception, so far from interfering with
the exercise of the voluntary powers, implies their highest
exercise. For it is a perception of good, that it is good,
and of truth, that it is truth ; and this, by reason of the
conformity of the nature of the person, to the good and
truth which are presented to him. If such an one, there
fore, has open vision, it is rather a consequence of his in
ward perceptions, or of that purity of heart by which he is
enabled to see God. This is the kind of revelation which
the writings of Swedenborg explain as the highest. Hence,
my Lord, we have no desire to be dealers in dreams and
visions, in the way in which it is sometimes supposed. We
would aim rather at an enlightened conscience, or that
singleness of eye by which our v/hole body is filled with
light. Swedenborg has shewn, how a man is not reformed
by external visions, and may be no better for seeing them.
For though he may see them, he may not understand them,
and so be no wiser than he was before. Indeed, the mere
seeing of external visions, where the person is possessed of
no inward perception, no more supposes him to be wiser
and better than others, than does any other extraordinary
gift ofthe Holy Spirit. Nay, Swedenborg assigns the best
of reasons for which, constituted as the mind in general is,
external intercourse with the other world might be highly
pernicious. For the spirits which attend a man, he says,
are such as are in agreement with his aflections and
thoughts; hence, did he openly converse with them, they
would only confirm him in his existing state of mind, and
add their testimony to the truth of all his. falses, and the
good of all his evils; enthusiasts would thus be confirmed
in their enthusiasm, and fanatics, in their fanaticism.
Were the mind, however, purified from its evils and falses,
the case would be altogether otherwise; because, then,
being in association with holy angels, the exercise of its
voluntary powers would not be interfered with; man would
learn what is good and true from an inward perception of
its nature; in which case, open vision, if it existed, would
not be the cause, but the consequence, of his state of life;
and whatever might be the symbolical scenes then present
ed to him, they would be perfectly intelligible, from an in
ward principle of perception.
Hence, in the Arcana Ccelestia, 5121, Swedenborg
observes, "In regard to revelations being either from per
ception, or from discourse with the angels through whom
17*

198 INTERCOURSE WITH
the Lord speaks, it is to be noted, that they who are in
good and thence in truth, especially they who are in the
good of love to the Lord, have revelation from perception;
whereas, they who are not in good and thence in truth,
may, indeed, have revelations, yet hot from perception,
but by a living voice heard in them; thus by angels, from
the Lord. This latter revelation is external, but the
former internal. The angels, especially the celestial, have
revelation from perception; as also the men of the most
ancient church had, and some also of the ^ancient church,
but scarcely any one at this day; whereas, very many
have had revelations from discourse without perception,
even who have not been principled in good; in like man
ner, by visions or by dreams. Such were most ofthe rev
elations of the prophets in the Jewish church; they heard
a voice, they saw a vision, and they dreamed a dream; but,
inasmuch as they had no perception, they were revelations
merely verbal or visual, without a perception of what they
signified; for genuine perception exists through heaven
from the Lord, and affects the intellectual principle spiritu
ally, and leads it perceptibly to think as the thing really is,
with an internal assent, the source of which it is ignorant
of The intellectual principle supposes that this internal
assent is in itself, and that it flows from the connection of
things; whereas, it is a dictate through heaven from the
Lord, flowing into the interiors of the thought, concerning
such things as are above the natural and sensual principle,
that is, concerning such things as are of the spiritual
world, or of heaven. From these considerations, it may be
manifest what is meant by revelation from perception."
In accordance with this view, the author of the Select
Discourses observes, (chap, vii, page 469,) " There is an
inward sense in man's soul, which, were it once awakened
and excited with an inward taste and rehsh ofthe Divinity,
could better define God to him, than all the world- else. It
is the sincere Christian, that so tastes and sees how good
and sweet the Lord is , as none else does. The God of
hope fills him with all joy and peace in believing; so that
he abounds in hope, as the apostle speaks. He quietly
reposes himself in God; his heart is fixed, trusting in the
Lord; he is more for a solid peace, and settled calm of
spirit, than for high raptures and feelings of joy, or extra
ordinary manifestations of God to him; he does npt pas
sionately desire, nor importunately expect, such things; he
rather looks after the manifestations of the goodness and

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 199
power of God within him, in subduing all in his soul that
is unlike and contrary to God, and forming him into his
image and likeness."— "Should a man hear a voice from
heaven, or see a vision of the Almighty, to testify unto him
the love of God towards him; yet, methinks, it were more
desirable to find a revelation of all from within, arising up
from the bottom and centre of a man's own soul, in the
real and internal impressions of a godlike nature upon his
own spirit; and thus to find the foundation and beginning
of heaven and happiness within himself."
Such, then, is a general outline of Swedenborg's views
with regard to Intercourse with the Spiritual World; and
1 think it may fairly be said, that any one will have a very
great difficulty to prove them to be fanatical and visionary,
without including in the same condemnation the views
whicji have been taken by some ofthe most learned, pious,
and judicious members ofthe church; nay, without involv
ing in the sentence, the very principles of Christianity itself
Before dismissing the subject, it may be well to advert
to an observation made by Archdeacon Paley; and, as it is
one which is not unfrequently advanced by others, and
cannot be better expressed than in the author's own words,
I may be allowed, perhaps, to quote it at length. "The
human understanding," says he, "constituted as it is,
though fitted for the purposes for which we want it, that is,
though capable of receiving the instruction and knowledge
which are necessary for our conduct and the discharge of
our diity, has a native original incapacity for the reception
of any distinct knowledge of our future condition. The
reason is, that all our conceptions and ideas are drawn
from experience (not perhaps all immediately from experi
ence, but experience lies at the bottom of them all;) and no
language, no information, no instruction, can do more for
us, than teach us the relation ofthe ideas which we have.
Therefore, so far as we can judge, no words whatever that
could have been used, no account or description that could
have been written down, would have been able to convey
to us a conception of our future state, constituted as our
understandings now are. I am far from saying, that it "was
not in the power of God, by immediate inspiration, to have
struck light and ideas into our minds, of which naturally
we have no conception. I am far from saying, that he
could not, by an act of his power, have assumed a human being,
or the soul ofa human being, into heaven; and have shewn to
him, or it, the nature and ihe glories of that kingdom; but it is

200 INTERCOURSE WITH
evident that, unless the whole order of our present world be
changed, such revelations as these must be rare ; must be lim
ited io very extraordinary persons, and very extraordinary oc
casions. And even then, with respect to others, it is to be
observed, that the ordinary modes of communication by
speech or writing, are inadequate to the transmitting of
any knowledge or information of this sort ; and from a cause
which has already been noticed,- namely, that language
deals only with the ideas we have; that these ideas are all
founded in experience; that probably, most probably indeed,
the things of the next world are very remote from any ex
perience which we have in this; the consequence of which
is, that though the inspired person mighthimself possess this
supernatural knowledge, he could not impart it to any per
son not in like manner inspired. When, therefore, the na
ture and con.stitution of the human understanding is con
sidered, it can excite no surprise, it ought to excite no
complaint, it is no fair objection to Christianity, ' that it
doth not yet appear what we shall be' I do not say, that
the imperfection of our understanding forbids it (for, in
strictness of speech, that is not imperfect which answers
the purpose designed by it;) but the present constitution
of our understanding forbids it."*
The Learned Author may, to a certain extent, be right,
in affirming that the present constitution of our understand
ing forbids it; for, as Swedenborg has shewn, the present
age, not excepting the learned, has sunk into a grave of
merely natural and sensual ideas, | and the human under-
* Sermons, page 165, State after Death.
t Indeed, so obstinate has this ' tendency to naturalism become, that a mod
ern author has been nothing lotli to make the following statement. " It was
plainly the intention of nature, tlwt our thoughts should be habitually directed to
things external; and, accordingly, the bulk of mankind are not only indisposed to
study the in'lelleclual phenomena, but are Incapable of that degree of reflection
which Is necessary for their examination. Hence It is-that, when we begin to
analyze our own internal constitution, we' find Ihe facts it presents to us, so
very Intimately combined in our conceptions with the qualities of matter,
that it is impossible for lis to draw distinctly and steadily Ihe line between them ;
and that when mind and matter are concerned in the same result, the former
is entirely overlooked, or is regarded only as an accessary principle dependant for
its existence on the latter. To the same cause it is owing, that we find It so
difficult, if it be at all practicable, to form an idea of any of our Intelleclual
operations, abstracted from the linages suggested by their metaphorical names."
(Dugald Ste\vart, First Dissertation.) This tendency to naturalism, and the
want of knowing the true principles of analogy, are, as we have pointed out,
among the cases which create the difficulty here allutiedto; a difficulty which
cannoi be removed from among the learned, until its causes be removed . I will
only add tllat, if the difficulty Jias become so great in regard to the natural mind.

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 201
standing has only followed the fallacies which these ideas
present; while, in the few instances in which those falla
cies are renounced, the mind is left in confessed darkness
upon the most important theological subjects. It is ac
knowledged, that man is born in evil, that he grows up a
mere creature ofthe senses; but, surely may we not see in
this very fact, the cause of the native incapacity of which
Paley speaks? May we not," in this, see the reason for
which it is perfectly true, that the mind must be reconstituted
before "man can arrive, from experience, at any just idea of
spiritual things? For, as long as he continues the merely
natural man, must not all his philosophy consist in forming
merely natural ideas and tracing their relations? Ofthe rela
tion of natural ideas to spiritual, indeed, he can know noth
ing, since it is perfectly true, that of spiritual things he can
form no conception, because he has no experience; and no
language, no information, no instruction, can do more for him
than teach him the relation ofthe ideas which he has. Hence,
as the learned author observes, there is an absolute neces
sity for the reconstitution of his mind, before it can form a
just, or even any, conception of spiritual things; for, until
then, all that is written upon the subject will appear to him
to have little or no intelligible reference to his practice, and
to furnish only abundant matter of faith and food for curios
ity. Now this reconstitution of the mind is no other than
its regeneration — the regeneration of its will, and the re
generation of its understanding; and, had any pretended
prophet revealed to us the mysteries of heaven, without
having, at the same time, communicated a method for this
reconstitution of the mind, however true might be the
knowledge communicated, it would be useless, and incom
prehensible. Yet, some how or other, when the real
merits of Swedenborg's writings are discussed, his visions
are sure to be singled out, and the very thing, nay, the only
thing, which could enable us to comprehend them, is almost
as sure to be omitted. It is the non-attendance to this sub
ject, that makes the revelations of Swedenborg appear to be
non-practical; that totally deprives them of all that internal
evidence which they would otherwise have; and, in default
of which, the reader considers himself as called upon to
what must it be in regard to the spiritual mind"! What must become of theolo
gy, when studied by minds of such a castel Is it not sufficient to justify all that
Swedenborg has declared with regard to the fulfilment of the prophecy, that
"darkness has covered the earth, a,nd gross darkness the people" ?

202 INTERCOURSE WITH
believe in the author, solely upon the author's own tes
timony. whatever may have been the nature of Swedenborg's
distempered fancy, certain it is, that we are not to look for
this distemper primarily in his visions, but in the philosophy
which led to them. Here is the origin of the evil, if it be
one. The fanaticism, if it be such, is not primarily in
the visions, but in the philosophy; and our opponents
must take up the question on this'ground, if they will take
it up on the only ground upon which it can be decided.
Thousands who have been misled by the popular views of
Swedenborg's pretensions, have been obliged to confess
their error, when they have come seriously to consider and
understand his principles. To compare his revelations
with those of Mahomed, or with all the idle stories we read
of in the Roman church, is but trifling with the subject;
and can have no sort of influence, except upon those who
live, to say the least of it, in the innocence of their own
ignorance ; while it can occasion only surprise and regret
in the more sober-minded and reflecting. Now we have
already seen how it is, that the Divine Being has been
thought to be necessarily so very different from any con
ceptions we can form of Him, that, know what we may of
Him, we, after all, know nothing. It is from the operation
ofthe same cause, that persons think it impossible to arrive
at any just ideas of the spiritual world. They imagine it
to be so far removed from any experience we possess in the
present life, that it is absolutely impossible to arrive at any
true conceptions with regard to it. To a certain extent
they are right; the same difficulties which lie in the way
of a right knowledge of God, lie in the way of a right
knowledge of the spiritual world, more particularly of
heaven. Man, having become merely natural, can, in this
merely natural state, form no just idea of those principles
of analogy to which we have aiiverted. By the reconstitu
tion ofthe mind, however, as explained by Swedenborg, he
is enabled to originate thoughts in accordance with these
principles. This reconstitution is an immense change, and
indeed one that is endless. The possibility of the coin-
mencement of such a change, at some period or other in the
history of the world, it does not appear that Paley denied,
nay, rather, it seems he was inclined to believe ; for, as he
observes in another place, "This doctrine of the progres
sive increase and final completeness of our Lord's king
dom, is also virtually laid down in this passage from the

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 203
Corinthians, 'He must reign till he hath put all enemies
under his feet.' For that this subjection of His several
enemies will be successive, one after another, is strongly
intimated by the expression, 'the last enemy that shall be
destroyed is death.^ Now, to apprehend the probability of
these things coming to pass, or, rather, to remove any opin
ion of their improbability, we ought constantly to bear in
our mind this momentous truth, that, in the hands of the
Deity, time is nothing; that he, has eternity to act in.
The Christian dispensation, nay, the world itself, may he in
its infancy. A mare perfect display qf the power of Christ
and of his religion may be in reserve; and the ages which it
may endure, after the obstacles and impediments to its re
ception are removed, may be, beyond comparison, longer
than those which we have seen; in which it has been strug
gling with great difficulties, most especially with ignorance
and prejudice." Sermons, Agency of Christ, p. 332.
My Lord, it is to this new order of things, that we be
lieve the writings of Swedenborg are calculated to conduce;
and, to this purpose, that he has achieved what no other
person has, the Christianization of science. Revealed relig
ion and science may be separated in the human mind, but
they are not separated in the mind of God. Nature and
the Bible, when rightly interpreted, will be found to be one.
The work of God will be found to be the language of the
Word of God; natural theology to be the same as revealed,
when natural theology shall itself have been revealed. On
the same Creator, Nature and the Bible discourse with each
other, — on the glories of the same Jehovah, deep calleth
unto deep.
Allow me, then, to ask. Is all expectation of the moral
renovation of the world vain and visionary ?* Is that
knowledge of the Divine operations, by which we are ena
bled to avail ourselves of divine power in the regeneration
of the soul, a knowledge which ministers only to specula
tive curiosity? If reason and experience shew that it is not;
if, at the same time, it be "the obvious policy of an impos
tor, and the most natural delusion of a visionary, to treat
much of curious and hidden matters, beyond what is con
ducive to practical instruction;" do not such objections de
monstrate, upon their own principles, that Swedenborg is
neither an impostor nor a visionary? that his principles
bear all the marks of a true revelation ? that, so far as the
?¦The reader is again referred to the Leclures by a Country Pastor, In which
the probability of some moral renovation seems to be admitted.

