Scientific discovery of Spiritual Laws given in Rational
Scientific Revelations
|
|
Series: |
DE
HEMELSCHE LEER A
MONTHLY MAGAZINE DEVOTED TO THE DOCTRINE OF GENUINE TRUTH OUT
OF THE LATIN WORD REVEALED FROM THE LORD ORGAN
OF THE GENERAL CHURCH OF THE NEW JERUSALEM IN HOLLAND EXTRACTS
FROM Nos. 2 TO 7, FEBRUARY TO JULY, 1931 (ENGLISH TRANSLATION) SECOND
FASCICLE 'S-GRAVENHAGE
SWEDENBORG GENOOTSCHAP LAAN VAN MEERDERYOORT 229 1981 PAGE 2 PSAIM
51 : 15 0
Lord, open Thou my lips, and my mouth shall shew forth Thy praise. DE
HEMELSGHE LEER EXTRACT
FROM THE ISSUE FOR FEBRUARY 1931 REV.
PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON ON DE HEMELSCHE LEER To
the Editor DE
HEMELSCHE LEER.
In DE HEMELSCHE LEER, January-August, 1930, appeared a series of
doctrinal studies (later translated into English and published in book form),
the purpose of which was to show: (1) That since the Writings are the Word, it
logically follows that those Writings are not the internal sense of the Word but
themselves have an internal sense; and (2) that this internal sense is the
Heavenly Doctrine and is made manifest to men by the doctrines formulated by the
Church.
The fact that we acknowledge the
Writings as the Word should be a sufficient guarantee of welcome to studies, the
aim of which is to exalt the vision of those Writings and make it more manifest
that they are the Word. At the same time it is incumbent on us to examine the
conclusions arrived at, that so we may see whether or not they fullfill their
purpose.
The "crowning thesis"
of the studies referred to is that, since the Writings are the Word, "the
DOCTRINE OF THE NEW JERUSALEM CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must also be
applied to them" (p. 5). Thus the Writings, being full of natural ideas,
ideas of persons, places, etc., of which angels can have no comprehension, are
not the Heavenly or Angelic Doctrine (pp. 7-8, 14 note), but are written like
former Revelations in "pure correspondences" which veil the spiritual
sense so that it is "not apparent in the sense of the letter" (p. 73);
indeed, "in reality the veil has become still thicker" (p. 22). The
Writings, therefore, are to be unfolded and their internal or spiritual sense 4 REV.
PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON drawn forth by using the same
laws of exposition as in the case of the Old and New Testaments (p. 103). The
spiritual sense, thus drawn forth, is that Heavenly Doctrine which in the
Writings could be revealed only wrapped up in the veil of correspondences.
Such in brief is the new view.
And it is thought that with this view it can now "for the first time be
rationally understood that the Writings are the Word" (p. 80); and
"the Church will receive an entirely new inspiration" and "for
the first time" will be able "to develop the doctrine concerning the
Holy Spirit in its real importance" (p. 30).
In developing this view, various
comments are made which indicate a lack of information concerning the positions
that have been held in the past with regard to the Writings as the Word. It
seems advisable, therefore, briefly to review these positions.
The belief in the Divine
Authority of the Writings very soon developed into the public statement that the
Writings are the Word "clothed in rational appearances" (W. H. Acton
in NEW CHURCH LIFE 1886, p. 152"). Among the thoughtful men of the Church
this could not but lead to a consideration of the relation of this Word to the
Old and New Testaments. The matter was discussed in a most thorough way by the
Reverend E. S. Hyatt in a series of articles which appeared in NEW CHURCH
TIDINGS from 1892 to 1894. Here he set forth the teaching that the Writings,
while being a rational revelation, are yet in "a literal form"; and
therefore, "unless the context limits the application, the expression
'sense of the Letter of the Word' applies to the literal form of the
Writings" (loc. cit. 1892, p. 922). Noting the statement in APOCALYPSE
EXPLAINED 1061, that "the Writings ultimately present a natural sense
although not the merely natural sense", he concludes that "all laws
concerning the nature and use of the natural sense, unless they are otherwise
limited by the context .. . have application to the sense of the Word which the
Writings ultimately present" (ibid., p. 87"). And furthermore,
"the laws revealed concerning Sacred Scripture apply to the written forms
of every Divine Revelation though with discrimination according to the place in
the series of revelations which each form of the Word has" (ibid., p. 682;
see also pp. 84, 87). 5 ON DE
HEMELSCHE LEER Therefore, like every Divine
Revelation, the Writings are "written in correspondences", but not in
the same way as in the Old and New Testaments (ibid., 1894, p. 118"). They
"present to us the Word clothed in appearances though, differently from
those of the Old and New Testaments, they are rational appearances. Still, like
all appearances, they will seem to be contradictory to each other unless they
are understood" (ibid., 1892, p. 952). In the Writings the internal sense
of the Word is "clothed in literal forms taken from the world, thus to some
extent clouded and guarded by cherubim lest the hand of profanation should be
laid upon it" (ibid., p. 1031). "In the Writings, the internal and the
external so closely approximate that the essential distinction . . . between the
external forms and their spirit and life is apt to be overlooked"; a
distinction "not so much between sensual appearances and spiritual
realities as between natural-rational and spiritual-rational appearances. As
long as men view the Writings in a merely natural-rational manner their genuine
spirit and life will be hidden" (ibid., 1894, p. 119">.
