The New Church ...

Front matter

m

I <

^H

Contents

PAGE

I. MR. REED'S IDEA OF THE NEW CHURCH CRITI- CALLY EXAMINED 13

"The Church Hereafter" (from 1757) . . 17 Continued Existence of Sects . , . .22 What Swedenborg Means by the Church . 24 The Nominal and the Keal Church . . 28 Endless Diversity of State * . . .31 The Specific Church . . . . . . 34

Conclusion

To conclude : — I have pointed out some of the mistakes and fallacies of Mr. Reed's pamphlet, prominent among which is the idea that the New Jerusalem is a visible body composed exclusively of those who acknowledge the claims and accept the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg. And I have endeavored to show : —

1st. That Swedenborg uses the term Church in two, and only two, senses : (1) as denoting the aggregate of religious organizations among those who have the Word, and thereby a knowledge of the Lord, without regard to character ; and (2) as denoting only the good people in Christian countries, whose internal and real character is known to the Lord alone. In one sense, therefore, he means by it the visible and nominal church ; in the other, which is the sense in which he most frequently uses the term, he means the invisible and real church.

2d. That there is a specific church and a universal church, the former being relatively less numerous though more interior and more enlightened, but essentially the same as the latter in its nature and constitution ; the one consisting of all in Christian lands who are in a state of love to the Lord and charity toward the neighbor; and the other composed of the good throughout the whole world, but whose character is known only to the Lord.

3d. That, at the time of the Last Judgment and in consequence of that event, men on earth began to have new thoughts, new feelings, new perceptions, new views of spiritual truth and religious life, new inspirations of civil and religious liberty ; and that this new influx of light and life into the minds and hearts of all who are willing to receive them, — pointing to and hastening the fulfillment of the divine prediction, " Behold, I make all things new " — is what Swedenborg referred to when he spoke (L. J. 73.) of " the Church hereafter/' meaning the New Church, which was to remain " similar in the outward form " to what the Christian church had been, but to be " inwardly dissimilar."

4th. That the New Church is the only church now on

ME. REED'S VIEW OF IT EXAMINED. 73

earth, since there cannot exist more than one church at any given time. And that this New Church, in its genuine and specific sense, is not a new ecclesiasticism — not a new visible organization distinguished by its peculiar doctrinal beliefs, but is composed of all the good people who profess the Christian religion — all who really love the Lord and the neighbor. And since these can be known and .distinguished only by Him who alone sees the internals of men, therefore the New Church in its specific sense, is invisible, and can never exist on earth in a distinct and organized form.

5th. That it is, therefore, a grave mistake, and one which must inevitably lead to other mistakes and produce much mischief, for any organized body to assume to be the specific New Church simply on the ground of its accepting the new doctrines revealed through Swedenborg ; for this Church is not one to be known or distinguished by its doctrinal beliefs. Yet it is proper and useful for those who accept these doctrines, to join together in an organized effort for their dissemination by any and all lawful methods. But any attempt to distinguish the Lord's church or people by the doctrines they profess, or any thought of building up a visible New Jerusalem here on earth simply by organizing a new religious body of those who receive its doctrines, is an attempt to separate the wheat from the tares before the time of harvest ; or an attempt of the woman to seek for herself an abode elsewhere than in the wilderness — "the place prepared of God," where she could be protected and " helped " and " nourished for a time and times and half a time from the face of the serpent." And any such attempt, because contrary to 7 divine order and the purpose of Divine Providence, must needs interrupt to some extent the free influx of the celestial currents, and thus hinder or hurt the growth of the Church.

If I have succeeded in demonstrating these points, it will readily be seen that the demonstration suggests to the readers and receivers of the heavenly doctrines quite a different aim from that cherished by Mr. Reed and his school, and quite a different course of action from that which has hitherto been pursued. Our aim should be, not to rear between ourselves and other Christians the highest possible wall of separation ; not to have new ordinances, a new priesthood, a new ritual, and consequently a new church-establishment — thus placing ourselves in a false if not offensive attitude, and exciting enmity and intensifying prejudice by assuming to be the Lord's true church on earth to the exclusion of all others ; not to disturb or weaken other religious organizations by advocating the immediate withdrawal therefrom of all who read and accept the teachings of Sweden borg. This aim, while altogether consistent with Mr. Reed's idea that the New Jerusalem is a visible body consisting exclusively of those who accept its doctrines, is wholly incompatible with the view advocated in these pages and abundantly confirmed by the teachings of Swedenborg. And this false assumption on our part, has been and is still one of the chief hindrances to the spread of the new theology.