204. INTERCOURSE WITH
arguments in the Essays are concerned, the writings of
Swedenborg may be true; that the kingdom of God may
have come upon us, nay, probably, has come upon us? It
is of no use merely to assert, that Swedenborg's writings
are only the day-dreams of a distempered fancy. They
must be proved to be such, by far better arguments than
any which have been yet adduced. Until this be done, may ~
we not call upon the wise virgins to give proof that they,
have not slept? or, that slumbering, they have not been the
dreamers ? that what is real, has not been to them as what
is unreal? that they have not mistaken their day-dreams
for realities ? Most certainly, as far as any of the argu
ments against Swedenborg are concerned, it may be, that
not he, but the church, has been the dreamer; that it has
not known the time of its visitation. If this be the case, it
is no more than what many rational and sober-minded per
sons have themselves been inclined to presume; and who
have never been considered, on that account, to have neces
sarily had a tendency to enthusiasm.
When we reflect, how even eminent authors, in their
zeal to defend the authority of Scripture, have explained
away its principles of inspiration; and accounted, as far
as possible, upon natural principles, for the supernatural in
tercourse of the prophets with the spiritual world, we can
not be surprised at the opinions which have been passed
upon the alleged visions of Swedenborg. It is unfortunate,
however, that authors in general seem to possess no test of
what is, or what is not, a true vision; that, so far as inter
nal evidence is concerned, they are wholly at a loss to de
termine whether even the visions recorded in Scripture are
true. As tradition is the principle upon which the Canon
of Scripture is received, so tradition seems to be the only
principle upon which the Divine origin of the scriptural
visions is recognized. The plain and most straight-forward
mode, however, of deciding the question, is, to point out
thfetest ofa true vision; and, by its application, to demon
strate that the visions of Scripture are genuine, and those of
Swedenborg spurious, and, consequently, of the same class
with the pretended visions of Mahomed, and of the various
enthusiasts in the Roman Church. Why do not our wor
thy opponents attempt this? If they have no test ofa true
vision, why do they not acknowledge it ? As far as the prin
ciples of analogy can be applied to the explanation of the
visions of Scripture, they are equally applicable to the cor
responding visions of Swedenborg. Indeed, it is obvious to

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 205
any person who attentively examines the subject, that the
visions of Scripture, concerning the objects in heaven, are
written pt'ecisely upon the same principles upon which the
corresponding visions of Swedenborg are written; and that
we cannot destroy the credit of one, without equally de
stroying the credit ofthe other. To assert that Mahomed's
visions are written upon this principle, is to assert what the
best authors who have written upon this subject have denied;
and to plead in their behalf such a scriptural character as
I cannot think the distinguished author of the Essays in
tended. They are generally admitted to be addressed only
to the natural senses, and are quite incapable of any explan
ation upon the principles of correspondence explained by
Swedenborg.* Besides, when I reflect on the profound truths of religion
and philosophy, which are intermixed with Swedenborg's
visions, I cannot but call to mind the followirfg passage in
a work previously quoted, I mean the Select Discourses, by
Mr. Smith. The author, speaking of enthusiastic impos
tors who pretended to revelation, observes. Chap. 4, "This
delusion ariseth from hence, that all this foreign force that
is upon them, serves only to invigorate and impregnate
their fancies and imaginations, but does not inform their
reasons, nor elevate them to a true understanding of things
in their coherence and contexture, and therefore they can
so easily embrace things absurd to all true and sober reason;
whereas, the prophetical spirit, acting principally upon the
reason and understanding ofthe prophets, guided them con
sistently and intelligibly into the understanding of things."
Now, although I do not believe that this principle is applica
ble to the prophets in Scripture, because it does not appear
that their understanding was always opened when their spir
itual vision was opened, still, if the principle be acknowledg
ed as the test ofthe highest prophetic spirit, we are willing
to submit the revelations of Swedenborg to this proof That
* With regard to the visions of paradise described by Mahomed, Mr. Sale
observes, in his Preliminary Discourse, affixed to the Koran, Sect. 4, "Had
Mahomed, after all, intimated to his followers that what he had told them of
paraHi.se was to be takeii, not literally, but in a melapliorical sense (as it is said
the Magians do the description of Zoroaster,) this might perhaps make some
atonement; b-ut the contrary is so evident from the whole tenor of the Koran, Ihat
although some Mahomedans, whose understandings are too refined to admit such
gross conceptions, look on their prophet's description as paral olical, and are
willing to receive them In an allegorical or spiritual acceptation, yet the general
and orthodox doctrine is, thai the whole is to be strictly believed in the obvious and
literal acceptation,'* fyc. 18

206 INTERCOURSE WITH
some of his visions may, to the reason of some persons,
appear absurd, we do not deny; all that we ask is, if they
are to be rejected upon this principle, why are those in
Scripture to be retained? We commonly call a thing ridic
ulous or absurd, if it creates in us feelings ofthe absurd or
ridiculous; but what can more completely demonstrate the
absurdity of our own principles, than to judge ofthe truth
of a narrative upon this ground ? It is making our feelings
the test of truth. The essential character and the succes
sion of spiritual ideas are not the same with those which
are merely natural; consequently, if, to the words which
express them, we attach the ideas of the merely natural
man, the less understood the narrative is, the more absurd
will it appear. Sober reason may convince us ofthe fact.
But if men will abandon their reason, and give way to their
feelings; if, in this state, they undertake to judge of what
they neither know, nor can know any thing about, the con
clusion to which they come is but the answer they receive
according to their folly. Suppose a person should ridicule
the narrative of St, John, with regard to the New Jerusa
lem, because he made the city as high as it was long, who
does not see that the merely natural man may be ridiculing
his own ideas, but not those of Scripture ? For the words
of Scripture were never meant to convey the views which
he ridicule?. Smile as he may, therefore, he is only smiling
at himself; being a standing witness of his own folly, in
supposing that be could have any knowledge of spiritu
al things, in his own natural state.
That there have been numbers of vain, delusive fancies
afloat-in the world; that warm', enthusiastic imaginations
have been forward to mistake the strong impressions pro
duced upon them for real existences, who caii doubt? But,
as one extreme is apt to give rise to another, may we not
presume that one principal cause of these delusions has
been the apathy, unconcern, nay, practical unbelief, in re
gard to the awful verities of another world, which we find
prevailing in the Christian community? What if there
have been enthusiasts, fanatics, and impostors? What if
they have gone about with "Thus saith the Lord" in their
mouths, when the Lord hath not spoken? If all warnings
are to be rejected simply because some are untrue, why
should we listen to established pastors and teachers; since
some among them have been ignorant, some unsound in
doctrine, and some have handled the word of God- deceit-

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 207
fully?* Far be it from us to ask persons to receive the
writings of Swedenborg, merely to make large demands
upon their faith or credulity. We appeal to an enlightened
reason; we appeal to the principles of that internal evi
dence, which our opponents have never yet been able to
gainsay; we invite them to bring all their faculties to bear
upon the subject, all their learning, all their sagacity, all
their judgment; and when they have done this, let them
not be disappointed, if all these should be found of no avail
without an humble arid a contrite heart. In vain is it said,
that the subjects are such, that any inquiry into them pre
supposes a spirit of presumption, and that men must be
content to live in their' present ignorance and darkness.
We have reason to be thankful, that many are not so un
concerned about their state hereafter. We live in days
in which many, if they cannot form right conceptions of
heaven and hell, will form to themselves wrong ones,
rather than form none at all; and if they form wrong ideas,
is it of no practical utility to point them out? If the king
dom of heaven is to be established within us; if man him-,
self is designed to be a heaven, is it ministering to mere
curiosity, is it indulging a blind credulity, is it conveying a
useless non-practical instruction, to inculcate right ideas of
its nature? Surely to affirm as much, would be to affirm,
that to instruct a man in that which he ought to be, which
he was intended to be, and for' which alone he was brought
into the world, is but wasting the time of the teacher and
the taught in unprofitable questions. When men have
fallen into delusions with regard to heaven and hell, when
those delusions pass for genuine truth, is it unworthy of
the mercy ofthe Lord to discover these errors by a revela
tion ofthe nature of the two worlds? For heaven is good
and truth, and hell is evil and the false; and to reveal the
nature 6f heaven and hell, is but to reveal the nature of
good and truth, evil and error. The evidence, therefore,
on which we are invited to receive the revelations of Swe
denborg, with regard to heaven and hell, is an internal evi
dence; it is that of our moral sense of the nature of good
and evil. Now is not this the highest evidence upon which
it is possible for us to receive any truth whatever? Mathe
matical demonstrations are addressed only to the lower
powers of reason, but this addresses itself to our whole
* See the Preface to Swedenborg's Treatise on Heaven and Hell, bv the
Rev. W. Hartley.

208 INTERCOURSE WITH
being; nevertheless, we are capable of attaining to this
evidence, only in the degree in which we perceive and
love that which is good, and hate that which is evil.
If then, as Christians, our moral sense of good and evil
be derived only from the Word of God; if we so interpret
that Word, as to derive from it entirely new principles of
life and conduct; if this new interpretation form the prin
cipal revelation of Swedenborg; and if all his narratives,
with regard to heaven and hell, be founded on the princi
ples of good and evil, truth and error, as taught in the
Word of God thus interpreted, can any thing be plainer
than that, so far from its being difficult to point out
in what respect Swedenborg's pretended revelations re
quire any alteration in our conduct, motives^ or moral sen
timents, the difficulty lies entirely. the other way? And if
so, what can be more clear than that the whole of the argu
ment in the Essays, as applied to the writings of Sweden
borg, is founded upon an entire misapprehension of the na
ture of his principles?
(Heaven and Hell' — page 4.) "The man ofthe church,"
says Swedenborg, "hath scarcely any knowledge respect
ing heaven and hell, or respecting his life after death, al
though they all stand plainly described in the Word; yea,
many also who are born within the church, deny those
things, saying in their hearts. Who hath ever come thence
to give us information? Lest,, therefore, such a negative
principle, which prevails especially amongst those who have
acquired much worldly wisdom; should also infect and
corrupt the simple in heart, and the simple in faith, it hath
been given me to have consort with the angels, and
to discourse with them as a man with a man, and also to
see the things which are in the heavens, likewise those
which are in the hells.... thus now to describe them from
what hath been heard and seen, in the hope that, by these
means, ignorance may be enlightened and incredulity dis
sipated." — Can we then suppose, that such a revelation, if
made, would be in accordance with our imaginations?
When God hath told us, that " it hath not entered into
the heart of man to conceive the things which he hath laid
up for them that love him," shall we reject a revelation
professedly coming from Him, because it does not
conform to our previous conceptions? Shall we confess,
that we are in utter darkness upon the subject; and
when a professed revelation comes, at once reject it,
with a confidence which would beseem only those, who

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 209
were previously well informed upon the matter? Shall we
not rather presume that, if such a revelation were made,
the probability would be, that it would contain things at
first incredible, and incomprehensible ? Look even to the
natural world, -^r-how slow of heart are we to believe all that
is written in the great volume of Nature! Born as we are,
with inherent evils, prejudices, and passions; brought up
within a narrovy and confined circle ; instructed but partial
ly in the ways of God, how many are there, whose minds
can see nothing beyond the limits of their own narrow
sphere! how few whose souls are adequate to the greatness
and grandeur even ofthe visible creation! However far
reason may travel, she is lost and confounded at the im
mensity which, even in the natural world, still lies before
her. "We have here attained," says a modern astrono
mer, (Discourse on Natural Philosophy, by Sir J. Her-
schell, art. 312,) " a point in science, where the human in
tellect is compelled to acknowledge its weakness, and to feel
that no conception the wildest imagination can form will
bear the least comparison with the intrinsic greatness ofthe
subject." If this be the casein natural things, how much
more is it the case in spiritual things! Oh! foolish, and
slow of heart to believe all that the Creator hath written
in the great volume of nature; Oh! far more slow of heart,
to believe all that He hath written in the great volume of
revelation ! " If I have told you of earthly things, and ye
believe not, how shall ye beheve, if I tell you of heavenly
things?" With these observations, my Lord, permit me now to
bring this Letter to a close; and to assure Your Grace
that, in many respects, it has been a very unwelcome un
dertaking; unwelcome, becauscthe author feels a reluc
tance to place himself in opposition to one, whose works have
often afforded him profit and delight; and v/hose learning,
attainments, Christian moderation, and enlightened views on
many subjects, cannot but command his respect and admi
ration; unwelcome, also, because the author is deeply sen
sible of his own incompetency to do justice to the cause he
advocates; and feels much more satisfied in cojrecting his
own imperfections, than in pointing out those of others.
Whatever may be the errors discoverable in this Letter, he
sincerely trusts that they who differ from him, may consid
er them as possibly errors in the author, and not necessa
rily in the cause he advocates. As he never desires to
take advantage of any mere inadvertencies committed by
18*

210 INTERCOURSE WITH
others, so he trusts he may, in return, receive from them
the same favorable consideration. He writes not for mere
critics; but for those whom the Spirit of truth may enable
to view the subject in all its comprehensive relations, with
out confining the sphere of their vision to whatever little
cavil it may be in their power to raise ; for those, in fine, who
can say, with Your Grace, " I have learned to call no man
master upon earth; and to appeal to nothing but the records
of inspiration, and the force of just reasoning."
The author of this Letter cannot conclude, without so
liciting, also, indulgence from the receivers of Sweden
borg's principles; for he is aware, that there are many who
are more conversant with the writings of Swedenborg than
himself; who could more correctly express the views of
that author; and more successfully answer objections
against them. He cannot, however, but observe, that,
however successful in controversy the principles of Swe
denborg may be, this is not the real sphere of their utility.
To testtheir real value, their power must be tried in the
regeneration ofthe soul; here, it is that their truth is evi
denced; here, that they manifest themselves in all the
glory of their divine original; here, that fact speaks, and
not argument, as it is written, " These signs shall follow
them that believe: in my name shall they cast out devils,
they shall speak with new tongues, they shall take up ser
pents, and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt
them; they shall lay hands on the sick, and they shall re
cover." Thus has the receiver of these principles the
witness ofthe Spirit within, the witness of his own heart, of
a reformed, regenerated nature; so that, whatever may be
the arguments adduced against us, — "we know that we have
passed from death unto life? because we love the brethren."
This love of God and of our neighbor, is that by which we
know that we are ofthe truth, and assure our hearts before
Him. The cause here advocated, will never be established by
the noise of mere controversy. — Its progress must be slow;
as slow as the moral regeneration of the world. We seek
not, therefor^e, to swell our numbers by proselytes; though
we consider it to be our bounden duty, at every seasonable
opportunity, to make known those principles we so highly
esteem, and to afford others the happiness they are calcu
lated to confer. May we ever hold out to all the hand of
Christian fellowship; and esteem those, who are not out
wardly with us, but who have been inwardly taught of

THE SPIRITUAL WORLD. 211
God, as more truly members of the New Jerusalem, than
such as are receivers of its doctrines, and are elated, instead
of humbled, by their knowledge. We have no fear ofthe final
success of these principles; and, whatever be our portion,
whether of evil report or good report, we desire to hold on
the even tenor of our way; knowing that the time is at hand,
when the Truth, like a rock, will ehierge above all the clouds
of darkness and prejudice with which it is surrounded; and
mankind will behold it with the sunshine of eternal glory
settled on its head. With these convictions, we would de
sire ever to remember the words ofthe apostle, (St. James,
chap. V, ver. 7,) "Be patient therefore, brethren, unto the
coming ofthe Lord. Behold ! the husbandman waiteth for
the precious fruit of the earth, and hath long patience for
it, until he receive the early and the latter rain. Be ye
also patient; establish your hearts, for the coming ofthe
Lord draweth nigh."
With a profound veneration of the high and holy office
to which Your Grace is called, and with an earnest prayer
that Your Grace may long be preserved to adorn the doc
trine of God our Savior, Believe me.
Most respectfully.
Your Grace's humble Servant,
AUGUSTUS CLISSOLD.

APPENDIX.

TP-INITY.
It has been usual to' confine the subject of the Trinity principally
to the learned. In the pi-esent Appendix we shall view it princi
pally in relation to the unlearned. The learned are the few; the
unlearned, the many. The scholar, if presumed to teach Tritheis-
tical notions, may plead the difference between essence and modes
of subsistence. The illiterate person has no such resort. "We be
gin with the learned ; we then pass to the unlearned. The jour
ney commences with the Dawn, continues to the Dusk, and ends
with the Midnight.

" The watchman said, The morning cometh." (Isa. xxi, 12.)
* " PERSON,, "in its ordinary use at present, invariably implies
a numerically distinct substance. Each man is one Person, and
can be but one. It has also a peculiar theological sense, in which
we speak of the ' three Persons of the blessed Trinity.' It was
probably thus employed by our Divines as a literal, or perhaps
etymological, rendering of the Latin word 'Persona.' I am in-
cKned to think, however, from the language of 'Wallis (the mathe
matician and logician) in the following extract, as well as from
that of some other of our older writers, that the English word
Person was formerly not so strictly confined, as now, to the sense
it bears in common conversation among ijs.
* Extracted from the Elements of Logic, by Archbishop Whately. Article PER
SON.

214

TRINITY.