The following is given by Mr.
Hyatt as an illustration of what he means by the "internal sense" of
the Writings: "Our understanding of the law of Love to the Lord depends
upon how much we see to be involved therein, of what is taught concerning the
Lord and of what is taught concerning how He is truly loved. . . . Thus it is
necessary to learn, first as doctrine, that every statement in the Writings
teaches a particular of the law of Love to the Lord; and then it is necessary to
proceed to actually receive an understanding of those laws formed from such
particulars a work which cannot be exhausted
to eternity" (ibid.,
1892, p. 721). Another
illustration he gives is: "The teaching [respecting the Jews] has not been
given merely that we may know how evil the Jews are. If we wish to see something
of the spiritual sense within in the passage, we must put away the idea of the
Jews as persons, and then we will find that it applies to all persons, thus to
our own selves" (ibid., p. 100"). *
* From a footnote in the English
translation of the articles we are reviewing, we learn that the editor did
not know of Mr. Hyatt's work in this field. As is readily seen, he is mistaken,
however, in implying that Mr. Hyatt's position is the same as that advocated in
Holland. 6 REV.
PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON In
1900. Bishop W. F. Pendleton, writing in NEW CHURCH LIFE, contrasts the form of
the Writings with that of the Old and New Testaments. In the former "the
Word as it is in heaven descends into the world, but it no longer veils itself
in figures, in representatives, in correspondences; it clothes itself in human
language indeed, but in the language of science and philosophy, the language of
the learned, the language of rational thought among men, but at the same time in
language so chosen that it accommodates itself to the understanding of the
simple. This is the angelic Word, the Divine Word, the Lord Himself appearing in
great glory and power to establish a church that is to endure forever. . . . The
Word or Divine Truth in heaven cannot be completely expressed or written out in
natural language; but still can be involved and interiorly contained
in books
that are written, and by means of the written books man may enter
interiorly into the light of Divine Truth as it is in heaven" (ibid., pp.
11415, 116).
Later in the year, Bishop
Pendleton wrote further; "What is spiritual and divine cannot appear in
nature except by a clothing from nature, but they can appear to men of spiritual
discernment whose thought is elevated above time and space. . . . The Divine
Truth of the Writings does not appear before the senses of men, and they who are
capable of seeing only what is manifest to the senses, when they read the
Writings neither see the Lord nor anything spiritual
in them"
(ibid., p.
322). Yet, he continues,
Swedenborg, "when he was giving expression to the truths of the internal
sense, did not use the language of correspondences and representation but taught
spiritual truths in a rational manner" (ibid., p. 325).
In the same year, the present
writer stated that the Divine Truth appearing to men takes on various media
words, images, ideas on the plane in which it is to appear. These media
in the Old Testament were "sensual ideas and images, even to the very forms
of letters"; in the New Testament they were
"spiritual-natural ideas implanted in the minds of the disciples by
the Lord Himself"; in the Writings "they are rational ideas".
"The media existed before the revelation was written", but in
revelation they "became arranged even as to their least 7
ON DE HEMELSCHE LEER particulars by the infilling
Divine" and "molded so as to correspond universally and particularly
with the Divine truth itself; and thus they became the body, the face, the
appearance of the Lord, through which and in which, to those who would receive,
the Divine itself shone forth" (N.C.L. 1900, pp. 31415).
Two years later, the Editor of
the LIFE, the Reverend C. Th. Odhner, wrote: "The Writings are written
according to the law of correspondence, and have within them an internal
sense". (This he supports by quoting SPIRITUAL DIARY 2185 to the effect
that Swedenborg's Writings were merely vessels into which more interior things
could be infused); were this not the case (he continues), the Writings would be
an exception to all writing (ibid., 1902, p. 347). The following year, he
continues the subject as follows: We do not claim "that the Writings have
an internal sense in the same way as the Word in the Letter. The doctrine 'of
discrete degrees applies to the science of correspondences as to all other
things. . . . Every Divine Revelation is correspondential and has an internal
sense and internal senses one within the other even unto the Divine itself, but
each revelation is in this respect somewhat different from every other". He
then shows that in the Ancient Word the correspondences were more remote (T.C.R.
279); in the Old Testament they rested on the very letters; in the New Testament
the internal sense rests chiefly upon the significance of
the words
and sentences; in the Writings "the natural-rational appearances of
truth contain deeper intellectual ideas" (ibid., 1903, pp. 1024).
The following year, 1904, Dr.
Cranch, a prominent member of the General Church, wrote: "While the
Writings reveal the internal or spiritual sense [of the Word] as it has never
been revealed before, they are yet part of the literal sense, for they are in the world, in the natural degree of Divine
Truth, which is for men. Hence in the Writings, Divine Truth is present in its
fullness, its holiness and its power; from them doctrine for the Church
is to be drawn, and by them it is to be confirmed; they are a basis, container
and support of the highest spiritual and celestial senses which are now revealed
to men through them as in the clouds of Heaven" (ibid., 1904, p. 593). And 8 REV.
PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON further;
In the Writings "we
cannot have an absolute internal sense but only a literal form of it suited to
men and making a one by correspondence with the actual angelic Word" (p.