If the view I have presented be the true one, our aim should be to win for the heavenly doctrines the favorable regard of all who are in states to receive them ; to overcome as far as possible the prejudice naturally felt toward new truths, and remove out of the way all obstacles to their reception ; to encourage the freest and widest circulation of our writings among all classes of Christians, by the assurance (strengthened by our practice) that we do not aim to disturb or rend asunder existing organizations, but to open to them new and wider avenues of spiritual instruction — to impart unto them new light, liberty and love, and so to bless them with increased toleration, unity and strength, and a greater fullness of the Divine Master's spirit.

Let this be our great and constant aim — the widest and speediest dissemination of the new theology and philosophy among our fellow-men — and the formation of clubs, societies and associations for that purpose, composed of all who are willing to aid in this benevolent and ennobling work, would follow as a matter of course. But none of those pitiful and disturbing ecclesiastical questions whose agitation has hitherto exerted a baleful and withering influence, could then arise. The wisest, best and most economical methods of disseminating the new truths, would be the only questions to be debated. Groups of delighted readers and affectionate receivers of these truths — little bands of free and earnest minds and of strong and loving hearts — would spring up in every city, town and neighborhood ; and the best men and women would be gradually drawn within the circle of their influence. And the blessed work of propagandise would go on all the more surely and rapidly because of the fraternal relations which the receivers study to maintain and cultivate with the members of the several churches to which they may respectively belong. Persons whose antagonism would be aroused, and whose prejudices would be intensified by the old sectarian methods and sect-building spirit, would be softened and won by this unwonted exhibition of genuine catholicity. Strong men whose souls have been blessed by the new truths, and who would gladly aid in their dissemination, would not be sickened and disgusted by petty ecclesiastical squabbles, but would have their love quickened and their zeal increased by this manifestation of the broadening, elevating, sweetening influence of the new doctrines on those who receive them. The existing prejudice against these doctrines would speedily give way, and their enlarging and ennobling effect on the character of receivers would soon force conviction on the minds of multitudes that they must indeed be the very doctrines of heaven.

These are some of the beneficent results sure to follow the general acceptance by the students of Swedenborg of that theory of the New Church herein set forth, and so abundantly sustained by the authorities cited. There are others equally beneficent, but I need not refer to them now. It is enough to know that the theory, if true, will some day be universally accepted ; and then, and not before, will the good of this truth be seen and realized.

II

MR. GILES 1 IDEA OF THE NEW CHUECH CARE- FULLY CONSIDERED.

IN the June 17th (1874) issue of the " New Jerusalem Messenger " is a discourse by Kev. Chauncey Giles, entitled " The New Jerusalem, a New Church in outward form as well as in inward life." It is not our habit to criticise sermons. But there are reasons for believing that we shall be excused for departing from the usual custom in the present instance, as the one now before us is of the nature of an essay rather than of a sermon. The author does not attempt to confirm his postulates by quotations from the Word, or from the writings of Swedenborg ; thus virtually conceding that no support of his main position is to be drawn from these sources. "The reasons for it," he says, "must come from a different source ; they must be found in the nature of the truths themselves, in the laws of the divine order, in the necessities which grow out of their promulgation, and in the wants of those who accept them."

As the subject which our brother has here discussed is one now before the New-Church public, it may be both interesting and profitable to examine briefly his positions and argument. And we will first meet Mr. Giles on his own ground, and draw our reasons from the very sources he has indicated, or consider the question from his own point of view.

7* 77

And what is the question ? It is that respecting the nature and whereabout of the New Jerusalem, and the orderly way of building it. Upon this question there are, among the receivers of the heavenly doctrines, both in this country and in England, two distinct and clearly defined schools; one of them holding that the New Jerusalem is not, and never can be in this world, a distinct and visibly organized body, like the various existing sects in Christendom ; the other, believing with Mr. Giles that it is a visible body, or that " the New Church must become distinctly organized." Both schools accept Swedenborg as a divinely commissioned teacher. Both believe in the New Jerusalem and its descent from God out of heaven. Both believe in it as " a new city, with new walls, new streets, new dwellings, new temples for worship, new laws and new methods." We do not know a single individual who believes it is to be " the old city, with the old walls, the old narrow and crooked streets, the old dark dwellings, the old temples," etc. Both agree that one hundred and nineteen years ago the Old City was standing, but in a state of hopeless decay, and that the New City had not then begun to be builded ; but that ever since, the New has been and still continues in process of erection.