" 'That which makes these expressions' (viz. respecting the
Trinity,) ' seem harsh to some of these men, is, because they have
used themselves to fancy that notion only of the word Person, ac
cording to which three men are accounted to be three persons, and
these three persons to be three men. But he may consider that
there is another notion of the word Person, and in common use,
too, wherein the same man may be said to sustain divers persons,
and those persons to be fhe same man ; that is, the same man, as
sustaining divers capacities. As was said but now of TuUy,. Tres
Personal JJtius sustineo ; i}.ieam, adversai ii, judicis. And then it
will seem no more harsh to say. The three persons. Father, Son,
and Holy Ghost, are One God, than to say, Goil the Creator, Got!
the Redeemer, and God the Sanctifier, are one God  it
is much the same thing whether of the two forms we use.' — Let
ters on the Trinity, p. 63.
" ' The word Person [persona) is originally a Latin word, and
doth not properly signify a Man (so that another person-mnst^eeda
imp\-y another man;) for then the "word i?omo would have served,
and they needed not have taken in the word persona, but rather
one so circumstantiated. And the same Man, if considered in other
circumstances (considerably different) is reputed another person.
And that this is the true notion of the word Person, appears by
those noted phrases, -persona-minduere, personam deponere, personam
a^-ere, and many the hke, in approved Latin authors. Thus the
same man may at once sustain the person^of King and a Father,
if he be invested both with regal and paternal authority. Now,
because the King and, the Father are, for the most part, not only
different p^sons, but tiifferentmen also (and the like in other cases,)
hence it comes to pass, that another Person is sometimes supposed
to , imply another man ; but not always, nor ia that the proper sense
of the word. It is Englished in our dictionaries by the state, qual
ity, ox condition whereby one-man differs from, another; a-ad so, as
the condition alters, the Person alters, though the man be the
same. " .
" ' The hinge of the controversy is, that notion concerning the
three somewhats, which the Fathers (who first used it) did intend to
design by the ' name Person ; so that we are not from the word
Person to determine what was that Notion, but from that Notion
which they would express, to determine in what sense the word
Person is here used,' &c. &c; — Letter _V, in answer to the Arian's
Vindication. " "What was precisely the notion which these Latin Fathers
intended to convey, and how far it approached the classical signifi
cation of the wort! ' Persona,' it may not be easy to determine.
But we must presume that they did not intend to employ it in
what is, now, the ordinary sense ofthe word Person; -both because
'Persona' never, I believe, bore that sense in pure Latinity,
and also because it is evident that, in that sense, 'three divine
Persons' wotild have been exactly equivalent to 'three Gods;' a
meaning- which the orthodox always disavowed.

TRINITY. 215
" It is probable that they had nearly the same view with which
the Greek theologians adopted the word:'Hypostasis ; which seems
calculated to. express ' that which stands under {i. e. is the Subject
of) A.ttribtites,' They meant, it may be presumed, to guard against
the suspicion of teaching, on the one hand, that there are three
Gods, or three Parts of the one God ; or, on the other hand, that
Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, are no more than three names, all,
of the same signification ; and they employed, accordingly, a term
which might serve to denote, that (though divine Attributes
belong to all and each of these,. yet) there are attributes of each,
respectively, which are not so strictly applicable to either of the
others, as wuch ; as when, for instance, the Son is called especially
the ' Redeemer,' and the Holy Spirit, the ' Comforter or Paraclete,'
&c. The notion thus conveyed is indeed -very faint, and imperfect;
but is perhaps, for that very reason, (considering what Man is, and
what God is,) the less likely to lead to error. One may convey to
a blind man, a notion of seeing, correct as far as it goes, and
instructive to him, though very imperfect : if he form a more full
and rfisiijicf notion of it, his icleaa will inevitably he, incorrect. —
See Essay VII, ^ 5, Second Series.
" It is perhaps to be regretted'that our Divines, in rendering the
Latin 'Persona,' used the word Person, whose ordinary sense, in"
the present day at least, differs in a most important point from
the theological sense, and yet is not so remote from it as to pre
clude all mistake and perplexity. If ' Hjrpostasis,' or any other
completely foreign term, had been used instead, no idea at all
would have been conveyed, except that of the explanation given ;
and thus the danger at least of being misled by a word woultl
have been avoided.
" Our Reformers however did not introduce the word into their
Catechism, though it has been (I roust think injudiciously) em
ployed in some popular expositions of the Catechism, without any
explanation, or even allusion, to its being used in a peculiar sense.
" As it is, the danger of being not merely not understood, but
misunderstood, should be guarded against most sedulously, by all
who wish not only to keep clear of error, but to inculcate impor
tant truth ; by seldom or never employing this ambiguous word
without some explanation or caution. For if we employ, without
any such care, terms which we must be sensible are likely to mis
lead, at least the unlearned and the unthinking, we cannot stand
acquitted on the plea of not having directly inculcated error.
" I am persuaded that much heresy, and some infidelity, may
be traced, in part, to the neglect of this caution. It is not wonder
ful that some should be led to renounce a doctrine which, through
the ambiguity in question, may be represented to them as involv
ing a self-contradiction, or as leading to Tritheism; that others
should insensibly slide into this very error ; or that many more
(which I know to be no uncommon case) should, for fear of that
error, deliberately, and on principle, keep the doctrine of the Trinity
out of their thoughts, as a point of speculative belief to which they
have assenteii once for all, but which they find it dangerous to

216 TRINITY.
dwell on ; though it is, in fact, the very Faith into which, by our
Lord's appointment, we are baptized.
" Nor should those who do understand, or at least have once
understood, the ambiguity in question, rest satisfied that they are
thenceforward safe from all danger in that quarter. It should be
remembered that the thoughts are habitually influenced, through
the force of association, by the recurrence of the ordinary sense of
any word to the mind of those who are not especially on their
guard against it. See ' Fallacies,' ^ 5.
"The correctness of a formal and deliberate Confession of Faith,
is not always, of itself, a sufficient safeguard against error in the
habitual impres£ons on the mind. The Romanists flatter them
selves thai they are safe from Idolatry, because they distinctly
acknowledge the truth, that 'God only is to be served;' viz. with
'Latria ;' though they allow Aboeation, ('hyperdulia' and 'dulia')
to the Virgin and other Saints, — to Images, — and to Relics : to
which it has been justly replied, that, supposing this distinction
correct in itself, it would be, in practice, nugatory ; since the mass
of the people must soon (as experience proves) lose sight of it
entirely in their habitual devotions.
" Nor, again, is the habitual acknowledgment of One God, of
itself a sufficient safeguard ; since, from the additional ambiguities
of One' and 'Unity,' (noticed in the preceding Article,) we may
gradually fall into the notion ofa merely figurative Unity; such
as unity of substance merely, (see the preceding Article) — Unity of
purpose, — concert of action, &c. such as is often denoted by the
phrase of ' one mind.' See ' Same' in this Appendix, and ' Disser-
tatiiro,' Book I'V, Chap. v.
" When, however, I speak of the necessity of explanations, the
reader is requested to keep in mind that I mean, not explanations
of the nature of the Deity, but of our own use of words. On the
one hand, we must not content ourselves with merely saying that
the whole subject is mysterious, and must not be too nicely pried
into ; while we neglect to notice the distinction between divine
revelations, and human explanations of them; between inquiries
into the mysteries of the Divine nature, and into the mysteries
arising from the ambiguities of language, and ofa language, too,
adopted by uninspired men. For, whatever Scripture declares,
the Christian' is bound to receive implicitly, however unable to
understand it; but to claim an uninquiring assent to expressions
of man's framing (however judiciously framed) without even an
attempt to ascertain their meaning, is to fall into one of the worst
errors of the Romanists.
" On the other hand, to require explanations of what God is in
Himself, is to attempt what is beyond the reach of the human
faculties, and foreign from the apparent design of Scripture revela
tion ; which seems to be chiefly, if not wholly, to declare to us (at
least to insist on among the essential articles of faith) with a view
to our practical benefit, and to the influencing of our feelings and
conduct, not so much the intrinsic nature ofthe Deity, as what he
is relatively to us. Scripture teaches us (and our Church Gate-

TRINITY. 217
chism directs our attention to these points) to ' believe in God,
who, as the Father, hath made us and all the world,— as the Son,
hath redeemed us and all mankind,— as the Holy Ghost, sanctifteth
us, and all the elect people of God.' And this distinction is, as I
have said, pointed out in the very form of Baptism. Nothing,
indeed, can be more decidedly established by Scripture,— nothing
more indistinctly explained (except as far as relates to us) than the
doctrine of the Trinity ; nor are we perhaps capable, with our
present faculties, of comprehending it more fully.
"In these matters our inquiry, at least our first inquiry, should
aliivays be, what is revealed: nor if any one refuses to adopt, as an
article of faith, this or that exposition, should he be understood as
necessarily maintaining its falsity. For we are sure that there
must be many truths relative to the Deity, which we have no
means of ascertaining : nor does it follow that even every truth
which cara be ascertained, must be a part of the essential faith of a
Christian. " And as it is wise to reserve for mature age, such instructions
as are unsuitable to a puerile understanding, so, it seems the part
of a like wisdom, to abstain, during this our state of childhood,
from curious speculations on subjects in which even the ablest of
human minds can but ' see by means of a glass, darkly.' On these,
the Learned can have no advantage over others ; though we are
apt to forget that any mysterious point inscrutable to Man, as
Man, — surpassing the utmost reach of human intellect, — must be
such to the learned and to the ignorant, to the wise and to the
simple alike ; — that in utter darkness, the strongest sight, and the
weakest, are on a level. ' Sir, in these matters,' (said one of the
most eminent of our Reformers, respecting another mysterious
point,) ' I am so fearful, that I dare speak no further, yea, almost
none otherwise, than as the Scripture doth as it were lead me by
the hand.'
" And, surely, it is much better thus to consult Scripture, and to
take it for a guide, than to resort to it merely for confirmations,
contained in detached texts, of the several parts of some System of
Theology which the student fixes on as reputed orthodox, and
which is, in fact, made the guide which he permits to ' lead him by
the hand ;' while passages culled out from various parts of the
Sacred \Vritings, in subserviency to such system, are formed into
what may be called an anag-ram of Scripture; and then, by refer
ence to this system as a standard, each doctrine or discourse is
readily pronounced Orthodox, or Sociniaii, or Arian, or Sabellian,
or Nestorian, &c. ; and all this on the ground that the theological
scheme which the student has adopted is supported by Scripture.
The materials indeed are the stones of the Temple, but the building
constructed with them is a fabric of human contrivance. If, instead
of this too common procedure, students would fairly search, the
Scriptures, with a view not merely to defend their opinions, but to
form them, — not merely for arguments, but for truth, — keeping
human expositions to their own proper purposes, [See Essay VI,
First Series,] and not allowing these to become, practically, a
19

218 TRINITY.
Standard ; if, in short, they were as honestly desirous to be on the
side of Scripture, as they naturally are to have Scripture on their
side, how much sounder, as well as more charitable, would their
conclusions often be I
" With presumptuous speculations, such as I have alluded to,
many theologians, even of those who live near, and indeed during
the apostolical times, seem to have been alike chargeable, widely
as they differed in respect of the particular explanations adopted
by each : " ' Unus utrique
Error ; sed variis illudit partibus.'
And it is important to remember, what we are very liable to lose
sight of, the circumstance, that not only there arose grievous errors
during the time of the apostles, and, consequently, such were
likely to exist in the times immediately following, but also that,
when these inspired guides were removed, there was no longer the
same infallible authority to decide what was error. In the absence
of such a guide, some errors might be received as orthodox, and
some sound doctrines be condemned as heterodox.
" The Gnostics introduced a theory of jEons, or.successive em
anations from the divine ' Pleroma ' or Fulness ; one of whom
was Christ, and became incarnate in the man Jesus. The Sabel-
lians are reported to have described Christ as bearing the same
relation to the Father, as the illuminating {cpunia-Tix6)') quality
does to the Sun ; while the Holy Ghost corresponded to the warm
ing quality {¦d-otlnbi' :) or, again, the Three, as corresponding lo
the Body, Soul, and Spirit of a man ; or, again, to Substance, —
Thought or Reason, — and Will or Action. The Arians again
appear to have introduced in reality three Gods ; the Son and the
Holy Spirit, created Beings, but with a certain imparted divinity.
The Nestorians and Eutychians, gave opposite, but equally fanci
ful and equally presumptuous, explanations of the Incarnatio'n,
&c. &c.
" Nor were those who were accounted orthodox, altogether ex
empt from the same fault of presumptuous speculation. 'Who,'
says Chrysostom, ' was he to whom God said. Let us make man?
who but he.  the Son of God 1' And Epiphanius, on
the same passage, says, 'this is the language of Goiitohis Word.'
Each of these writers, it may be observed, in representing God
(under that title) as addressing Himself to the Son as a distinct
Being previously to the birth of Jesus on earth, approaches very
closely to the Arian tritheism. And Justin Martyr, in a similar
tone, expressly speaks of God as ' One, not in number, but in
judgment or designs.' I will not say that such passages as these
may not be so interpreted as to exclude both the Arian and every
other form of tritheism ; but it is a dangerous thing, to use (and
that not in the heat of declamation, but in a professed exposition)
language of such a nature that it is a mere chance whether it may
not lead into the most unscriptural errors. If the early writers
had not been habitually very incautious in this point, that could
hardly have taken place which is recorded respecting the council

TRINITY. 219
held at Rimini, (a. d. 360,) in which a Confession of Faith was
agreed upon, which the Arians soon after boasted of as sanctioning
their doctrine, and ' the Church,' we are told, ' was astonished to
find itself unexpectedly become Arian.'
" The fact is, that numberless writers, both of those who were,
and who were not, accounted heretics, being displeased, and justly,
with one another's explanations of the mode of existence of the
Deity, instead of taking warning aright from the errors of their
neighbors, sought, each, the remedy, in some other explanation
instead, concerning matters unrevealed and inexplicable by man.
They found nothing to satisfy a metaphysical curiosity in the
brief and indistinct, though decisive, declarations of Scripture, that
' God was in Christ, reconciling the World unto himself;' that
' in Him dwelleth all the Fulness of the Godhead bodily ; ' that
' it is God that worketh in us both to will and to do of his good
pleasure;' that if we 'keep Christ's saying. He dwelleth in us,
and we in Him ; ' that ' if any man have not the Spirit of Christ,
he is none of his;' and that 'the Lord is the Spirit,' &c. They
wanted something more full and more philosophical than all this ;
and their theology, accordingly, was ' spoiled through philosophy
and vain deceit, after the tradition of men, after the rudiments of
the world, and not after Christ.' Hostile as they were to each
other, the grand mistake in principle was common to many of all
parties. " And in later ages the Schoolmen kept up the same spirit, and
even transmitted it to Protestants. ' Theology teaches,' (says a
passage in a Protestant work) ' that there is in God, one Essence,
two Processions, three Persons, four Relations, five Notions, and
the Circumincession, which the Greeks call Perichoresis.' 
What follows is still more to my purpose ; but I cannot bring my
self to transcribe any further. ' "Who is this that darkeneth coun
sel by words without kno^edge V
" But the substance of |Rat part of what I have been saying,
has been expressed in better language than mine, in a late work
which displays no ordinary ability, Mr. Douglas's Errors Regard
ing Religion.
" ' The Radical mistake in all these systems, whether heretical
or orthodox, which have embroiled mankind in so many scandal
ous disputes, and absurd and pernicious opinions, proceeds from
the disposition, so natural in man, of being wise above what is
written. They are not satisfied with believing a plain declaration
of the Savior, " I and the Father are one." They undertake, with
the utmost presumption and folly, to explain in what manner the
Father and the Son are one; but man might as well attempt to
take up the ocean in the hollow of his hand, as endeavor, by his
narrow understanding, to comprehend the manner of the Divine
existence.' — P. 50.
" ' Heresies, however, are not confined to the heterodox. While
the Arians and Semi-Arians were corrupting the truth by every
subtilty of argument and ingenious perversion of terms, the ortho
dox all the while were dogmatizing abtiut the Divine nature, with

220 TRINITY
a profusion of words which either had no meaning, or were gross
mistakes, or inapplicable metaphors, when applied to the infinite
and spiritual existence of God. And, not content with using such
arguments against the heretics as generally produced a new heresy
without refuting the former one, as soon as they obtained the
power they expelled them from the Roman empire, and sent them
with all the zeal which persecution confers, and which the ortho
dox, from their prosperity, had lost, to spread every variety of er
ror amongst the nations of the tsarbarians.
" ' Orthodoxy has become a very nice affair, from the rigor of its
terms, and the perplexity of its creed, and very unlike the highway
for the simple which the Gospel presents. A slip in a single ex
pression was enough to make a man a heretic. The use or omis
sion of a single word occasioned a new rent in Christianity. Ev
ery heresy produced a new creed, and every creed a new heresy.
 Never does human folly and learned ignorance appear
in a more disgusting point of view, than in these disputes of Chris
tians among themselves ; nor does any study appear so well cal
culated to foster infidelity as the history of Christian sects, unless
the reader be guided by light from above, and carefully distinguish
the doctrines ofthe Bible from the miserable disputes of pretended
Christians.' P. 53.
"To discuss this important subject more fully, (or perhaps in
deed as fully as it has been here treated of,) is hardly suitable to a
logical work : and yet the importance of attending to the ambigu
ity I have now been considering, cannot be duly appreciated,
without offering some remarks on the subject-matter with which
that ambiguity is connected ; and such remarks again, if scantily
and imperfectly developed, are open to cavil or mistake. I must
take the liberty, therefore, of referring the reader to such works,
both my own, and those of others, as containing something of a
fuller statement of the same views.-^See Essays (First Series,)
Essay II, § 4, and Essays IV and IIP— Second Series, Essay
VI, ^ 2, p. 199 ; VII, § 3; and IX, § 1. — Origin of Romish
Errors, Chap, ii, § 1. Archbishop King's Sermon on Predestina
tion, dfc, and Enclyclop. Metropol. History, Chap, xxvii, p.
589, and Chap, xxxiv, p. 740." *
" ONE — is sometimes employed to denote strict and proper
numerical Unity ; sometimes, close Resemblance; — correspon
dence with one single description. — See ' Same.'
 " ' Facies non omnibns UNA,
Nee diversa tamen ; qualem decet esse sororum.'
fQv. Metam. h. ii.
" It is in the secondary or improper, not the primary and proper
sense of this word, that men are exhorted to ' be of one mind; '
i. e. to agree in their faith, pursuits, mutual affections, &c.
" It is also in this sense that two guineas, e. g. struck from a
* The whole of this article is inserted, in order that I mieht^not appear to snppress
any observations on the sin of presumption which some have attributed to Sijvedeii''
b6rg, but which are already answered in the body ofthe letter.