594).
In 1913, Mr. Odhner again
returned to the subject discussed in 1903. After quoting ARCANA COELESTIA n.
1476 to show that the Writings are written according to correspondences, the
teaching being that ultimate vessels correspond to rational things, the latter
to spiritual things, these to celestial, and these to divine, he says: "In
the Writings the internal sense rests upon rational forms, forms adapted to the
highest degree of the natural mind" (ibid., 1913, pp. 139-40).
Two years later he writes:
"The Writings are written in rational not sensuous correspondences, i.e.,
the continuous correspondence or harmony between external rational thought with
ever more internal rational ideas and perceptions" (ibid., 1915, p. 199).
In an address to the British
Assembly, published in the LIFE for 1920, it was stated by the present writer
that Divine Revelation or "the written Word" is always given "in
the language of appearances adapted to the natural mind"; and that in the
"Letter of the Word" thus revealed, men are to seek for the internal
sense, the genuine doctrine, that so they might draw from the letter the
doctrine of the Church embodying their understanding of the Word. In the New
Church also the Revelation 'is given "in the form of appearances, adapted
to the apprehension of all manner of men"; and, "as in former
churches, so in the New, the doctrines of the Church must be drawn from the Word
in its Letter, and confirmed thereby. To the New Church, this Word includes the
Writings of the Church as given to us in literal form" (ibid., 1920, p. 652
seq.).
Finally, in 1927, the Reverend
Albert Bjorck wrote: "The natural language of Swedenborg is the literal
sense of the Writings; and, because it is natural, it more or less veils or
clouds the truth revealed through it. This veil admits more of the light of
heaven to the man of the Church as he develops an internal rational sight by
reflecting upon the meaning of the many different statements in and through
which the truth is revealed in the Writings. ... Such reflection is, as I
understand it, what is meant by the 9
ON DE HEMELSCHE LEER statement that 'all doctrine
should be drawn from the Letter of the Word' " (ibid., 1927, pp. 713-14).
Contrast with the above the
assertions made by DE HEMELSCHE LEER with respect to past students of the
subject, that they have "not yet entertained the thought" that the
doctrine of Sacred Scripture might be applied to the Writings (p. 71); that they
have had the "curious idea" that correspondences did not apply to the
Writings (pp. 52-53); and that they have mistaken the natural ideas of the
Writings for genuine rational truths (pp. 79, 69), and their literal sense for
"the precious things within them" (p. 72).
The new element in the views
brought out in DE HEMELSCHE LEER is not that the Writings have been written in
correspondences and therefore have an internal sense; but it lies in what is
asserted concerning the nature of those correspondences and the mode whereby the
internal sense is to be drawn forth.
It has long been acknowledged,
says DE HEMELSCIIE LEER, that we must penetrate more deeply into the
understanding of the Writings; but that this penetration "is based on an
orderly unfolding along the discrete degrees of the human mind", and this
by the science of correspondences, the doctrine of genuine truth, and
enlightenment from the Lord, has thus far remained hidden from the Church (p.
103).
According to the view long held
in the Church, the Word or Revelation has been clothed in different
correspondences in the Old Testament than in the New, and in the New than in the
Writings. Consequently, there is a difference in the mode whereby the internal
sense is to be elucidated.
But according to the new view, no
such discrimination is observed. In the Writings, spiritual truths are not to be
seen shining out of the natural-rational truths in which they are clothed, but
are to be elucidated in the same way as the Old and New Testaments are now
elucidated from our pulpits. A distinction is indeed made, namely, that while
the Old and New Testaments consist "entirely of merely natural scientifics"
the Writings, being a revelation of the Divine Rational, are "not
sensual-natural but rational natural scientifics" (p. 99); and again, that
these scientifics or "natural-rational
ideas" which constitute the "main 10 REV.
PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTION material" of the Writings,
are "a kind of correspondence different from the sensual correspondences of
the Old Testament" (p. 81). Yet, in the actual expositions of the Writings,
no use is made of this manifestly important distinction, and emphasis seems
rather to be laid on the consideration (to continue our citation) that the
Writings contain "also a fullness of sensual-natural ideas derived from the
visible things of the world, which first must all be opened according to order
with the assistance of the science of correspondences, before man by means of
the doctrine of the Church can approach the spiritual sense of the
Writings" (p. 81).
The reader, therefore, will not
be surprised that DE HEMELSCHE LEER holds that, the Writings being written by
"pure correspondence", the spiritual sense "is not apparent in
the sense of their letter" (p. 73); does not become manifest unless their
"natural signification" is "put entirely aside"; and is
"to be understood abstractedly from the letter just as if the letter did
not exist" (p. 105); or that it declares: "It has long been the
opinion, even of well-read members of the New Church, that in a book such as
HEAVEN AND HELL the quality of the spiritual world and of heaven and hell has
been made known in naked truths. In reality man can see no genuine internal
truth there unless he be able to read the book from within". In
illustration of this, we are given the meaning of the teaching "Man lives a
man after death" as read "from within", namely: By these words
"the really living man of the New Church is described, who, as he rises
from the grave of the letter, becomes a Man, that is, an image and likeness of
the Lord" (p. 49).