So far both schools agree. But as soon as they come to the questions, Where and what is the New Jerusalem, and how is it or how ought it to be builded, straightway they part company.

BUILD TNG THE CITY ANEW.

Bight here, then, seems to be the proper place to consider what is the orderly or normal method of replacing an old city by a new one — we mean a natural or material city. If we can once be sure of this, we may see clearly, from the light of correspondence, how the New Church comes and ought to come to take the place of the Old. Remember that the new city is to be builded upon the same site as the old one ; for Christendom is where the New Church of which we are now speaking, is to be built up ; or Christendom and Heathendom together, if we admit that the Old Church included both.

As a primary requisite to the rearing of a new in the place of an old material city, one or more persons must be brought to see the dilapidated and forlorn condition of the old, and to feel some desire for, and have some conception of, the beauty and order and grandeur of the new. Thus the new city, or some faint image of it, must first descend into their minds — first dawn upon their imagination.

And what next ? Do these few persons straightway withdraw from the old city, go quite outside its limits, and there lay out new streets and dig for new foundations, saying, Here we will build new walls, new streets, new buildings, new temples ? By no means — if they are sensible people. But they set about building the new city right within the limits of the old. They do not expect nor intend to do so great a work in a day or a year. They will be satisfied if they complete it in a hundred years. They talk about their plans, exhibit them on paper to their neighbors ; and after a while they succeed in interesting many others. At last their views begin to be appreciated, not fully but partially, and their influence begins to be felt throughout the city.

Then the people go to work. They introduce a new and more thorough system of drainage. They adopt a new and improved method of lighting and watering the city. They widen a street here, and straighten and beautify another there. They demolish a rickety old block in one quarter, and replace it by a substantial, elegant, airy and well-ventilated structure. They tear down old, dark, worm-eaten, bat-inhabited temples, and on the same sites rear others that vie with the temples in heaven. They build with better and more durable materials. They dig deeper, and lay more substantial and secure foundations to all their buildings. They plant trees and flowers in places that were most uninviting before, and beautify and adorn the spots that were once unsightly. And as these improvements go on, the spirit of improvement spreads ; until at last it reaches and affects nearly all the citizens. Then the improvements proceed with still greater rapidity, growing always better and better as they increase ; until finally a new city stands there in the place of the old one, its streets, dwellings, temples, halls, sewerage, waterworks, illuminating apparatus, every thing, in short, belonging to the city being made altogether new.

1 We submit, that this is the normal and the only sensible and orderly way of building a new city on the site of an old one. And if so, and there be any truth in the doctrine of correspondence, we confess ourselves at a loss to see how that school of professed New-Churchmen to which Mr. Giles belongs, can for a moment maintain their present position. For nothing can be plainer than that the normal method of building a new material city on the spot where an old one stands, is in direct and violent conflict with the theory of that school in

31 R. GILES' VIEW OF IT CONSIDERED. 81

regard to the New Jerusalem and the best way to build it up. Carry out the correspondence in all its details, and see if you can find in it any thing that harmonizes with this theory ; any thing, that is, which points to a sudden withdrawal from their old religious organizations, and the formation of a new and separate one, by persons who become receivers of the heavenly doctrines ; — bearing in mind, too, what the theory involves, viz., the idea that the organizations from which they withdraw are, viewed in the aggregate, the old city, and that which they enter, the new one — " the holy city New Jerusalem."

But apply the correspondence to the theory of the other school, and it harmonizes with and sustains it perfectly throughout. For a new natural city that rises to take the place of an old one, does not spring up outside the limits of the old, built there by the hands of those who, having caught the spirit of improvement and imbibed some new municipal ideas, have suddenly taken themselves away from their neighbors, and gone outside to rear a city of their own. On the contrary, it springs up within the old which it finally supersedes or displaces. The renovation is gradual and slow. The new comes as fast as, and just where, the old disappears. And must not the corresponding way be the true and orderly way in which the New Church is to be built up, or to come and take the place of the Old ? Not by the receivers of its doctrines seceding and forming a new and separate organization ; but by remaining there in the old, and doing all in their power to renovate it by imparting thereunto the light and life of the new ? If

F any thing is plainly taught by the doctrine of correspondence, it surely is this..