TRINITY. 221
wedge of uniform fineness, are said to be 'of one and the same
form and weight, and also, of one and the same substance.' In
this secondary or improper sense also, a child is said to be 'of one
and the same (bodily) substance with its mother ; ' or, simply 'of
the substance of its mother : ' for these two pieces of money, and
two human beings are numerically distinct
"It is evidently most important to keep steadily in view, and
to explain on proper occasions, these different uses of the word ;
lest men should insensibly slide into error on the most important
of all subjects, by applying, in the secondary sense, expressions
which ought to be understood in the primary and proper." — See
'Person.' '* " Specimens of this ' philosophy and vain deceit,' such as are
to be found in various dissertations on what are called the myste
rious doctrines of the Christian faith, such as I cannot bring my
self to transcribe, and cannot even think of without shuddering, —
it may be sometimes a profitable though a painful task to peruse,
in order to estimate duly, as a warning and admonition to our
selves, the effects of misapplied learning and misdirected ingenuity.
To select one instance out of many, no point in these systems of
speculative theology has so much exercised the perverted powers
of divines of this stamp as the mystery ofthe Trinity, or, as they
might with more propriety have called it, the mystery of the di
vine Unity; for though in itself the doctrine, so sedulously incul
cated throughont the Scriptures that there is but one God, seems
to present no revolting difficulty, yet, on rising from the disquisi
tions of many scholastic divines on the inherent distinctions of the
three Divine Persons, a candid reader cannot but feel that they
have made the Unity of God the great and difficult mystery, and
have, in fact, so nearly explained it away, and so bewildered the
minds of their disciples, as to drive them to withdraw their
thoughts habitually and deliberately from every thing connected
with the subject, as the only mode left for the unlearned to keep
clear of error."
Note. " It is however important to remark, that, though the
Unity ofthe Deity is not, in itself, a doctrine of very mysterious
difficulty, it is one which is the more earnestly dwelt on in Scrip
ture, besides other reasons, for one resulting from the tone of the
Scriptures themselves. For they would, but for these express
declarations, naturally lead the reader either to believe in three
Gods, or at least to be in doubt on the question. The doctrine of
the Trinity is not so much declared as a distinct article of faith, as
it is implied by the whole history recorded, and views everywhere
taken in Scripture, of God's threefold manifestation of Himself,
which are such as would present to our minds nothing inconsistent
with the agency of three Divine Beings acting in concert, were it
not that such sedulous care is taken to assure us ofthe numerical
Unity of the God thus manifested to us ; that in the Son 'dwelleth
all the fulness ofthe Godhead,| &c. &c. See Essay vii, (Second
oao 'mIi 'io o>[ci-ij;r[ oa snos-rsq Snnii-iih oo'rrl; nBO y;o.H .fji "
»Ex(^f5ed,/fsn),JBB^rftr3(jfjBf55fpjsm,.j53 %% ,^»'^J:c5W?P!iWl;?f'^tll"/;'I
19*

222 TRINITY.
Series), pp. 234, 235, andEssay,ix, pp. 277, 281. See also Hinds's
' Three Temples of the One God,' pp. 129, 1 32, for a most luminous
view of this important subject.
" The reader is also referred to the articles ' One,' and ' Person,'
in the Appendix to the ' Elements of Logic.' It has been doubted
whether jhere is any foundation for the suspicion I have there
expressedt'that the language of some divines has a leaning
towards Tritheism. The following extract will at once explain
my meaning, and prove, I conceive, satisfactorily, that my appre
hensions are not altogether groundless. It is taken from a work
of considerable merit, and which has obtained not only much
popularity, but also a peculiarly high description of patronage.
Several of my readers will perhaps recognize the passage ; but I
purposely avoid naming the book, because it is not my object to
discuss the merits of this or that individual work, but to call
attention to the notions which are afloat in the world generally ;
and I am so far from designing to particularize the work in ques
tion, as containing any thing novel, peculiar, likely to be gene
rally offensive, and at variance with prevailing opinions, that my
meaning is the very reverse.
'" When the great Creator had finished the rest of his works,
wanting another creature to rule them all, and, as their priest, to
adore him in their name, he said, " Let us make man in our own
image,after our likeness." Inthecreationof otherthings allis done
with the tone of command, or with a mere volition. " Let there
be light ; let there be a firmament ; let the earth bring forth so
and so." But when man is to be made — a creature who is to be
endued with reason and intelligence — the very image of the Maker,
he uses an expression which indicates deliberation and counsel ;
he consults with some other august Beings (the two remaining
Persons of the Trinity, no doubt,) of whom, as well as of himself,
man was to be both the workmanship and the resemblance.'
" If this passage bad stood alone in the Jewish Scriptures, or if
the Jews had interpreted it, as this "writer has done, without any
reference to the other passages of Scripture which serve to qualify
and guard it, they would doubtless (as the above extract seems to
shew) have adopted nearly the same hypothesis as was long after
ward broached by Arius, that the supreme God acts in concert
' with some other august Beings !' "
[End of the extracts from the works of Archbishop Whately.
The reader will now compare them with what follows.]

"Woe unto us! for the day goeth away, fo-r ihe shadows ofthe
evening are stretched out." (Jer. vi, 4.)
" Q. How can three distinct persons so partake of the one
Divine nature or essence, as altogether to make but one God ?

TRINITY. 223
" A. That is not my concern to explain ; this I am sure,' that if
the Scriptures be (as we all allow that they are) the Word of God,
what they plainly deliver must be true ; because it is, in effect,
delivered by God, who can neither be himself deceived, nor will
deceive me. Now that they deliver both these propositions to me,
that the Father is God, the Son is God, and the Holy Ghost is
God, and yet that there are not three Gods, but one God, I am as
sure as I can be of any thing that is spoken or written for my
understanding. That, therefore, both of these assertions are true
and credible, I am sure. But how, or after what manner, I am to
understand them, so as to remove all shew of contradiction in them,
this the Holy Scriptures have not revealed; nor do I, therefore,
presume to pronounce any thing more particularly concerning it."
— Principles of the Christian Religion Explained. A Catechism, by
Archbishop Wahe. Section 15.*
t " Questions may, however, arise, as to the particular Divinity
of the Son ; whether, for instance, he may be considered as Divine,
by himself and alone, and be compared with the Father, as it
regards his several attributes or otherwise ? I answer, I can only
say that, as the Scripture appears to represent Christ as proceeding
from the Father and being very God, just as any son of -man may be
said to proceed from his natural father and be very man, although it
is quite out of my power to particularize about the process in either
case; so I think I can reasonably believe Christ to be of God, and
very God ; a being proceeding from the eternal, invisible, and in
comprehensible fountain of life and light, and adapted to the com
prehension of creatures such as we are, as far as such comprehen
sion is necessary to our instruction and welfare. If it be asked,
whether the Father and the Son can be considered each as exist
ing absolutely and independently of the other, and exerting the
powers of independent Deity ? I answer at once, I cannot tell.
Reason has nothing to offer on the subject one way or the other,
and the Scriptures are silent." — Professor Lee's Sermons. — Doc
trine af the Trinity, Dissertation 1, p. 110.
t " The Father loveth the Son ; his one, his dear, his only Son,
or his Only begotten Son, the Son of his love and of his bosom,
his Son from eternity, the everlasting Son of the Father. The Son
loveth the Father equally in return, and doeth always such things
as please Him. The Father, and the Son, in like manner and
degree, love the Holy Ghost, who eternally and essentially pro
ceedeth from both together ; and they are infinitely and equally
loved and admired by him in his turn ; he being peculiarly v^i;;}")),
*This quotation is introduced as one instance of the unity being considered the
mystery. Neither in lliis worli, nor in Bisliop Home's Sermon, which are tracts
circulated by the Society for Promotini: Christian Knowledge, is any notice talcen,
that the term person is used in any peculiar sense. It should be borne in mind, that
the extracts above quoted, are tal<en, with few exceptions, from the tracts circulated
by the Society for Promoting Cbrislian Knowledge, and by the Religious Tract
Society ; that they are not mere selections of particular passages, to the exclusion of
others which qualify their meaning ; but that they give, as 1 believe, a fair view of
the subject, as designed by the Author, and understood by the reader. The few
passages extracted from works not circulated as tracts. See. by religious societies, are
marlted with a cross, j ihus. The worlts of Goodwin and Cbarnock are on the cata
logue of the Religious Tract Society.

224 ' TRINITY.
the soul of love, the active energetic principle of all goodness and
beneficence. He is, besides, the common centre, the bond of
union and relation, by which both the Father and the Son are
inseparably and eternally united, as it were consolidated and iden
tified, by the strongest ties of natural affinity, congruity and
attach m.ent. In the Father and the Son there is mutual love, a
re-action and reciprocation ofthe strongest affection, the sincerest
cordiality, the most perfect harmony and unanimity. But, in and
through the Holy Ghost, there is'also joint love in the Trinity, or
the Godhead; that is, the same common aft'ection, the same
mutual pleasure and delight in the same infinitely lovely and
beloved individual ; and this love and delight reflected and recip
rocated back, from him and by him on themselves, with equal
ardor and sincerity of unmixed complacency and purest benevo
lence. Hence the third person of the Holy and undivided Trinity ,
and the Holy Ghost is, as it were, the cement and solder whereby
the first and second persons are still more closely related, associ
ated, aiid united. Agreeably to the ancient doxology, ' through
Jesus Christ our Lord, by whom and with whom, in the unity of
the' Holy Ghost, all honor and glory be unto thee, O Father
Almighty, world without end." — Doctrine of Atonement and Sacri
fice, by Dr. Whitley, Page 26.
" God himself not only undertakes to make (man,) but is pleased
so to express himself, as if he called a council to consider of the
making of him. Let us make man. The three persons of the
Trinity, Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, consult about it, and concur
in it. Man, when he was made, was to be dedicated to Father,
Son, and Holy Ghost. Into that great name we are with good
reason baptized ; for to that great name we owe our being. The
three persons of the sacred Trinity at first concurred in counsel
and operation, in forming man ; as, afterwards, in his recovery
from the fall." — Commentary of Henry and Scott. Genesis, chap.i,
ver..26, 27, 28. ,
t "We first should carefully study, and duly be affected with,
thi\t gracious consent, and, as it were, confederacy ofthe glorious
Three, in designing and prosecuting our good; their unanimous
agreement in uttering those three mighty words of favor to man
kind, Faciamus, Redimamus, SalvemuS, let us make man out of
nothing, let us recover him from sin and perdition, let us crown
him with joy and salvation. We should, with grateful resent
ments, observe them conspiring to employ their wisdom, in con
triving fit means and methods to exert their power in the effectual
accomplishment of what was requisite to the promoting of our
welfare, the rescue of us from all misery, the advancing us to the
highest degree of dignity, and installing us in the most perfect
condition of happiness of which our nature is capable ; in the
prosecution of that gracious design which their joint goodness had
projected for us." With much more of the same kind. — Defence of
the blessed Trinity, by Dr. Isaac Barrow.
. .,.'' We may cqnsii^ler, .liJ?.e^Jii^e, ^t }n,t^^.j^rj^ mm.M, F.afe^
aaid) Sony^a near -relalion,iialliancfii,fandf unity between tTOOrOiifjithe

TRINITY. 225
persons is intimated ; and, in reason, we must infer something of
a similar kind for the third, so closely joined with them. Il is not
said ' in the name of God and his two faithful servants,' nor, ' of
God, and Christ, and the Holy Ghost ;' -which might have sug
gested a thought that one only of the three was God ; but ' in the
nanie of the Father and of the Son,' a style perfectly equal and
familiar, vvithout any note of distinction more than that of a per
sonal relation, carrying with it the idea of a sameness of nature ;
as among men every father and son are of the same human nature
with each other. From the very wording of the form of baptism,
therefore, most reasonably might it be presumed that the two first
persons named were equally divine ; and the inference from thence
would fairly, and, indeed, unavoidably reach to the third, to make
all suitable and consistent; besides, that the terms Holy, and
Spirit, evidently point the same way."
" It is likewise said, that ' grace was given us in Jesus Christ
before the world began.' The words intimate that, previous to the
creation of the world, something had passed in our favour above ;
that the plan of our future redemption was then laid ; that some
agreement, some covenant relative to it, had been entered into :
' grace was given in us,' not in our proper persons, for as yet we
were not, we had no being ; but in the person of Him who was
afterwards to become our representative, our Savior, ' in Christ
Jesus.' Now the plan must have been laid, the covenant entered
into, by the parties who have been since graciously pleased to
concern themselves in its execution. Who these are we. cannot
be ignorant. It was the Son of God, who took our nature upon
him ; and, in that nature, made a full and sufficient oblation, satis
faction, and atonement for the sins of the world. It was the
Father who accepted such oblation, satisfaction, and atonement;
and, in consequence, forgave those sins. It was the Holy Spirit
who came forth from the Father and the Son, through the preach
ing of the Word, and the administration of the sacraments ; by his
enlightening, healing, and comforting grace, to apply to the hearts
of men for all the purposes Of pardon, sanctification, and salvation,
the merits and benefits of that oblation, satisfaction, and atone
ment." — The Trinity in Unity, a Discourse by Bishop Home."
" Christ was appointed by God, and He Himself also undertook
to be our Surety. This you have in Hebrews vii, 22. 'He was
made surety ofa better Testament,' or covenant, namely, of the
New. . . . Of this covenant Christ is the plighter of his troth for
it, the surety, the promiser, the undertaker. The verb this comes
of means to prove, which comes from the words signifying s^Wfa'ra^
hands, or giving one's hand as a sign of a covenant, and so to bar
gain with, or make up a covenant. ' Be not thou one of them
that strike hands, or of them that are sureties for debts,' (Prov.
xxii, 26) ... . God did, as it were, say to Christ, ' What they
owe me I require it all of your hands;' and Christ assented, and
from everlasting struck hands with God to do all for us that God
could require, and undertook it under the penalty that lay upon us
to have undergone; yea, Christ became such a surety in this for