These positions have been arrived
at as a logical consequence of the assumption that what, in the Writings, is
said of Sacred Scripture must be applied to those Writings themselves
"without any difference or reserve" (pp. 27, 80). Past students have
held that there must here be discrimination, because of the different plane on
which the Writings are written; for if the ultimates of revelation are
distinctly different, then the means of unfolding those ultimates must likewise
be distinctly different. Certainly we could not apply to the Writings
"without any difference or reserve", the teaching that "being
inwardly spiritual and celestial, 11 ON
DE HEMELSCHE LEER the Word has been written, by
mere correspondences; and what is written by mere correspondences is written in
the ultimate sense, in a style such as in the Prophets and Gospels" (S.S.
8). Clearly the Writings are not written in such style.
As a result of applying to the
Writings "without difference or reserve" the teaching concerning the
Word given in ARCANA GOELESTIA 8615, DE HEMELSCHE LEER states that "the
Latin Word has been so written, that every particular therein even to the most
minute corresponds to things that are in heaven" (p. 52). Yet reserve or
rather discrimination seems here imperatively to be called for. Otherwise we
would be led to the conclusion that every detail in Swedenborg's manuscripts,
every slip in spelling or grammar, every capitalization "corresponds to
things in heaven"; nay, even the fact that sometimes, as in the ARCANA
COELESTIA, drafts of letters are interpolated in the manuscript, or calculations
of the cost of printing. Is it not more rational to interpret the teaching of
ARCANA COELESTIA 8615 as meaning that the Word is so written that every
particular therein, even to the most minute, corresponds on its own plane to
things that are in heaven? and since the Writings are written on the plane of
natural rational truths,
that every particular truth
therein so corresponds?
The frequent teaching that the
literal sense of the Word is written "for the simplest sort of persons and
for children" who believe only "in the appearances of things"
(A.C. 10441, 6839, 9025, etc.), can surely not be said of the Writings which,
though adapted also to the simple, are yet designed to lead them to distinguish
between appearances and realities; and which sometimes are so manifestly and
even specifically addressed not mainly to the simple but lo "the
intelligent".
Moreover, unreservedly to apply
to the Writings the literal statements of those Writings concerning Sacred Scripture, seems opposed to the very
position advanced in DE HEMELSCHE LEER; for the core of that position is that to
understand the Writings we must enter into their spiritual sense, a sense which
is not apparent in the Letter.
I have already presented some
specimens of what Mr. Hyatt meant by the internal sense or deeper meaning of 12
REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON the Writings. As further
illustrations of the same thing might be adduced a progress in the understanding
of the doctrines, which, it is hoped, testifies to some a-dvance toward a deeper
insight into the Writings. Let me now present in brief form the spiritual sense
of certain statements of the Writings as elucidated in DE HEMELSCHE LEER. The
text elucidated is taken from the Title-page and part of the Table of Contents
of the ARCANA COELESTIA. Arcana together with wonderful
things. The heavenly arcana which
are disclosed in the Sacred Scripture or the Word of the Lord, are contained in
the explanation, which is the internal sense of the Word. As to the quality of this sense, see what has been shown
concerning it from experience, and, moreover, in the text.
The wonderful things seen in the world of spirits and in the heaven of
angels are prefixed and subjoined to each chapter. For those who read the word from
within, in all particulars there are inseparably connected to the arcane of the
letter, actually experienced states of a spiritual insight into the Divine
nature of the things that constitute the Church and heaven. As regards the Lord, wonderful indicates His Divine
Providence, and in that sense the text signifies the laws of the Divine
Providence in respect to the form and contents of the Word (n. 45). By Disclosed heavenly arcane are
meant the genuine cognitions of good and truth which determine the spiritual
understanding of the Divine Essence of the things that make the Church and
heaven (p. 67). These genuine cognitions are to
be found nowhere but in the Writings, and therefore not in the Old and New
Testaments except as illuminated by the light of the third Testament (ibid.);
and , nevertheless, they remain hidden unless the literal sense thereof is
unfolded by the genuine doctrine of the Church (pp.103-4). The Latin word is indeed the
internal sense, but only when it is read not from without but from within
(p.104). The genuine truths or the
internal sense are for the man 13
ON DE HEMELSCHE LEER of the new Church; and he should
not remain in the literal sense alone. This
appears from the signification of the word see being the opening of the
understanding (ibid.). The ascent of the forms of truth
or the apparent natural influx (ibid.). The forms of the Doctrine of the
church, that is, the truth of good or the actual spiritual influx (ibid.).
The ascent from the truth of the Letter to the good of life, which is
taught by that truth, is meant by experience: and the tissue that the Lord
weaves in the descent out of this good with man, or out of this celestial is
meant by the text (p. 107). Each genuine rational state of
man or each state determined by the rational from the celestial is preceded by
states of faith, and is followed by states of faith from the celestial.
A chapter (caput) signifies a spiritual state in which the Lord makes and
determines everything. It therefore
signifies a state of man from the Lord (p.123). 14
REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON the
Word only if man by experience raises himself to one of the summits where the
Lord in him can weave the spiritual out of the celestial. One or two refers to
the difference between the states of reformation which precede and the states of
regeneration which follow the reformation.