MR. GILES' ILLUSTRATIONS IN CONFLICT WITH HIS

THEORY.

And everywhere throughout the universe, " the laws of the divine order " to which Mr. Giles confidently appeals, are in palpable conflict with his theory on the question at issue ; while they are seen to be as obviously in harmony with the theory of the opposite school.

In all orderly divine operations by which the new comes to take the place of the old, it comes not in organic separation from, but in organic union with, the old. And so coming, it is helped by the old, although this latter is displaced by its advent. Take, for example, the human body. This is being renewed continually. Fresh material is daily added to it, while the effete and worn-out substance is cast off or gives place to the new. So that, as science tells us, a man gets an entirely new body every seven years. But how is this new body built up ? Not, surely, in organic separation from the old, but in most intimate and vital union with it. Each fresh instalment which is added day by day, comes in to take the place of the old. The new substance does not withdraw from the old, and attempt to build up a new body outside or apart from it. But it works in fraternal union with it, not trying even to displace the old substance so long as this latter is capable of rendering the least service. "And thus the new body is built up little by little, not apart from or outside of the old r but right within it.

Now carry out the correspondence here, and see which of the two theories in regard to the orderly method of building up the New Church it favors. It certainly does not favor the theory which holds that " the New- Church must become distinctly organized/' must be built up as a distinct and visible body, apart from and outside of all other church organizations. It is in palpable conflict with such a theory.

" New principles," says Mr. Giles, " must ultimate themselves in new forms. It is a law of the divine order, which, as far as we know, reigns in all the provinces and degrees of the creation. " True : but we cannot see that this furnishes any support whatever to his theory. For he is urging a new and distinct churchorganization for the New Jerusalem. And this is what he means by the " new form " that these principles are to take on according to the universal law here referred to.

But what is the fact ? Why, if we look at our New- Church societies, associations and convention, we shall see that all of them are but poor imitations of what we find in the other churches. We meet together in temples very similar to theirs ; but usually inferior to them in neatness, comfort, beauty or attractive ess. We read the Word, kneel, pray, sing, and listen to sermons as the people do in other churches. And the chief difference between these performances in our churches and others, which would strike an ordinary spectator, is the general inferiority of ours to theirs. Is there any such marked difference between the outward form of the present nominal New Church (viewed ecclesiastically) and the other churches, as might be expected, if here is where we are to look for the ultimation of the " new principles"? Is not the new ecclesiastical form so like the old, that the keenest eye can scarcely discern any difference? And, save in the general substitution of the Lord's prayer for longer and more wordy ones, the difference is seldom an improvement on the old.

We submit that " the new forms " in which the principles of this New Age might be expected to ultimate themselves — in which they are, indeed, ultima-ting themselves — are not ecclesiastical, as Mr. Giles and his school would have us believe. Swedenborg expressly declares that the church which would arise in consequence of the Last Judgment and the New Dispensation, would not be a new ecclesiasticism, or essentially different in form from what it had been, or from what it was at the time he wrote. The church " will be similar," he says, " in the outward form, but dissimilar in the inward;" dissimilar, that is, in its ideas, thoughts and spirit.

Obviously, then, we must look in a different direction for the " new forms " in which the new principles ought to ultimate themselves according to the unchangeable Jaw referred to. We must search for them in a broader field than an ecclesiastical organization. " The field is the world." And when Ave look at all the new sciences, inventions, arts and industries which have sprung into existence since the commencement of the New Dispensation ; at the new and multitudinous labor-saving machines ; the new modes of travel and transportation ; the new methods of education and of diffusing knowledge ; the new ways of farming, manufacturing, mining and printing ; the new methods of building, lighting, warming and ventilating our houses and temples ; the new and better way, in short, of doing every thing whereby the wants of the world are supplied, and its conveniences and comforts multiplied and increased ; when we look at all these new, useful and rapidly multiplying forms, we find in them some adequate expression of the new principles announced for the New Age. They are precisely such fonns as we might expect the New Dispensation of love and good-will to men would ultimate itself in ; all of them beneficent ; all of them breathing good-will to men ; all of them contributing to the progress, comfort and welfare of our race.

By the side of these grand and beneficent forms — all of them the normal outbirths or embodiments, according to that unfailing law of correspondence, of the new principles revealed from heaven — how inadequate and utterly insignificant seems that new ecclesiastical form which some are working so hard to build up, and which so many are in the habit of thinking and speaking of as " the New Jerusalem in its ultimate form " !