226 TRINITY.
US, as is not to be found among men. On earth sureties are wont
to enter into one and the same bond with the debtors, so as the
creditor may seize on which of the two he will, whether on the
debtor or on the surety, and so, as usual, on the debtor first, for
him we call the principal ; but in this covenant God would have
Christ's single bond; and hence Christ is not only called the surety
of the covenant, but the covenant, (Isa. xlix, 8, and elsewhere.)
God making the covenant of grace primarily with Him, and with
Him a"S for us, thereby his single bond alone was taken for all,
that so God might be sure of satisfaction. . . . 'Thou spakest in
vision to thy Holy One, and saidst, I have laid help on one that is
mighty.' As if God had said, ' I know that these will fail me,
and break, and never be able to satisfy me ; but you are a mighty
and substantial person, able to pay me, and I will look for my
debt of you.' " — Christ Set Forth, Goodwin, p. 58.
" God trusted Christ before He came into the world, and saved
many millions of the Jews upon His bare word ; and then Christ,
at his death, trusts God again as much. . . . Yea, Christ thus
trusted God upon his single bond ; but we, for our assurance, have
both Christ and God bound to us, even God with his surety Christ ;
for He is God's surety, as well as ours. A double bond from two
such persons, whom would it not secure ? If God the Father and
God the Son thus mutually trusted one another for our salvation,
whom would it not induce to trust them both for one's own sal
vation, when, as otherwise, they must be damned that will not ?"
— Ibid. p. 16, et seq.
" Indeed, sacri'fices, as they looked backward, could be no other
than a transcript of the agreement between the Father and the
Son ; of the one's paying, and the other's accepting, the price of
blood for the redemption of man ; and, as they looked forward, —
a type of the real performance of the sufferings on the one part,
and the acceptance of them on the other part, when the fulness of
time should come wherein they were actually to be undergone.
This tradition of sacrifices was handed down to all nations of the
world; but the knowledge of the end of them was lost." — Christ
Ci'iicified. Charnoch, p. 65.
" If we consider it (i. e. the sacrifice of Christ) simply in itself,
without any previous order, without any covenant struck between
the Father and the Son concerning it. He was not obliged to have
any respect to the apostate creature upon the account of it. But
after a covenant struck between them, wherein it was agreed that
Christ shouW lay down his soul as a ransom, and offer Himself
an unblemished sacrifice for the sons of men, and that he should
see the travail of his soul, and by his righteousness justify many,
after he had borne their iniquities in his own body on the tree,
God could not but accept it, unless he could have found a spot in
the offering, and charged Him with a non-performance of any
article covenanted between them." — Ibid. p. 137.
" God promiseth to be a Father to Christ, in the same sense
that Christ owns Him to be His God and his Father after His resur
rection, (John XX, 17,) which respects God's relation to Him as

TRINITY. 227
Mediator ; for, as He is considered absolutely as tbe Son of God,
God could not so properly be said to be His God. The term
implies a covenant between them ; in pursuance of which, Christ
was to be God's servant, and, in acceptance of this, God was the
God of Christ, and promises to be His Father, manifesting His
Fatherly and gracious acceptance of His services, as a father doth
the obedience ofa Son ; and therefore Christ pleads the righteous
ness of God (for the obtaining the accomplishment of His grace in
those that believe in Him,) as well as the love which God bore to
Him as Mediator."— iW. p. 142.
" This sacrifice was of infinite value, and therefore worthy of
the acceptance of an Infinite Nature. His person was of as great
a dignity as the Father's, to whom he was offered. Though there
be a distinction of order between the three Persons, yet not of dig
nity. He had no peer but God, for He was equal with Him, had
equalities of perfections with God, was every way equal to the party
offended, so that He is called God's fellow, one of the same nature
with Him ; a man, as stricken by the sword, yet His fellow, as
considered in His divine nature." (Zech. xiii, 7.) — Ibid. p. 176.
" ' Oh ! Lord of hosts, how long wilt thou not be merciful to Je
rusalem, and the cities of Judah ? ' And Zechariah saith, that he
observed that ' the Lord answered the angel with good words, and
comfortable,' (Zech. i, 13.) God was fain to give him good words,
as we use to say, that is, words that might pacify Him ; as words of
comfort to us, so good words in respect to the angel's complaint.
And you may observe how, in the answer God returns upon it,
which he bade Zechariah write, God excuseth it, as it were, to
Christ, that his church had been so long and so hardly dealt withal ;
as if, beyond his intention. He lays the fault on the instruments.
' I was but a little displeased, but they helped forward the afflic
tion,' (v. 15.) This is spoken and carried after the manner of men,
to show how tender God is of displeasing Christ, our Intercessor ;
•that when Christ hath, as it were, been a long while silent, and let
God alone, and his people have been ill dealt withal. He, on the
sudden, in the end, intercedes and complains of it ; and it is not
only instantly redressed, but excused for times past with good
words and comfortable words. Christ's Father will not displease
Him, nor go against Him in any thing. Now that you may see
a reason of this, and have all cavils and exceptions taken away,
that may n%e against this, and how that there is an impossibility
that it should be otherwise, know that this Father and this Son,
though two persons, have yet but one will between them, and but
one power between them, though the Son outwardly executes all.
' My Father and I are one,' (John x, 30,) that is, have but one and
the same power to save you, and one mind and will. So also
' the Son can do nothing of Himself, but what he seeth the Father
do ; and whatever he doeth, the same the Father doeth also,'
(John V, 19.) They conspire in one, have one power, one will,
and then it is no matter though God commit all power to the Son,
and that the Son, though he hath all power, must ask all of the
Father; for to be sure, whatever He asks, the Father hath not

228 TRINITY.
power to deny, for they have but one will and power. They are
one, so as if God deny Him, He must deny Himself, which the
apostle tells us He cannot do, (2 Tim. ii, 13.) And so in the same
sense that God is said not to have power to deny Himself, in the
same sense it may be said. He hath not power to deny Christ what
He asks." — Christ Set Forth, Goodwin, p. 172.
"As God could not testify His goodwill to man in a higher
manner than sending His Son to be a sacrifice for him, so He
could not in a higher manner testify His delight in that sacrifice
than to send so great a person as the Holy Ghost to be a Solicitor
to men to accept of it, and a Comforter to those who believe in it —
the third Person in the blessed Trinity to preserve the honor of the
oblation of the second. God would never have been at the ex
pense of so great a gift, to keep up the credit of a person and
sacrifice wherein he had no pleasure." — Christ Crucified, Char
noch, p. 172.
t " 'Of how much sorer punishment, suppose ye, shall he be
thought worthy, who hath done despite unto the spirit of grace?'
Things cannot be vexed and insulted, persons may. Hence the
Holy Spirit is not a thing, but a person, and therefore God. His
acts are in some sense distinct from those of God. " He that
searcheth the hearts knoweth what is the mind of the Spirit, be
cause He maketh intercession for the saints according to the will
of God.' If the Holy Spirit were the grace of God, what could
induce the apostle to declare, what none could doubt, that God
knew His own ¦working in their souls? Or testate that the Holy
Spirit intercedes for Christians? that is, within them, according
to God, since it would be God Himself who did it? Hence it is
certain that the work of the Holy Spirit, in this passage is, in some
sense, distinct from the work of God; and therefore the Holy Spirit
cannot mean the grace of God, or his influence, but is truly God
the Spirit, essentially one with the Father, but also mysteriously
distinct." — Christianity compared with Unitdrianism, by the - Hon.
and Rev. Baptist W. Noel, p. 46.
( " Christ) was the fittest, in regard of His being the second
Person in the Trinity. It was not fit the Father should suffer ;
He is regarded as the Governor of the world : who should then
have been judge of the satisfaction, whether it had been sufficient,
or no? Was It fit the Father should have appeared before the
tribunal of the Son ? — Nor was it so fit that the Spirit of God
should undertake it ; because, as there was a necessity of satis
faction to content the justice of God, so there was a necessity of
applying this satisfaction, and quickening the hearts of men to be
lieve and accept' it, that they might enjoy the fruits of this sacri
fice. The order of the three Persons had then been disturbed ;
and that Person, whereby the Father and the Son execute all
other things, had changed his operation." — Christ's Death, Char
noch, p. 78.
" Christ is a Person in the Godhead distinct from the Father,
' Advocate with the Father ; ' the Father and the Advocate are
here distinct ; a judge and an advocate are different persons, have

TRINITY. 229
different offices, are exercised in different acts. The Father is
considered as the governor ; and the Advocate, as a pleader." —
Ibid. p. 222.
" In His incarnation. He came from the Father to acquaint us
with His gracious purposes, and how far He had agreed with God
on our behalf; and at his ascension. He went from us to the
Father, to sue out the benefits He had so dearly purchased. He
drew up an answer upon the cross, to the bill, that sin by virtue
of the law had drawn against us ; and ascended to heaven, as an
Advocate to plead that answer upon his throne, and rejoin to all
the replies against it  When His offering was accepted. He
went to heaven to the supreme Judge, to improve this acceptation
of His sacrifice, by a negociation which holds and continues to
this day. Christ is entered into heaven." — Ibid. p. 227.
" Q. Whither did our Savior ascend ?
" A. Into the heaven of heavens, the presence of God ; where
His human nature is seated far above all angels and archangels,
all principalities and powers ; even at the right hand of God.
" Q. "VVhat mean you by His sitting at the right hand of God?
" A. The advancement of His human nature to the height of
dignity and authority in the presence of God ; the right hand being
esteemed the place of greatest honor and favor. Or it may import.
His sitting in His human shape on the right hand, or that bright
throne or resplendent glory which visibly accompanies and mani
fests some extraordinary presence of God ;— the usual symbol of
His power and majesty, which was probably what St. Stephen
seems to have seen, when he beheld liie glory of God, and Jesus
standing at the right hand of God.
" Q. What are we obliged to believe concerning our Savior's
ascension ?
"A. That the only begotten and eternal Son of God, after He
rose from the dead, did, with the same soul and body with which
He rose, by a true and local translation, convey Himself from the
earth on which He lived, through all the regions of the air, through
all the celestial orbs, until He came unto the heaven of heavens,
the most glorious presence of the Majesty of God.
" Q. What benefit do we particularly receive from Christ's
exaltation in heaven ?
" A. The great advantage of His intercession for us at the right
hand of God ; where He is a perpetual patron and advocate in our
behalf, to plead our cause, to solicit our concernments, to repre
sent our wants, and to offer up our prayers and requests to God,
by virtue of his meritorious sacrifice. So that the true penitent
may expect forgiveness; the weak but sincere Christian strength
and assistance, having so powerful a Mediator with the Father.
Those that suffer and are persecuted, may depend upon their high
priest for comfort and support ; since he is touched with a sense
of our infirmities. And all may come boldly to the throne of
grace, to obtain mercy and help in time of need ; because our
prayers are offered to God by so powerful and prevalent a hand."
Nelson's Fasts and Festivals. Ascension.
20

230 TRINITY.

"A land of darkness, as darkness itself, and of the shadow of death
without any order, and where the light is as darkness." Job x, 22.
" I clothe the heavens with Uackness." Is. 1, 3.
" ' At that day,' says Christ, ' you shall ask in my name : and I
say not to you that I will pray the Father for you, for the Father
himself loveth you.' John xvi, 26, 27. . . Now of that time when
he shall be in heaven. He says, 'I say not that I will pray for
you,' which is not meant, that Christ prays not for us in heaven ;
but rather those very words are the highest intimation, that He
would and doth pray for us, that can be. When men would most
strongly intimate their purpose of a kindness, they meant to do
for one, they use to say, ' I do not say that I love you, or, that I'
will do this or that for you;' which is as much as to say, I will
surely do it, and do it to purpose." — Goodwin, Christ Set Forth,
p. 180.
" It is such a speech as men use, when they would express the
greatest reason that another hath to rest confident and assured of
their love.' 'I do not love you ; no, npt I.' It is an expressing a
thing by its contrary , which is most emphatical .' As when a man
hath the greatest good turn done him that can be, we use to say,
' You are shrewdly hurt.' It is such an expression as Paul used
to the Corinthians : ' I converted yonr souls when you thought not
of it ; I caught you with guile ; forgive me this wrong.' So says
Christ here, ' I say not that I will pray for you ;' when the truth
is, that it is the chief work which He doth in heaven ; ' He liveth
ever to intercede ; as He ever lives, so to intercede ever, and never
to hold his peace, till sinners are saved.' " — Ibid. p. 223.
" Now to raise up our apprehensions how potent and prevalent
this intercession of Christ must needs be, let us consider both the
person interceding, namely, Christ ; and the person with whom
Christ intercedes for this favor, which is God ; the one, the Son ;
the other, the Father ; and so the greatness of Christ with God,
and the graciousness of God to Christ, together with the oneness
of wills and unity of affections in them both. So that Christ will
be sure to ask nothing, which His Father will deny; and His
Father will not deny any thing, which he shall ask." — iW. p.l50.
" All matters of intercession are carried, we know, by way -of
favor; and therefore look, how prevalent, in a way of merit, His
being God makes His death in its kind, no less prevalent doth His
being the Son of God make his intercession in its kind; namely,
in a way of obtaining grace and mercy ; yea, so prevalent of itself
it is, that we might build upon it alone, even as much as upon
his death. And, indeed, Christ intercedes, not only in the virtue
and strength of His satisfaction (though in that also,) and of His
obedience to His Father; but also in the strength of^ his relation
as a Son, who pleads his own grace and interest in God, as He is

TRINITY. 231
His Son ; which is a consideration that doth always actually exist
and abide. Whereas His obedience, though perfect, was but once
offered up, and its existence is but virtual ; but He continues a
Son for ever, not virtually only, but actually." .... Ibid. p. 153.
"And how effectual must the intercession of such a Son be, who
IS so great a Son of so great a Father; equal with Him, and the
express image of His person ! Never any son so like, and in so
peculiar a transcendent manner a son ; as the relation of sonship
among men is but a shadow of it. Christ is one with the Father,
as Himself often speaks ; and therefore, if His Father should deny
Him any thing, He should then cease to be one with him ; He
must then deny Himself, which God can never do." — Ibid. p. 164.
" The Spirit is an advocate to indite our petitions, and Christ is
an advocate to present them. Some distinguish them, that Christ
is an advocate by way of office, and the Spirit by way of assist
ance ; but certainly, the Spirit is an advocate by way of office to
counsel us, as Christ is an advocate by way of office to plead for
us; and the Spirit is as much sent to do the one in our hearts, as
Christ was called back to heaven to do the other for our persons.
The Spirit is an Intercessor on earth, and Christ is an Intercessor
in heaven. Again, as there are two courts we are summoned to
appear in, the court ofthe Supreme Judge and the court of the
Judge's deputy, our own consciences ; Christ clears us by his plea at
•God's bar, and sets us right with the offended Father ; the Spirit,
as Christ's deputy, being sent in His name, clears us at the bar
of our own consciences. Christ answers the charge of the law, in
the court of God's justice, and the Spirit answers the accusations
of sin, in the court of God's deputy ; the one pleads for our dis
charge above, the other pleads for our peace below, and the voice
of God's spirit is as mighty in us, as the voice of Christ's blood is
mighty for us." — Christ's Death, (^c. Charnock, p. 230.
" (The petition of Christ) is in the nature of a claim and demand.
It is not a petition for that which is at the liberty of the petitioned
person to grant or refuse; but for that which the petitioner has a
right to by way of purchase, and the person petitioned to cannot
in justice deny. An advocate is an officer in a court of judicature,
demanding audience and sentence in a judicial way; so that this
intercession of Christ is not a bare precarious intercession ; for as,
when He was in the world, ' He taught as one having authority,
and not as the scribes," (Matt, vii, 29,) so in heaven. He intercedes
as one having authority, by virtue of his Mediatorial power, and
not as an ordinary supplicant. He hath a right to demand ; on
earth, indeed, he had only promises of assistance to put in suit;
but in heaven. He pleads the conditions performed on his part,
upon which the promises made to Christ become due to Him. It
is now, ' Father, I have glorified Thee upon the earth, now glorify
me with Thy own self,' (John xvii, 4, 5.) He pleads for His peo
ple as they are the gift of His Father, and as they have received
His words, (v. 8.) He pleads His own commission, as one sent
(v. 23.) He reminds the Father of the covenant between them
both, as God gave Him a command what He should do in the