As regards the Lord Himself and His Word, which in the literal sense
consists of chapters, the concept chapter refers to the states in the Divine
Human determined by the Divine Truth from the Divine Good by which the Lord
became the Word in ultimates" (p. 124).
Let me give one more example: The manifestation of the Lord and intromission into the spiritual world surpass all miracles. This means, not the Lord's manifestation before Swedenborg but His appearance in the fulness of His second coming in the Doctrine of the Church. This has not been granted to any one since the creation, as it has been to me (Invitation 52). The New Church through the Divine Human of the Lord is
the crown of all churches: and all previous churches from the beginning have
existed for the sake of this church and have striven toward it (pp.50-51).
Whether
or not one agrees with what is said in the above expositions, he can entertain
no doubt but that they 15
ON DE HEMELSCHE LEER
Moreover, why should truths be thus concealed in the Writings? They were
veiled in the Old and New Testaments because of the needs of the age and the
limitations of the instrument or scribe. But of the present age we are told that
"now it is permitted to enter intellectually into the mysteries of
faith" (T.C.R.
508); and as regards
limitations in the scribe, we cannot imagine that Swedenborg was ignorant of the
"spiritual sense" of his Writings DE
HEMELSCHE LEER criticizes those who call the Writings the internal sense of the
Word. But do not the Writings so designate
themselves? Listen:
"The spiritual
sense is opened at this day,
and with it are disclosed genuine truths and goods, because the Last Judgment
has been wrought" (A.E. 376). "That
man may again be conjoined with heaven, Divine Truth such as it is in heaven has
been revealed, and this is confirmed by the spiritual sense of the Word" (A.E.
950). "These are most evident testimonies that the spiritual sense of the
Word has been disclosed by the Lord through me. ... This exceeds ail revelations
that have hitherto been given from the creation of the world" (INV. 44).
"The spiritual sense of the Word has 16 this
sense is
there clothed
in the language of
rational thought is evident. It
is contended, however, that the Heavenly Doctrine cannot possibly be revealed in
the Letter of the Writings because that letter speaks of persons, places, etc.,
of which angels can have no idea. But surely it is not suggested that New
Churchmen have thought of the Writings as the naked truth such as it is in
heaven, unclothed by things drawn from the world. "It is not contended
(wrote Bishop W. F. Pendleton), that the Writings are the Word such as it is in
heaven in its entirety or fullness". And, as though foreseeing the future,
he adds: "It seems necessary to say this, but it should not be
necessary" (N.C.L. 1900. p. 116). We are taught that "the spiritual
sense is for angels and also for men" (A.E. 697). And what else do devout The
Writings are indeed clothed in correspondences, but these correspondences are
rational truths. What man can question this who knows that Swedenborg was
"an investigator of natural truths" that, on the foundation of these,
he might become "an investigator of spiritual truths" (INFLUX 20). DE
HEMELSCHE LEER seems to recognize this when it 17
ON DE HEMELSCHE LEER
distance
between the letter and the spiritual sense is just Against
this, however, we have the teaching that the revelation now made is the crown of
all revelations because it is based on an open intercourse with angels and
spirits never before granted to mankind (INV. 43). Its nature. moreover, was
represented in the spiritual world by the lifted veil, signifying "that now
the Word is laid open", which was seen in that temple over whose gate was
written NUNC LICET: "Now it is allowed to enter intellectually into the
arcana of faith". While the Word has been closed to the Roman Catholics and
Protestants, now "in the New Church it is allowed to enter with the
understanding and to penetrate into all its secrets; and this because its
doctrinals are continuous truths disclosed by the Lord by means of the Word; and
confirmations of these by things rational result in the opening of the
understanding above, more and more, and so it is elevated into the light in
which are the angels of heaven" (T.C.R. 508). The
veil is lifted. Divine Truth now comes to us, no longer veiled and concealed but
so set forth in the clear language of rational thought that all who will may
see. Entrance into the understanding of interior truths is no longer limited by
the nature of the revelation, as was the case in the Old Testament and in the
New for the Lord said there were many- things which they could not then bear
but solely by the state of the reader. It is this fact which marks the
revelation to the New Church as a revelation of "truths continuous from the
Lord" truths uninterrupted in their descent from firsts to lasts. This 18 His
glorified Human to such as will see. What would be the significance of the
expression "henceforth", if the Word, that is, the Writings, is still
shut up behind a veil and a veil that is "still thicker than
before" (p. 22)? Into
this revelation we are, of course, to enter ever more interiorly; and the mode
of entrance is involved in Swedenborg's words to certain angels: "Enter
more deeply into DE
HEMELSCHE LEER limits the application of the words "the doctrinals of the
New Church are continuous truths disclosed from the Lord by the Word" to
the doctrines which the men of the New Church have drawn from the Latin Word by
the mode of exegesis referred to above; and holds that. it is these doctrinals
that are "so 19
ON
DE HEMELSCIIE LEER obscure
language but. in statements comprehensible to the rational mind without
artificial aids. As a confirmation. J might again note the fact that DE
HEMELSCHE LEER frequently appeals to the plain teachings of the Writings and not
to their "internal sense" to establish what it draws from those
Writings by its mode of exegesis. The
Writings do indeed have an internal sense, but it is the internal sense of a
revelation couched in language the direct and only purpose of which is to remove
fallacies and appearances, to implant rational truths, and so to lead to the
knowledge of spiritual truths, and thus of the Lord Himself in the glory of His
Divine Human. That
we must enter more interiorly into the understanding of the Writings, has always