" The discovery of a new scientific truth," says Mr. Giles, " leads to the formation of a new society for its cultivation and extension.' 5 Sometimes. But do the receivers of the " new scientific truth" withdraw at once from all connection with other scientific bodies to which they have hitherto belonged, and set up a new body of - their own ? — a body with such lofty claims, too, as might (possibly) befit a company of men who held a monopoly of all the scientific knowledge in the world, and could show a good title-deed to the same ? We Jiave never heard of the receivers of new scientific truth behaving so unwisely or presumptuously.

No one objects to an organization for the more effec- 8 tive propagation of any new idea. We know of none who think that we are " working contrary to the laws of the divine order, in forming societies and organizing associations for the dissemination of the new truths which constitute a new age in the spiritual progress of humanity. " On the contrary every one admits the propriety and expediency of this. But organizing societies and associations for such a purpose, is a very different thing from organizing the New Jerusalem, however some may seek to confound the two. The theory which we oppose involves the idea that the aggregate of so-called New-Church societies is the veritable New Jerusalem on earth. Hence the new ordinations, the new priesthood, and the claim of new and more valid ordinances set up by the advocates of this theory. If societies or associations were formed merely " for the dissemination of the new truths," no one would question their legitimacy or expediency ; and members of all the sects and of no sect might consistently enough belong to them, just as they may belong to an ethnological or scientific association or a Shakespeare club. But in stating this only as the purpose of our existing New- Church organization, as if no other end were contemplated and no claim set up beyond this, is to attempt to wink out of sight the main question at issue, and to conceal the most prominent and only objectionable feature of the organization.

" A new political idea/' says Mr. Giles, continuing his series of illustrations, "organizes a new form of government. Take the idea of republicanism for example. Its essential principle in relation to natural life is the same as that of the New Church in relation to spiritual life, rational freedom. . . . Could it ever have become this benign and gigantic power [that it is], if the idea had not been organized, and the problem worked out on a scale of sufficient national grandeur to attract the eyes of the world ? "

This seems plausible ; to some, no doubt, it will seem conclusive. But when the illustration is closely scanned, it will be seen to conduct to a very different conclusion from that to which it was intended to lead. To make the cases parallel and the subject clear, let us suppose that the theory of our government, including our federal constitution, had never been thought of prior to 1757 ; and that it then came as a new revelation from heaven to some illustrious American, and was carefully written out by him, and afterwards printed in a book. Suppose this book to have been circulated, and in the course of forty or fifty years to have convinced a thousand American citizens of the truth and value of republicanism as well as of its heavenly origin. Suppose a public meeting had then been called, and these thousand zealous republicans had met in general convention ; and after due deliberation, had passed resolutions like the following :

"Resolved, 1st. That this book on republicanism is what it claims to be, a veritable revelation from God out of heaven.

" Resolved, 2d. That, since the ideas contained in this book are from heaven and entirely true, therefore republicanism is the only proper form of government for this or any other country.

" Resolved, 3d. That these ideas can be of no practical value, until they be ultimated, or until we proceed to form a government in accordance with this heaven-revealed theory.

" Resolved, 4th. That allegiance to the God of heaven and fidelity to our own convictions, require that we have nothing more to do with monarchical government ; that we withdraw from all connection with it, and proceed at once to establish a republican form of government according to the revealed pattern."

And suppose (the reigning monarch or the powers that be, allowing them to proceed without interference in ultimating their new governmental ideas) they go to work and establish their new government with all its complicated machinery, electing their president, governors, legislators, judges and all other onicers. Remember they embrace only a ten-thousandth part of the adult population of the country ; and these are scattered over a territory more than a thousand miles square. To every republican who has withdrawn from all connection with the old and still reigning government, and joined in the republic, there are 9999 who are yet uninstructed or unbelievers in the principles of republicanism. These, if prejudiced against or opposed to the new ideas before, would not be likely to have their prejudices much softened, still less removed, by the grave attempt of this pitiful minority to set up a rival government in their midst. The governmental onicers, considering how small. the number from among whom they are to be chosen, must be for the most part fourth, fifth or tenth rate men. The taxes, considering how few there are to pay them, must be excessively burdensome to these few. But the government once started, its wheels must be kept well oiled, else it will surely go to ruin ; and the needful oiling involves an enormous expense in proportion to the amount of work done ; for every government official must be paid, though the work given him to do may not be a fiftieth part of what he might do and would do had he a larger constituency.