232 TRINITY.
world ; which was no other than an injunction to perform those
conditions which had been agreed upon, and that will of God,
expressed in the covenant of redemption, which is called the will
of God, (Heb. x, 7.) Christ, having done this will, mediates for
the performance of^the conditions God was bound to by this cove
nant ; and claims the performance of them as a debt due to His
meritorious obedience on the cross ; so that it is not a desire only in
a way of charity, but a claim in a way of justice, by virtue of
meriting ; and a demand of the performance of the promise." —
Ibid. p. 252.
"He sat down, expecting till His enemies be made his foot
stool," (Heb. X, 13) — expecting the full fruits of that sacrifice, in
the complete subjection of His enemies; and, consequently, the
full felicity of Himself and His Friends ; and all this time of ex
pectation. He is suing out the promise of God to Him, asking that
inheritance which was assured Him in the covenant between them
(Psalm ii, 8.) This is the reason of his sitting down for ever, to
exercise His priesthood for ever, in the presence of the King and
Judge of all the earth. He is always in the presence of His
Father, in the dignity of His person, and fulness of His merit,
continually spreading every part of His meritorious sacrifice in the
view of God. The High Priest entered into the Holy of Holies
but once a year ; but this High Priest sits for ever in the court, in
a perpetual exercise of His function, both as a Priest and a sacri
fice. And since His own sacrifice for sins offered on earth, was
sufficient. He hath nothing to do perpetually in heaven, but to
sprinkle the blood of that sacrifice upon the mercy-seat. He is
never out of the presence of God ; and the infiniteness of His com
passions may hinder us from imagining a silence in him, when
any accusations are brought in against us. The accusations might
succeed well, were He out of the way ; but, being always present.
He is always active in his solicitations; no clamor can come
against us, but He hears it, as being on the right hand of his
Father; and appears as our attorney there, in the presence of
God, to answer it, as the high priest appeared in the holy of holies
for all the people."— iSz'ti. 262.
" If we have Him and his favor, we may be sure that we have
the favor of God by His means. For He sitteth on the right
hand of God His Father, as our proctor and attorney ; pleading
and suing for us, in all our needs and necessities." — Homilies,
Sermon on Good Friday.
" If any man sin, it implies, that every man ought to make re
flections on his conscience, lament his condition, turn his eye to
his great Advocate, acquaint him with his state, and entertain
him afresh in his cause. Though He lives for ever to make in
tercession, it is only for those who come to God by Him as their
agent and solicitor ; for those who come to tbe Judge, but first
come to Him as their attorney." — Christ's Death, Char
nock, 219.
"He manages not an intercession merely in a way of charity;
but in a way of authority, as a person entrusted by God, and dig-

TRINITY. 233
nified to this end ; not only as our friend, but as a divine officer;
as an attorney may manage the suit of his kinsman, not only as
being related to his client, but as being admitted by the court into
such an office. Christ is not only admitted as one of kin to
us, but commissioned as Mediator for us." — Christ's Death,
Charnock, 231.
f'ltis His propitiation that He pleads. And we might be
apt to suppose that His blood had lost its value and efficacy, were
no mention made of it in heaven since the time it was shed. But
now we see that it is of esteem there ; since it is continually rep
resented in the intercession of the Great Advocate, the Attorney
General for the church of God." * — Matthew Henry's Comments.
John, 1 Ep. ii, 1.
" He intercedes for nothing but what He knows the Father
wills. What He did on earth was not without, but with. His
Father's will ; what he doth ih heaven, hath the same rule. As
they were joined in the counsel of reconciliation and peace which
was 'between them both' (Zech. vi, 13,) so they are joined in the
counsel of advocacy and intercession which is between them both ;
the one as the Director, the other as the Solicitor. Their wills
are in the highest manner conformable to one another, and the
will of the Father as much known by the soul of Christ in heaven,
as it was on earth. He asks nothing, but he first reads in the
copy of His Father's instructions, and considers what His will
was. He reads over the annals of His Father's decrees and re
cords; He doth nothingbut what He sees the Father do; He takes
the copy of all from His Father ; and whatsoever Christ doth, the
same doth the Father also. They have but one will in the whole
current of redemption ; so that He can plead nothing in regard of
the persons for whom He appears^ and the good things He desires
for them, but it is according to the will of God  If He gives
* Bishops Beverifige, Reynolds, Pearson, Archbishop TitIot=ion, also Drs. Barrow,
Hammond, &;c., talte fundamentally the same view ofthe subjecti although some of
them do not enter into such [larticulars as are siipplied by others. A few, alter fol
lowing ont the details in the lowest and most literal sense, appear to have occasion
ally some misgivings, as to whether it is possible that such things can be. Of these
Bishop Beveridge appears to be one — wJio, in his sermon on Christ's Ascension, af
ter describing the ol.Rceot intercession in the usual manner, observes, " We must not
thinic that He mattes any solemn prayers to "His Father, as we do, or, at least,
out lit to do. No; whatsoever He would have, He onlyaclually wills it should
be so, and immediately it is just so as fie wonld have it." Still, however, by this
observation, the pious and learned prelate seems to mean no more than that our Sa
vior's prayers to the Father in heaven, are like the one He offered up on the earth.
" Father, / will tllat they also whom Thon hast given me, be with me where 1 am,"
&c. Indeed, thi^ is the explanation the Bishop afterward gives. Unfortunately,
however, many a learned commentator will not allow of it ; insisting, it seems, lor
varifins reasons, upon prayers and entreaties, though tacit, such as Christians com
monly otfer up. Hence some maintain that, when our Savior says, "Father,! will
that they also wiiom thou hast given me, be with me where I am," the expression
J will means J iDish, limplore, 6cc. This ia the meaning attached to the word in
I'arkhurst's Lexicon ; as also in Bloomfield's Synopsis, where any other meaning
than that of pctiticm or supplication is treated as absurd. Olhers, like Keach, give,
as will tie seen, a ditforent turn to the passage j bill in linth cases, therea er is thrown
back upon those popular views ot intercession and medinlioii, which are described
above • because the mediation or intercession going on in lieaven, they conceive to
benf the same nature with that which took place on earth ; with this additional ad-
vanta"e that Christ, in heaven, can more eflectually plead his «iwn merits.
20*

234 TRINITY,
blessings for the glory of his Father, He then, in his suit, urgeth
the glory of His Father as an argument to obtain them. God
must, then, be an enemy to his own glory, if He be deaf to his
Son's suit ; and since the Advocate's plea is suitable to the Fa
ther's will, He cannot reject the will of his Son, without offering
violence to His own will. They are both one in will, and one in
affection. His human will cannot desire any thing in opposition
to the Divine."* — Christ's Death, Charnock, p. 278.
" His advocacy for us isa confession of our interest in Him,
our owning of Him : by virtue of which confession, or claim, we
are set right in the court of God, as those for whom He hath shed
His blood. This intercessory demand, or asking, is accompanied
with the presenting the memorials of his death. It is a com
memoration of the sacrifice which He offered on earth for our ex
piation; and the whole power of intercession, with the prevalence
of it, is wholly upon this foundation; it is a presenting the
efficacy of his death, the virtue of his blood, the pleasure ol God
in the sacrifice offered by Him. It is by the displaying the whole
merit of his passion, that he doth solicit for us. Intercession is
not properly a sacerdotal act, without respect to the sacrifice. It
* The following are extracts from Reach's Metaphors, on The OiRce of Christ
as an Advocate. (Articles 11, 12, 13, 14, 17, 13, 21, 23, 27.) An advocate usually
speaks comfort to his client, especially if the cause will bear it. Jesus Christ out
does ail advocates under heaven, in all things j for He speaks so as never man
spake like Him. He hids them ask what they will, and He will do it for them.
Ask and it shall be done, that your joy may be full. An advocate can use free
dom of speech, and speaks boldly to the judge ; Christ most fully answers to this
where he saith, Father, I will that those whom thou hast given me, be with me
where I am, that Ihey may behold my glory. An advocate knows the fittest time
to manage business ; and every thing is beautiful in its season. The Lord Jesus
knows tbe fittest time to manage business on the behalf of souls ; there is an accep
table time for him to be heard, and to do his work. When 8atan .tempts, when he
desires to sift, when he accuseth to Gnd, as in the case of Job, when provocation is
given and the enemy lays siege against the soul, then is a fit time for our advocate
to work ; this, Christ is well acquainted with, &c. An advocate hath the judge's
ear more than those that are but standers by, that may be somewhat concerned in a
cause ; but the judge listens to him, because he expects him to speak to the purpose,
who hath authority so to do. Christ hath the ear of the heavenly Judge, because he
always speaks to the very life ofthe cause. He was heard in all things, and at ajl
times ; * I know that thou hearest me always.' He only is authorized to plead for
poor sinners. An advocate is much honored by the judge in all his replies ; some
times gives him the title of brother. Christ is very much honored by Gqd, He calls
Him His fellow, and will have all men honor the Son, even as they honor the Fa
ther. An advocate knows much of the judge's mind, being skilled in all the rules
that he judgeth by ; and is well acquainted with his nature and disposition. Jesus
Christ knows much ofthe mind of God, ' being always by Him, and as one brought
up with Him,' Ate. (Prov- viii.) An able advocate doth, and that not seldom, carry
causes, that are very doubtful, to others ; Christ did frequently, when on earth, and
doth, since his departure into heaven, carry causes doubtful to others. He carried
the cause in a great trial against Satan, who had made strong attempts against Him,
after He had fasted forty days, &.c. A good advocate is always very diligent, and
mindful of his clients' concerns. Christ Is very diligent, never guilty of any neglect
in acting for His people ; He went about doing good, pleaded often ; pleaded strongly
with crying and tears; used mighty and prevailing arguments with God, on the be
half of his (btck on earth ; pleads for great things for them, &c. A wise and honorable
advocate lietb fair for preferment, 1. e. in some space of time to be a judge himself,
when his work and business of advocacy ceasetli. The Lord J«sus is the wisest
and most hunoi able advocate that ever was, and therefore, is the undoubted heir to
preferment, yen, to the greatest of preferments; He being appointed the judge of all
the woild, by Ji former and unutterable decree j ' Him hath God ordained lobe judge
ofthe quick and the dead,' &c.

T R I M T Y . 235
was with the blood of tbe sacrifice, that the high priest was to en
ter into the holy of holies, and sprinkle it there. "The same blood
that had been shed without, on the day of expiation, was to be
carried within, the veil. 'What was done typically, Christ doth
really; first give Himself a sacrifice, and then present Himself as
the sacrifice for us. The apostle shews us the manner of it
(Heb. xii, 24.) The blood of Christ is a speaking blood, as well
as the blood of Abel. It speaks in the same manner as Abel's
blood did; though not for the same end. As the blood of Abel
presenting itself before the eyes of God, was as powerful to draw
down the vengeance of God, as if it had uttered a cry so loud as to
reach to heaven ; so the blood of Christ, being presented before the
throne of God, powerfully excites the favor of God, by the loud
ness of its cry. He speaks by his blood, and his blood speaks by
its merit. The petitions of his lips had done us no good, without
the voice of his blood. He stands as a lamb slain, when He pre
sents the prayers of the saints (Rev. v, 6, 8,) with his bleeding
wounds open, as so many mouths fiill of pleas for us ; * and every
one of them is the memorial and mark of the things which He
suffered, and for what end He sutfered them ; as the wounds of a
soldier, received in the defence, and for the honor of his country,
displayed to persons sensible of them, are the loudest and best
pleas for the grant of his request. If the party-colored rainbow,
being looked upon by God, reminds Him of His covenant not to
destroy the world again by a deluge (Gen. ix, 14, 16;) much more
are the wounds which Christ bears, both in his hands, feet, and
side, remembrances to him of the covenant of grace, made with
repenting and believing sinners. The look of God upon those
wounds, whereby so great an oblation is remembered, doth as ef
ficaciously move Him to look kindly upon us, as the look upon
the rainbow disposeth Him to the continuance of tbe world. If
our Savior had not a mouth to speak. He hath blood to plead ; and
His blood cries louder in heaven for us, than His voice did in any
of the prayers He uttered upon earth ; for by this. His performance
ofthe articles on His part is manifested, and the performance of
the promises on God's part solicited; when He sees what tbe
Redeemer hath done. He reflects upon what He Himself is to do ;
the blood of Christ speaks the tenor of the covenant of Redemp
tion made with Christ on behalf of sinners."— Ibid. 254.
* In Scntt's-Christian Life, which is, I believe, a popular work, and a reprint of
which, with the rest of his worlts, issued from the Clarendon Press, at Oxford, in
the year 1826, the same idea is enlarged upon ; and in the Chapter on the Interces
sion of Christ, the whole process is explained with the same degree of minuteness as
that which is exemplified in these extracts. The chapter is divided as follows.
" First — The intercession and advocation of Christ in. heaven, is a solemn address
of our blessed Savior to God the Father in our behalf. Secondly This address is per
formed by the presenting 11 is sacrificed body to tbe Father in heaven. Thirdly It
is continued and perpetuated, by the perpetual oblation or presenting of tins His
sacrificed body. Fourthly, In virtue of tliis perpetual oblation. He doth always suc
cessfully move and solicit God ; and this, first, to receive and graciously accept our
sinreiearid heartv oraver ; and, secondly, to empower Him to bestow on us all
S graces and favo«rwbtcb,'ln consideration of His sacrifice, God hath promised

236 TRINITY.
" As therefore He is entered into heaven, sat down at the right
hand of God, and has maintained the plea of his sacrifice for so
many hundred years since He first entered His suit, it is a proof
that the pleading His death, and the sight of His sacrificed body, is
not wearisome and distasteful to God. It is not like a carcass
that He desires to be buiied out of his sight. He joyfully hears
the voice of His blood sounding in his ears to this moment. 'Well,
therefore, might the apostle, upon this account, make so great a
challenge to all, ' Who is he that condemneth ? It is Christ that
died, yea, rather, that is risen again, who is even at the right hand
of God, who also maketh intercession for us," (Rom. ,viii, 33, 34.)
Christ by His death appeased the wrath of God; by His resurrec
tion He was acquitted by the justice of God; by His ascension He
took possession of His regal throne ; by His sitting at the right
hand of God, He prevalently pleads His sacrifice for the ends for
which it was ofiered ; and by His spirit applies His blood to them
that lielieve in, Him." — Christ Crucified, Charnock, p. 157.
" He understands our cause ; He understands the law according
to which he is to plead the articles of agreement between the
Father and Himself ; and He understands the fulness and redun
dancy of His own merit. He uses arguments proper to thp cause
he pleads, and drawn from the nature of the person He apphes
himself to. When He meets with the church in weakness and
distress by potent adversaries, and would have the Jews delivered,
and the temple rebuilt. He solicits God as the Lord of Hosts (Zech.
i, 12.) When He finds His people in danger of sin and tempta
tion, He petitions God under the title of Holy (John xvii, 11.)
When He would have promises performed to them. He appeals to
the righteousness of the Father (John xvii, 25,) it being part of
His righteousness to fulfil that word which He hath passed, and
make good the grant which so great a Redeemer merited. He
pleads the respects He had to the Divine will in the exercise of
every part of his office, both of Priest and Prophet (Psalm xl, 9, 10,)
(a prophetic psalm of Christ.) ' I have not hid Tby righteousness
within my heart, I have declared Thy faithfulness and Thy salva
tion, I have not concealed Thy loving-kindness and Thy truth
from the great congregation.' The ailding thy to every one of
them is emphatical : it was Thy righteousness I had commission
10 declare. Thy faithfulness I had order to proclaim. Thy mercy I
had a charge to publish ; Thou wert as nruch interested in all that
I did, as I myself was. I shall be counted false and a liar, Thou
wilt be counted unjust and cruel, if all be not fulfilled as I have
spoken ; since it was Thy rule I observed, and Thy glory I aimed
at in declaring it. Disgrace not Thyself and Me in refusing the
petition of such a supplicant, who believes in My word which I
gave out by Thy authority. Surely as Christ observed the will of
God upon earth, so He is wise to intercede for nothing but accord
ing to tlipse rules He observed in His humiliation, which was
whatsoever might honor and manifest the righteousness, faith
fulness, salvation, truth, and loving-kindness of the Father. Tbig
is a part of His wisdom, to plead for nothing but for what Hg

TRINITY. 237
hath the nature of God to subscribe to His petitions, and back
Him in them. It is not for the honor of an advocate to under
take a cause he cannot bring to pass; nor will any wise man
engage in a suit which he hath not some strong probabihty to
effect. Our Lord, in whom are hid all the treasures of wisdom
and knowledge, stands more upon His honor than to undertake
a cause He cannot accovnphsh."*— Christ's Death,Chamock, p. 234.
Not only however is Christ an intercessor for us, but it appears
that we are also sometimes intercessors for Christ. I quote from
the eighth edition, of Family Prayers, by a clergyman of the Church
of England.— Key. T. Coterill, Fellow of St. John's, Cambridge.
t " Pardon us, therefore, O Lord, according to the multitude of
Thy mercies. Have regard unto Him who knew no sin, and was
made a sin-offering for us, that we might be made Thy righteous
ness in Him. Look upon Jesus, tbe Son of David, the Son of Thy
love. Lord, remember Him, and all his troubles. Remember His
offering, and accept His sacrifice. Turn not away the face of
Thine Anointed, who, by His own blood, is entered into heaven
itself, and now appeareth in Thy presence for us. Hear us, we
pray Thee, for His sake, and for the glory of Thy name."