been acknowledged. In the past, moreover, this deeper understanding has
sometimes been called the spiritual or internal sense of the Writings. As a
definition, however, this term is not only vague and lacking in the element of
nice discrimination, but it is also 20
REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON We
turn now to another phase of the position set forth by DE HEMELSCHE LEER and
which indeed is a necessary consequence of its teaching concerning, the nature
of the letter of the Writings. We read: "The
truth which for some time now has been acknowledged by us as the very heart of
the second coming of the Lord and of the New Church, is the thesis taken from
the literal sense of the Latin Word, First that by the Doctrine of the Church,
not the Writings of Swedenborg are meant, but the vision of those Writings and
of the Word as a whole which the Church gradually, in an orderly way, acquires
for itself: and Second, that this Doctrine of the Church is of purely Divine
origin and of a purely Divine essence" (p. 56). By the
"Doctrine of the
Church", DE HEMELSCHE LEER understands
what is ordinarily called
the Heavenly Doctrine. Of this Doctrine it is said in the Writings: "This
Doctrine is also from heaven because it is from the spiritual 21
ON DE HEMELSCIIE LEER
signified
the Writings, appears clearly from this, that they [the Writings] are full of
natural ideas taken from the world, from the kingdoms of nature, from
ecclesiastical history, which we know are not understood in heaven but Therefore, continues DE HEMELSCHE LEER, "by the Doctrine of the New Church, not the Latin Word but the Doctrine of the Church should be understood; and by the spiritual sense of the Word, not only the spiritual sense of the Old and New Testament but, in the first place, also the spiritual sense of the Latin Testament. From this it follows that by the doctrine which is in heaven that is, by the Heavenly Doctrine, not the literal sense of the Latin Word but its spiritual sense is meant. Every church must from the Word acquire for itself its doctrine. It
is not its doctrine that is given to any church by immediate revelation; but the
Word in a literal sense is given, from which its doctrine must be developed
according to order; for in And
DE HEMELSCHE LEER continues that the concept (1) that the Writings are the *
This would seem to explain the reason why the Dutch Journal is entitled "Doctrina
Genuini Veri. DE HEMELSCHE LEER" (The Doctrine of Genuine Truth, The
Heavenly Doctrine), a title which has hitherto been confined to designating a
specific work by Swedenborg, or language having the authority of Divine
Revelation. Yet, even now, after knowing the position of DE HEMELSCHE LEER as
regards the "Doctrine of the Church", the reason for using this title
to designate a journal, is not clear; for I do not for a moment conceive that
there is any intention of regarding the utterances of that journal as of Divine
Authority, and certainly it cannot yet be said of them that they are "the
true Doctrine of the Church" since it cannot yet be known whether "in
the future they will prove to be imperishable" 22
REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTUN Heavenly
Doctrine and the Doctrine of the Church; and (2) that what is said of the Letter
of the Word applies only to the Old and New Testaments; "has up to the
present kept the Church as a whole in a purely natural state" and in
consequence "the Lord Himself has, as it were, remained unthroned in the
Church" (p. 9)a serious statement, made with a regrettable lack
of reserve. As
we have seen, the thought that the doctrines of the New Church must be drawn
from the Writings and confirmed thereby is by no means new in the Church. What
is new in the present view is that in the Writings
the Heavenly Doctrine is covered with a veil (p. 7) and so "is not
apparent" (p. 73); while in
the doctrine of the Church drawn from those Writings and formulated by men, it
is openly revealed. In other words, the men of the Church will be able to supply
a vehicle of words wherein the Heavenly Doctrine is clearly set forth to view,
while Swedenborg was unable to do this, or unwilling. And the question will
naturally arise: if Swedenborg was unable. by virtue of what superior advantages
shall others be able? or if unwilling, on what grounds shall others be willing? If
the Writings are not the Heavenly Doctrine because their letter is expressed in
a language incomprehensible to angels, does not the same objection apply to the
Doctrine of the Church which also has its "literal sense" or
"natural text" (p. 121)? "The Doctrine of the Church (says DE
HEMELSCHE LEER) is the rational understanding of the Word laid down in the
natural" (p. 43) an understanding consisting of truths which
"are never truths
in themselves but appearances of truth accommodated to the rational"
(p. 56). And later it adds: "Every spiritual truth and every genuine
rational idea, the moment it is expressed in natural words or laid down in
natural writing, becomes a purely natural scientific, a letter without soul,
dead in itself, and whether it will arise anew to be a rational idea depends
entirely on the state of the man" (p. 69). What
then is that difference, assumed by DE HE.MELSCIIE LEER, which makes the
Writings a "thick veil" hiding the Heavenly Doctrine, while the
Doctrine of the Church is that Heavenly Doc-trine itself? Are not both written
in the language of rational human thought? the one
bring tin- formulation
of the Heavenly Doctrine
by 23
ON DF HEMELSCIIE LEER the
Divinely prepared Revelator, and the other, the formulation of a human and
fallible understanding of that Doctrine by the men of the Church? Indeed, the
witness of this is DE HEMELSCHE LEER itself. For there the style of writing, the
manner of presentation, the mode of appeal, is that
which has
become familiar
to New Churchmen from the
pattern furnished in the Writings. Certainly there is no evidence that the one
style clearly manifests the Heavenly Doctrine while the other hides it under a
veil of correspondences. More
justly does DE HEMELSCHE LEER define "the infinite difference" between
the Writings and the doctrine of the Church when it says that the one is
"an infinite unfolding of truth" while the other is "a finite
unfolding" (p. 120). To which we would add that the one is a Divine
formulation of the Heavenly Doctrine adapted to men of all times and in all
states; while the other is a human formulation adapted to the age and the state
which produced it. As
regards the authority to be attached to the Doctrine of the Church when genuine,
I find it difficult clearly to 24 purely
Divine origin, the Divine lives in them; consequently the Doctrine of the Church
is the Lord Himself" (p. 56). Yet
there seems here to be some confusion of thought. Of course, as to its origin,
all truth is Divine, by whom Of
course men, and especially priests, are agents for the teaching of men and the
opening of" their eyes to the
truths of Revelation. But they are
faithful agents only so far as they ascribe authority to the Writings alone and
lead men to go to those Writings, there to see for themselves whether the
Doctrine of the Church or the teaching of the priest is or is not the teaching
of revelation and this, even if such seeing should lead them to
disagree with
the Church
or the priest. Thus. the
"Academy Doctrines", as Academy Doctrines, have no authority
whatsoever. They
simply declare
that the Writings teach so
and so; and if men, whether by means of the Academy doctrines or independently,
see that the Writings do actually so teach, the authority will be ascribed to
those Writings alone. Otherwise, the utterances of men would usurp the Authority
of God. And it is to guard against this very thing that we are unqualifiedly
exhorted not to trust in
councils. "My reader
(says Swedenborg), believe not in councils but in the Holy Word" (T.C.R.
634). "And go to the God of the Word and thus to the Word and you will be
enlightened" (ibid.. 177). I
would not for a moment be understood as implying, 25
ON DE HEMELSCHE LEER evEn
remotely, that the writers in DE HEMELSCHE LEER advocate that doctrinal
authority shall attach to councils or bodies of men. Indeed, I could not
entertain any such thought of fellow New Churchmen whom I respect as my
brethren. But I do wish earnestly to call attention to what, in my view, is
implied in a position which while giving Divine Authority to the origin of the
Doctrine of the Church, seems also at times to give the same authority to the
formulation of that Doctrine by men, and even decla-res that when it- has been
drawn from the Writings "in a state of illustration" it is the Lord
Himself (p. 136; see also DE
HEMELSCHE LEER itself speaks of the warning given in the Writings "against
the arbitrary interpretation" of those Writings by councils: but it leaves
us in uncertainty Divine
Authority can attach only to an "immediate revelation", that
is, to a revelation not made by means of spirits and angels but coming
immediately from God; and that the Writings are such an immediate revelation,
they specifically declare (H.H. I, fin.). Tt is true that there is also
"Divine revelation by internal perception" (p. 65), tha.t is to say, by enlightenment: and the Doctrine
of the Church or its understanding of the Word is the fruit of this
enlightenment. But this revelation is a mediate revelation, that is, it comes by
means of admission into the society of angels and good spirits. This is shown by
the fact noted by DE HEMELSCHE LEER that the Doctrine of the Church may be a
perversion of the Word. and the law of perversion is essentially the law of
enlightenment: if the former is effected by the love of self operating by means
of evil spirits, the latter is effected by
the Lord operating by means of good
spirits. 26
REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON DE
HEMELSCHE LEER, however, contends that since the Doctrine of the New Church is
to be drawn from the Writings, it therefore follows as a logical consequence,
that in those Writings' it is now veiled over, in the same way as were the
doctrines which the Jewish and Christian Church might have drawn from their
Revelations. Such a conclusion, however, inevitably involves a new Divine and
immediate Revelation, and so is not in accord with the statement that the
Writings are the Crown of Revelations. It
is true that the Jews and Christians, by faithful study of their Word, might
have drawn forth true doctrines there from. But those doctrines would have been
confined to the clearer understanding of such truths as are plainly set forth in
their Word. Thus the Jews might have seen that the Lord wills not sacrifice but
obedience; that they should love their neighbors as themselves, etc., etc.; for
in their Word this is openly stated; and had they seen and acknowledged these
teachings, then in the light of them they might have searched their Word and
seen light in many of its dark sayings. But this progress could never have
proceeded beyond the limits of what was plainly demonstrable in the letter of
their revelation. For the written Word, and not any private illustration,
whether genuine or not, was the only authority to which they could justly
appeal. Certainly they could not have arrived at a true doctrine concerning the
nature of the spiritual world, degrees, etc. The same reasoning applies to the
Christian Church. Thus, from the statement that "What God hath joined
together let not man put asunder", that (church might have discerned the
truth concerning marriage and by the application of this truth to other
passages, might have come into wider perception of it: and so likewise in other
cases. From a study of the Lord's parables they might
27 ON DE
HEMELSCHE LEER
even
have learned something concerning correspondences. But they could never have
advanced beyond -the limits defined by the clearly demonstrable teachings of
their Word. To have done so would be to have ventured on an unchartered sea with
no other guide than a real or imagined enlightenment which at best could have
merely individual authority. For
further progress, a new
revelation was necessary, a revelation that could be made only by one who had
been prepared as a natural philosopher and who was in both worlds at the same
time. This revelation is distinguished from all preceding revelations as being
their Crown. But if, as is now claimed, it also comes to us in the form of an
obscure letter, which must be unfolded in the same way as former revelations,
will not our minds, desirous of the guidance of God, when men cry: "Lo here
and lo there", be troubled with doubts? and thus doubting, will we not ask
of the Writings: "Art thou the Christ or do we wait for another"? ALFRED ACTON BRYN
ATHYN, PENNSYLVANIA U. S. A. January
16, 1931 29 DE
HEMELSGHE LEER EXTRACTS
FROM THE ISSUE FOR MARCH-APRIL 1931 THE
REVIEW 0"F DE HEMELSCHE LEER BY DR. ALFRED ACTON A
COMMENTARY BY THE REV. THEODORE PITCAIRN. Dr.