" Tlie angel, on hearing these words, ivas silent for a long time,
standing motionless in astonishment ; but when his surprise was
somewhat abated, he thus delivered himself; ' Is it possible that the
Christian world should be so infatuated, and wander so far from
sound reason into such bewildered conceits, and establish the funda
mental doctrine of salvation on such paradoxes ?' " &c. — Sweden
borg's Memorable Relation, Article 134. Universal Theology.
¦" And when he had opened the seventh seal, there was silence in heaven
about the space of half an hour." Rev. viii, 1.
My Christian reader, allow me to ask a few questions. When
the idea of separation, and of distinctness of office and person, is
*The works of Goodwin and Charnock, from which these extracts are taken,
are now circulated by the Religious Tract Snciity, who have established district Libra
ries all over the kingdom, and in many of the colonies. To shew Ihe high opinion
which they entertain of these doctrines, it may he observed that, in tlie address of
tbe committee as published in the Report for the year 1837, the nature and qualities
of the tracts are thus alluded to; — " They should consist of pure truth'". . . ."nncon-
taminated with error, undisturbed wilh human systems, clear as crystal, like the
River of Life.". . . ." Here should be seen nothing but Divine Truth, unmingled,
unadulterated, pure as it came from heaven, and lit for the vvb.'le human race to
imbibe." — '* By pure truth," is meant " those Evangelical Principles of the Reforma
tion, in which Luiher, Calvin, and Cranmer were agreed, and that system of doc
trine and scriptural interpretation, which is comprised in tbe Harmony of tbe jCon-
fessions ofthe Reformed Churches, both at home and abroad.'' . . . . Aniongthe com
mittee it is said, " There has been such a perfect under.<tandin« of these principles,
as they re]alii to the doctrinal sentiments, and the hoiid of union which connect the
members of this institution in alTection and in exertion, that these endeavors have
been easy to themselves, and have been acknowledged to be satisfactory to the society
at large." i will here only add, that I have not availed myself of all the illustrations
of the doctrine of the Trinity and Atonement which the Society have ciiculated as
*' pure truth," — " uncontaminated with error," — " clear as crystal," and " fit for the
whole human race to imbibe." More might have been added j but some of my read
ers may tliink perhaps that enough has been given, and others, perhaps, too much.

238 TRINITY.
thus so constantly dwelt upon, and, as some may conceive, so
satisfactorily explained, will it not be impressed upon the mind
more forcibly than the idea of unity, which is so seldom adverted
to ; and which, even when adverted to, is so often explained in the
sense of unanimity ? If an author writes a hundred pages upon
the Trinity, and four lines upon the Unity, which idea is likely to
be most strongly impressed upon the reader's mind ? In instruct
ing the common people, they best understand our meaning by con
veying it to them in sensible images. Tell them of three persons,
andthey will readily understand you. Tell them you are speaking
of three persons who have but one essence, and they do not know
what you mean ; for they understand what person means,, but not
what essence means. Tell them, that by person you do not mean
what is commonly meant, but only a distinct mode of subsistence,
they cannot understand what you mean by mode of subsistence ;
still they can give a meaning to the word person, and, when you
speak of three persons, will find no difficulty in attaching the
ordinary ideas to the expression ; more particularly when, in ex
pounding the doctrine, you yourself may be constantly using the
word in the same sense in which they do. Now, in addition to all
this, tell them that one person is gone up to sit at the right hand
of another person, they will find no difficulty in understanding this
in their way. Tell them that by right hand you do not mean a
member of the body, for that God is without body, parts, or pas
sions, that you mean only that the person is invested with great
power, they may possibly arrive at some true idea of what you
mean, still retaining the idea of two persons, though not forming
to themselves any conception of their relative situation in regard
to place. Tell them that one person iptercedes with the other
person, they will immediately think of one person speaking to the
other person, or addressing him by some signs or symbols. Tell
them that this person is a mediator between you and God, that he
prays to God, that he pleads his own merits to God, and under
takes to communicate your prayers to God, the idea of two sepa
rate existences becomes then tolerably clear, more particularly if
you should give no further interpretation of what is meant by in
tercessor or mediator. You would think it very wrong for a per
son to presume, that in all this you were teaching a duality, or (if
you add your explanation ofthe personality ofthe Holy Ghost,) a
triumvirate of Gods ; for you maintain that although God be three
persons, yet he is only one in essence. True, but a poor man
does not know what essence means. Tell him, that by person you
mean, as you have said, only a distinct mode of subsistence, he
will answer that you are talking metaphysics. If, to avoid meta
physics, you say nothing upon the subject, then the idea upper
most in his mind will be, that of three Gods planning, covenanting,
counselling, agreeing, co-operating, and so forth, with each other,
upon the subject of his salvation. Believe me, then, that the case
is not one of controversy, or of argument for the schools. In so
teaching an ordinary mind, the question is not merely what your
ideas are, but what are tbe ideas which your pupil cannot help af-

TRINITY. 239
fixing to your words. You may reply, it is not your fault if your
instructions are misunderstood. The question is not here, whose
lault It IS, but whether it be the fact. I am not speaking so much
01 the doctrine itself, as ofthe effect which such a mode of teach
ing It produces, according to the known laws of the human mind.*
tor while the doctrine professedly maintains that God is one, the
Idea produced in the mind ofthe disciple is that of three separate
Gods. Indeed, what terms are there which can be used to signify
three separate beings, which have not been used in explaining the
iripersonality? The Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, have been
called three separate persons, without the slightest notice to the
ordinary reader that the term person is used in any peculiar sense ;
they are called three intelligent agents, three distinct subsistences ;
also individuals, parties, separatet existences, nay, as separate
and distinct as Peter, James, and John ; the Son is declared to be
generated of the Father, and to partake of the same Divine Nature
just as any other Son is begotten of his father, and partakes ofthe
same human nature. All three are said to plan, concur, agree,
and conspire together; one is said lo be appeased; another, to
pacify; another, to convey and apply the tidings of pacification ;
they are said to be one, as a unanimous society is one ; they have
all separate offices, in many cases separate properties,' and receive
separate worship. Yet all this, we are told, is not a system of
Tritheism; now, even if it were not, how are the generality of
uneducated persons to help mistaking it as such? Is the danger
avoided by telling them to say with their lips, and ' yet they are
not three Gods, but one God V Does an evil not exist, because we
tell the person not to acknowledge it, and he obeys the injunction ?
Is a malady the less dangerous, because the physician declares be
was not concerned in producing it, and forbids the patient to con
fess its existence; although all the time it may be consuming ihe
vitals of his system ? Besides, if I give two meanings to a word,
and if, perhaps, for every time I use the word in one sense, I use
it, and hear it used, a thousand times in another, which of the two
senses, ceteris paribus, will the occurrence of the word be most
likely to suggest ? "Will not the law of association, as it is called,
incline me to assign to the word its most frequent meaning ; more
particularly where this meaning is clear, and the oiher obscure ;
for a clear idea produces a stronger effect upon the mind, than one
that is obscure and indistinct? If this be the case, what sort of
reflections are those which are suggested by a survey ofthe mode
of teaching adopted in the Christian world ? Allow me to draw
* Both those who teach, and those who have been disciplined in, the popular views
of the Trinity, generally disavow, in tbe strongest words, the ttoctriiie of Tritheism j
nor have I ever personally known but one exception in which the pupil openly avow
ed the existence of three Gods, although I can have no doubt that every one from
whom ho had received instruction would, in tbe strongest words, have disclaimed
tlie idea. His notion of unity was the same, it is presumed, with thatof unanimity.
'I'hougb, however, I have personally known only one instance of this kind, yet
there are many whoconceive of the three Divine Persons partaking of oi e and the
same divine nature, just as we conceive one human nature to be common to Peter,
Jumes,and John.
t Bishop Burgess' Catechism.

240 TRINITY.
your serious attention to the following extract from a work enti
tled an' Elementary Course of Theological Lectures,' by the Rev.
W. D. Conybeare. Speaking of.ihe passages in Scripture which
refer to the union of Christ with the Father, he observes, ' It has
ever appeared strongly to me, that these texts which thus exhibit
Chilst as the only sensible manifestation of the Divine nature to
man, point out a most important adaptation of the Christian
' scheme to the wants of our nature, and the limitation of our facul
ties. To minds constituted like ours, the abstract idea of the
Divine Nature which no man hath seen at any time, which hath
nothing like unto itself whereunto we may liken it, conveys no
definite impression ; and abstract ideas, thus vaguely conceived,
have little power to move our affections. Surely, then, it is most
mercifully provided, that, to the Christian mind; this incomprehen
sible essence is sensibly represented under a form, upon which our
devotional affections can fix and attach themselves ; since the
Word became flesh, and tabernacled among us, and we beheld his
glory, the glory as of the only begotten of the Father, full of grace
and truth.' In the person of Christ, a sensible object, such as
our faculties need for their contemplation, is placed before them ;
and that sensible object embodies to our minds all the abstract perfec
tions ofthe Divine Nature." — Second Ed. p. 448.
Allow me here to add the doctrine of Swedenborg upon this sub
ject; namely, that there is one God ; that the Lord Jesus Christ
is that one God ; and that, in this unity, there is a Trinity of
Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
As, however, it is one ofthe frailties of human nature, when a
person is representing the opinions of his opponent, to be less
careful in speaking the truth, than when he is stating his own ;
so the doctrine of Swedenborg, in regard to the Trinity, has often
been represented as the same with that of Sabellius and other
ancient heretics, who confounded the Divine with the human na
tures ; the entire untruth of which statement may be judged of by
the following extract from the Four Leading Doctrines : —
" That the Lord put off, by successive steps, the Human
ity FROM the Mother, and put on a Humanity from the
Divinity in himself, which is the Divine Humanity and the
Son of God. That the Lord possessed both Divinity and Human
ity, Divinity from his Father Jehovah, and Humanity from the
Virgin Mary, is well known. Hence He was both God and man,
having a Divine Essence and a human nature, a Divine Essence
from the Father, and a human nature from the mother ; whence
He was equal to the Father, as touching His Divinity, and inferior
to the Father, as touching His Humanity ; and, further, this
htiman nature from the- mother was not transmuted into the
Divine Essence, neither commixed with it : all which is taught by
tbe doctrine of faith, called the Athanaslan Creed. Indeed, such
transmutation ofthe human nature into the Divine Essence, or
commixtion therewith, is impossible. Still the same creed teaches,
that the Divinity or Godhead took, that is, united, to itself the
Humanity or Manhood, just as the soul is united to its body, so

TRINITY. 241
that they were not two, but one person. From these two positions,
then, must follow this conclusion, that the Lord put off the
Humanity taken from the mother, which, in itself, was like unto
the humanity of another man, and consequently material, and put
on a Humanity from the Father, which, in itself, was like His
Divinity, and consequently substantial : so that the Humanity
also was made Divine. Hence it is, that in the prophets, the
Lord is called, even with respect to the Humanity, Jehovah and
God; and Lin the Evangelists, the Lord, God, the Messiah or
-Christ, and the Son of God in whom we must believe, and by
whom we are to be saved. r
" In consequence of His having from the first a Humanity from
the mother, which he put off by successive steps, the Lord, during
His abode in the world, was alternately in 'two states ; the one a
state of humiliation, or exinanition, and the other a state of glori
fication, or union with the Divinity, which is called the Father :
He was in a state of humiliation at the time, and in the degree,
that He was in the humanity from the mother ; and He was in
the state of glorification, at the time, and in the degree, that he
¦was in the Humanity from the Father. , In the state of humilia
tion He prayed to the Father, as to a being distinct from Himself;
but in the state of glorification He spoke with the Father as with
Himself. In this latter- state He said, that the Father was in
Him, and He in the Father, and that the Father and He were
One ; but in the other state he underwent temptations, and suffered
the tjross, and prayed to the F-ather not to forsake Him ; for the
Divinity could not be tempted, much less could it suffer the cross.
Hence it further appears, that, by temptations followed by contin
ual victories, and by the passion of the cross, which was the last
of those temptations, He fully conquered the hells, and fully glori
fied the Humanity, as was shewn above."
Having now-shewn the way, in which sdme of the fundamental
doctrines of Christianity are explained, I proceed, finally, to shew
the other side ofthe question, and to afford a few examples ofthe
manner in which they are left unexplained, or, in which the- more
humble and sober-minded consider these doctrines to be incompre
hensible, upon any commonly received principles.

",'^ae unto -you ihat desire the day of ihe Lord! to what end is it
for you ? thedayof the Lord is darkness, and not light." Amos v, 18.
> " But now once, in the end of the world, Christ appeared to put
away sin by the sacrifice of Himself." .... How, arid in what
particular way, (this sacrifice) had this efficacy, there are not
¦wanting persons who have endeavored to explain; but I do not
find that the Scripture has explained it. We seem to be very
much in the dark concerning the manner in which the ancients
understood atonement to be made ; i. e. pardon to be obtained by
sacrifices. And if the Scripture has, as surely it has, left this
21

242

TRINITY.

matter ofthe satisfaction of Christ mysterious, left somewhat* in
it unrevealed, all conjectures about it must be, if not evidently
absurd, yet at least uncertain. Nor has any one reason to com
plain for want of farther information, unless he can shew his
claimto it. Some have endeavored to explain the efficacy of
what Christ has done and suffered -for us, beyond what the S.crip-
ture has authorized ; others, probably because they could not ex
plain it, have been for taking it away, and confining his office as
Redeemer of the world to his instruction, example, and govern
ment of the church, &c. It is our wisdom thankfully t<) accept
the benefit, by performing the conditions upon which it is offered
on our part, without disputing how it was procured on His." — But
ler's Analogy, Part 2, Chap. 5.
" The constitution of the world, and God's natural government
over it, is all mystery ; as much as the Christian dispensation." —
Ibid. . . _ ¦
" Since the constitution of nature, and the methods and design?
of Providence in the government ofthe world, are above our com
prehension, we should acquiesce in and rest satisfied with our
ignorance, turn our thoughts from that which isabpve and beyond
us, and apply ourselves to that which is level, to our capacities,!
and which is our real business and concern. Knowledge is not
our proper happiness. Whoever will, in the least, attend to the
thing, will see, that it is the gaining, not the having-of itf which is
the entertainment ofthe mind. Indeed, if the proper happiness of
man consisted in knowledge, considered as a possession or trea
sure, men who are possessed of the largest share would have a
very ill time of it ; as they would be infinitely more sensible than
others of their poverty in this respect. Thus he who increases
knowledge would eminently increase sorrow." — Butler's Sermon
on ihe Ignorance of Man.
" ' Who is ever at the right hand of God, who also maketh inter
cession for us.' Into the speculations of the recent commentators
on the ideas meant to be expressed by these phrases, it is not ne
cessary for me to enter. The former is unquestionably an orien
tal metaphor, meant to express dignity next to that, of God ; and
the latter, the intercession which Jesus Christ makes for Chris
tians. Into the mode in which this is done, it becomes us not too
curiously to pry. Whether the intercession is continually made,
or whether it can be necessary to be continually made, we know
not; but that the effect of this intercession on the part of Jesus
Christ, towards God, in behalf of the faithful, is perpetual,- we
may be assured from the words of our apostle himself, ' seeing
that He ever liveth to makeintercession for us.' " Heb. vii, 25.— ¦
Bloopifield's Synopsis. Rom. viii, 34.
" Christ's ascension to the right hand of God is marvellous ; be-
* Nearly the whole.
tThe class of divines to which this learned Prelate belongs, often" distinguish the
mysteries of Christianity from what they call ils plain and practical truths; by
which ttiey, in general, seem chiefly to mean those which refer to the ordinary duties
ofihoral and civil life. ,

TRINITY. ^ 243
cause it is a sure token that heaven is a certain fixed place, and
not a mere state. That bodily presence of the Savior which the
apostles handled, is not here, it is elsewhere, it is in heaven. This
contradicts the notions of cultivated and speculative minds, and
humbles the reason. Philosophy considers it more rational to
suppose, that Almighty God, as being a spirit, is in every place,
and in no one place more than another. It would leach, if it dare,
that heaven is a mere state of blessedness ; but, to be consistent,
it ought to go on to deny, with the ancient heretics referred to by
St. John, that ' Jesus Christ is come in the flesh,' and maintain
that his presence on earth was a mere vision ; for certain it is, he
who appeared on earth went up from the earth, and a cloud re
ceived Him out of His apostles' sight. And here, again, an addi
tional difficulty occurs, on minutely considering the subject.
Whither did He go ? Beyond the sun ? Beyond the fixed stars ?
Did He traverse the immeasurable space which extends beyond
them all ? Again, what is meant by ascending ? Philosophers
will say, there is no difference between down and up as regards
the sky ; yet, whatever difficulties the word may occasion, we can
hardly take upon us to decide, that it is a mere popular expression,
consistently with the reverence due to the sacred record. And
thus we are led on to consider, how different are the character and
effect of the Scripture notices of the structure of the physical
world, from those which philosophers deliver. I am not de
ciding whether or not the one or the other are reconcileable ; I
merely say their respective effect is different. And when we have
deduced what we deduce, by our reason, from, the study of visible
nature ; and then read what we read; In his inspired Word, and
find the two apparently discordant, this is the feeling I think we
ought to have on our minds ; not an impatience to do what is be
yond our powers, &c. &c  I will but remind you, on this
part of the subject, that our Lord is to come from heaven ' in like
manner as he went ; ' that he is to come ' in clouds ; ' that ' every
eye shall see Him, and all tribes of the earth wail because of
Him.' Attempt to solve this prediction according to the received
theories of science, and you will disoo-ver their shallowness. They
are unequal to the depth ofthe problem." — Sermon on the Feast
of Ascension, by J. H. Neivman, Fellow of Oriel, ,Vicar of Si. Mary
the Virgin, Oxford.
" I have made the foregoing remark, in order to impress upon
you the mystery with which we are encompassed all about ; such
as not merely to attach to one or two truths of religion, but ex
tending to almost every sacred fact, and to every action of our
lives. 'With the same view, let me observe upon the doctrine
which accompanies the fact of the ascension. Christ, we are
told has gone up on high, ' to present himself before the face of
God' for us.' He has ' entered by his own blood, once for all,
into the Holy Place : having effected eternal Redemption' — 'He
ever liveth to make intercession for those who come unto God by
Him ; He hath a priesthood which -wiU not pass from Him.' —
' 'W'e have such an High Priest, who is set on the right hand ofthe

244 TRINITY.
throne ofthe Majesty in the Heavens, a Minister ofthe sanctuary
and of the true Tabernacle ; which the Lord pitched, and not man.'
These, and similar passages, refer us to the rites of the Jewish
Law. They contain notice of the type ; but what is the Antitype ?
We can give no precise account of it. For consider ; why'was it
that Christ ascended on high? With what -object ? What is
His work ? What is the meaning of his interceding for us in
heaven ? We know that, whatever he does, it is the gracious re
ality of the Mosaic figure. The High Priest, entering with the
atoning blood into the Holiest, was a representation of Christ's
gracious deed in our behalf. But what is that deed ? We know
what the shadow is ; what is the substance ? The death of Christ
answers to the Jewish rite of Atonement ; how does He vouchsafe
to fulfil the rite of Intercession ? Instead of explaining. Scripture
does but continue to answer us in the language of the type ; even
to the last, it veils His deeds under the ancient figure. Shall we,
therefore, explain away its language as merely figurative, which
(as the word is now commonly understood) is next to saying it
has no meaning at all ? Far from it. Clouds and darkness are
round about him. We are not given to see into the secret shrine
in which God dwells. Before Him stands the Seraphim, veiling
their faces. Christ is within the veil. We must not search curi
ously what is His present office ; what is meant by His pleading
His sacrifice, and by His perpetual Intercession for us. Aid since
we do not know, we will studiously keep to the figure given us in
Scripture ; we will not attempt to interpret it, or change the
wording of it, being wise above what is written. We will not
neglect it, because we do nut understand it. We will hold it as a
Mystery, or, (what was anciently called) a truth sacramental; that
is, a high invisible grace lodged in an outward form, a precious
possession to be piously and thankfully guarded for the sake of the
heavenly reality contained in it. Thus much we see in it, the
pledge of a doctrine which reason cannot understand ; viz. of the
influence ofthe prayer of faith upon the divine counsels. The In
tercessor directs, or stays, the hand of the Unchangeable and Sov
ereign Governor of the World ; being at once the meritorious
cause, and the earnest of the intercessory power of his brethren.
' Christ rose again for our justification,' — ' The efiectual fervent
prayer of a righteous man availeth much,' are both infinite mercies
and deep mysteries." — Ibid.
Thus are we furnished with the two principal kinds of theology
which have prevailed in the church ; the one which explains the
mysteries of Christian doctrine, the other which leaves them un
explained, or considers them inexplicable ; for I am not aware of
any intermediate system, * except that which either avoids all
reference to the subject, or treats of it as little as possible. In the
first class of extracts, under the divisions of Dusk and Midnight,
may be seen an illustration of the desecration of Divine Doctrine
* Though Dr.Pye Smith seems to be at a loss to determine the exact meaning of
the word intercede, he .does not appear, on the whole, to deviate much from the or
dinary views;

TRINITY. 245
by the introduction of the ideas of the merely natural man. This
desecration is the consequence of those who approach Jehovah,
"not taking their shoes from off their feet ;" in other words, accord
ing' to Swedenborg's comment, " not divesting their minds of merely
carnal and sensual ideas." On the other hand, in the last class of
extracts may be seen the confessed darkness in which the mind is
left upon the mysteries of the gospel, when it is divested of the
merely natural idea. Both are a fulfilment of the prophecy of the
latter days, of which, we are told, " The Sun became black as
sackcloth ; " by which, says Victorinus, is meant, " The splendor
of true doctrine will be hid from unbelievers." — See Adams on the
Opening of the Sealed Book.

NEW CHURCH BOOKS,
PUBLISHED AND FOR SALE BY OTIS CLAPP.

SWEDENBORG'S WEITINGS.

HEAVENLY ARCANA ; or Heavenly Mysteries contained in the Sacred Scripture
or Word of the Lord, manifested and laid' open ; beginning with the Book of Genesis,
Interspersed with Relations of Wonderful Things seen in the World of Spirits and the
Heaven of Angels: and INDEX. 13 vols. 8vo. $33.00. Without the Index, $30.00.
THE APOCALYPSE REVEALED ; wherein are disclosed the Arcana therein
foretold, which have hitherto remained concealed. With an INDEX 3 vols. $2.00,
THE APOCALYPSE EXPLAINED according to the Spiritual Sense j wherein
are revealed (more at large and more fully illustrated than in the preceding Work) the
Arcana which are predicted therein, and whiph have hitherto been concealed. To
which is added, a SUMMARY EXPOSITION ofthe Internal Sense ofthe Prophetical
Books of the Old Testament, and of the Psalms of David, with a twofold Index. 6
vols, and INDEX. $17.87. Without the Index, $16.00.
THE FOUR LEADING DOCITRINES OF THE NEW CHURCH, Signified in
the Revelation, chap. xxi. by the New Jerusalem ; being those respecting The Lohd,
his Divine and Himian Natures, and the Divine Trinity; The Sacred Scripture, to
which is added The White Horse; Faith; and Life. Neat cambric, 75 cents.
Each ofthe above Doctrines may be had separatehj, namely,
THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW JERUSALEM RESPECTING THE LORD.
12mo. Price $2.00 per dozen, 20 cents single.
THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW JERUSALEM RESPECTING THE SACTRED
SCRIPTURE. To which is added, The Treatise on the White Horse. $2.00
per dozen, 20 cents single without the White Horse, and 25 cents with do.
THE DOCTRINE OF THE NEW JERUSALEM RESPECTING FAITH. 18mo,
Half morocco, 25 cents. '
THE DOCTRINE OF LIFE FOR THE NEW JERUSALEM, from the Com
mandments ofthe Decalogue. 12mo. $1.25 per dozen, 12i cents single.
ON THE NEW JERUSALEM AND ITS HEAVENLY DOCTRINE. To which
are prefixed some Observations concerning the New Heaven and the New Earth.
I2mo. $1.37 per dozen, 12^ cents single.
A BRIEF Exposition of the doctrines of the new church.
12mo. $1.60 per docen, 15 cents single.
TRUE christian RELIGION; or the Universal Theology op the New
CHtTECH v/hich was foretold by the Lord, Daniel vii. 13, 14, and in the Apocalypse,
ixi. 1, 2. 1 vol. 8vo, Boards, $2.50. With the Coronis, cambric, $3.00. CJoronis,
or Appendix to do. , separate, 37^ cents.
ON THE ATHANASIAN CREED. Extracted from the Apocalypse Explained.
ISmo. Half morocco, 50 cent3»
The Wisdom of Angels concerning THE DTVINE- LOVE AND DIVINE WIS
DOM, Illustrative of the Divine Attributes, of Creation and Redemption, of the Nature
ofthe Eternal World, and of the Human Mind. 8vo. $1.00.
The Wisdom of Angels concerning THE DIVINE PRO"\aDENCE, in which the
Laws of Order are unfolded hy which the Divine Govjirnment is regulated, especially
ih regard lo Man's Salvation. 8vo. $1 50.
THE TREATISE ON THE DIVINE LOVE AND WISDOM, extracted from the
Apocalypse Explained. 12mo. Half morocco^ 50 cents.
The Delights of Wisdom concerning CONJUGIAL-LOVE. 8vo. Cambric, $2.00,
THE NATURE OF THE INTERCOURSE BETWEEN THE SOUL AND THE
BODY, which is supposed to take place either by Physical Influx, or by Spiritual
Influx, or by Pre-estahlished Harmony. 12mo. $1.00 per dozen, 10 cents single.
A TREATISE CONCERNING HEAVEN AND ITS WONDERS, AND ALSO
CONCERNING HELL, being a Relation of Things seen and heard. 12mo. 75 cts.
A TREATISE CONCERNING THE LAST JUDGMENT AND THE DESTRUC
TION OF BABYLON ; showing that all the Predictions contained in the Apoca
lypse are at this present day fulfilled. (Elucidatory of the present state of the World),
Being a Testimony of Things heard and seen. To which is added, a Continuation
CONCERNING THE LAST JUDGMENT AND THE SPIRITUAL W0RLI>. 18m0. Half IDO-
rocco, 50 cents.

NEW CHURCH BOOKS.

ON THE EARTHS IN OUR SOLAR SYSTEM, which are called Planets; and
concerning the Earths in the Starry Heaven; together with an Account of their
Inhabitants, and also of the Spirits and Angels there; from what has been seen and
heard. 18mo. Half morocco, 50 cents. •
ON THE WORSHIP AND LOVE OF GODj treating of the Birth of the Earth,
of Paradise, and of living Creatures; also of the"Nativity, the Infancy,-and the Leva
of the first-begotten, or Adam. 12mo. Half morocco, 75 cents.
A SUMMARY EXPOSITION OF THE INTERNAL SENSE OF THE PRO
PHETICAL BOOKS OF THE WORD OF THE OLD TESTAMENT, and also of
the PSALMS OF DA'VID. With a twofold Index. 12mo, 37^ cents.
ON THE WHITE HORSE mentioned in the Revelation, chap. xix. 6 cts.
MISCELLANEOUS.
BOOK OF PUBLIC WORSHIP, for the use of the New Church; Prepared hy
order ofthe General Convention. Cambric, $1.00.
GROWTH OF THE MIND, with Remarks on some other Subjects. By Sampson
Reed. 12mo. Cambric, 62i cents.
SERMONS ON THE LORD'S PRAYER. To which are added Three Sermons
ON OTHER Subjects. :^' By Henry A. Worcester. 12mo. Cambric, 62^ cents.
APHORISMS OF VFISDOM; or a Collection of Nine Hundred Maxims and Obser
vations on Divine Subjects. 18mo. Boards, 50 cents.
THE GOLDEN WEDDING RING; or Observations on the Institution of Mar
riage. By Rev. J. Clowes. 18mo. Cambric, 20 cents.
REMARKS ON SEVERAL ERRORS CONCERNING THE 'WRITINGS OF
SWEDENBORG. By Samuel Worcester. I2mo. 20 cents.
THE GOSPELS OF MATTHEW, MARK, LUKE AND JOHN, Illustrated by
Extracts from Swedenborg, and with Notes. By Rev. J. Clowes. 4 vols. 8vo.
Boards, $S(35.
Also seven volumes Clowes'a SERMONS on the Beatititdes, Ten Virgins,
Marriage of the King's Son, Lord's Prayer and Ten Commandments, De
liverance op the Israelites from Egypt ; Miscellaneous Sermons ; and do.
preaciied at St. Johns.
Clowes's work on Mediums, Twelve Hours of the Day, Two Heavenly Mb-
MORiALisTS ; on Science ; Miscellaneous Thoughts ; &c.
Also for sale the Works of Rev. Robert Hindmarsh, Rev. M. Sibley, Rev. S.
Noble, Rev. D. G. Goyder, &c. &c.

TRACTS.
THE TRUE OBJECT OF CHRISTIAN WORSHIP DEMONSTRATED, and the
Doctrine of the Trinity elucidated, and cleared of the Difficulties in which it is com
monly involved. By Samuel Noble.
A DIALOGUE ON THE APOSTOLIC DOCTRINE OF THE ATONEMENT,
in which that Doctrine ia clearly explained.
THE DOCTRINE of the SCRIPTURES respecting Regeneration and Good Works.
A FEW PLAIN ANSWERS TO THE QUESTION, " WHY DO YOU RECEIVE
THE TESTIMONY OF SWEDENBORG?"
BRIEF REMARKS on the ATONEMENT and MEDIATION"of JESUS CHRIST.
AN AFFECTIONATE ADDRESS to the Clergy on the Writings of Swedenborg.
CHILDREN'S BOOKS.
SUNDAY LESSONS, for the Instruction of Children of the New Church, in Schools
or at Home. By a Member of the Boston Society of the N. J. 12mo. Camb. 50 cts.
LESSONS FOR CHILDREN OF THE NEW CHURCH. 16mo. Cambric, 25 cts.
A CATECHISM FOR THE CHILDREN OF THE NEW CHURCH. By Sam
uel Worcester. $1.00 per dozen, 10 cents single.
THE RAINBOW EXPLAINED ACCORDING TO ITS INTERNAL OR SPI
RITUAL MEANING, in the way of Question and Answer. :^ Rev. J. Clowes.
$1.00 per dozen, 10 cents single.
THE GOOSEBERRY-BUSH AND CATERPILLARS; or a True Figure of ths
Bad Passions and their Mischievous Effects. By Rev. J. Clowes. 62| cents per
dozen, 6i cents single.
EDWARD AND ELLEN, a Tale. "Beware of ever exceeding the boundaries of
truth in any mode or form." $1.00 per dozen, 10 cents«ingle.
MARY AND SUSAN. By the same Author. 62i cents per dozen, 6 cts. singlb
STORIES FOR SMALL CHILDREN. 62i cents per dozen, 6 cents singla.

3 9002 02399 1012