Acton's review opens with a historical account of the positions held in the
GENERAL CHURCH with respect to the nature of the Writings and the manner in
which they are written. He supposes a lack of information on the part of The
Hague as to the statements in NEW CHURCH LIFE and NEW CHURCH TIDINGS concerning
the positions held in regard to the Writings. While, as mentioned in DE
HEMELSCHE LEER, the Hague Society at the time of the first publication of DE
HEMELSCHE LEER was unaware of the NEW CHURCH TIDINGS, they were familiar with
the positions of the various ministers as presented in the
pages of
NEW CHURCH LIFE:
namely, that
the Writings have a letter, that the Writings are full of
correspondences, that the Writings have an
internal sense and that they
are read differently according to this sense in the three Heavens, also that
many things said in the Writings concerning the Word have an application to the
Writings. All these ideas are expressed in an article written by myself which
appeared in NEW CHURCH LIFE (1929: 344353), and which was met with general'
approval. There was however a sentence in my article which was based on mere
assumption and was not founded on fact, and which has been quoted in the review
of DE HEMELSCHE LEER in NEW CHURCH LIFE, January 1931, as follows: "In a
lengthy article the Rev. Theodore Pitcairn suggests' that even the abstractions
in the Writings have an interior sense, inexpressible by human language (1929:
351), although no further revelation is needed to expound the Writings, since
the means are given in the doctrine".
30 Yet
it is the primary function of the Doctrine of the Church to do this very thing
which I there said was impossible. The reason that I fell into the above error
was that at that time T was unacquainted with the nature of the Doctrine drawn
from the Writings and with what is said in the Writings concerning the
"revelation" given to the men of the Church (see A. C. 8694), and did
not reflect on what the Writings say concerning the opening of the degrees of
the mind. It is obvious that if one sees the degrees of the internal sense of
the Writings that these The
position concerning the Writings as the letter of the Word was first formulated
by the Rev. E. S. Hyatt, but Mr. Hyatt went much further than those who followed
him, both as to the Doctrine that the Writings are part of the letter of the
Word and as to the nature of the
Doctrine drawn from the Writings. This is not so evident in the sermons
published in the NEW CHURCH TIDINGS Not
the external sense, but 'the internal sense is the very Doctrine of the Church'
(N.J.H.D. 260)". He then quotes A. C. 9025 and continues: "Hence that
sense is not the light, but testifies concerning the light".
He then further quotes:
"Of what quality the Word is such as John the Baptist taught, is signified
by, he that is lesser in the kingdom of the heavens is greater than he. .. .
When he spoke concerning the Lord Himself, who was the Divine Truth itself or
the Word, he said that he himself 31
THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON part
worldly. corporeal, and earthly, which can never make the Word of the Lord"
(A.C. 1540). Mr. Hyatt then continues: "Such is the character
of that sense of the Word which John the Baptist represents, and it is
really that sense which he said was not the light. Still John the Baptist, or
rather, that which he represented, is necessary to testify concerning the
light". He further quotes: "Still the sense of the letter represents
truths and presents the appearances of truth in which man can be while he is not
in the light of truth" (A. C. 1984), and continues: "Such is the Thus
it is with regard to the Revelation in which the Lord has effected His New
Advent. At first in the literal forms thereof we only see a man speaking about
the Lord". We might quote further, but this is sufficient to show that Mr.
Hyatt saw the letter of the Writings, apart from the doctrine of the Church that
the Writings are the Word, as not the Lord, not the Light; yea that the letter
of the Writings is not worthy to unloose the latchet of the Lord's shoe. Mr.
Hyatt also saw that the Doctrine of the Church is from the internal sense of the
Writings, for in this connection he quotes A. C. 9025, as follows: "It is
to be known that the true Doctrine of the Church is what is here called the
internal sense, for in that sense are truths such as the angels in heaven have.
Among priests and among the men in the Church there are those who teach and
learn truths from the literal sense of the Word and there are those who teach
and learn from Doctrine from the Word which is called the Doctrine of faith of
the Church. The latter differ exceedingly from-the former in perception". From
the above it is manifest how great was the difference in point of view between
Mr. Hyatt, who taught that the letter of the Writings by itself is not the Light
and that of Mr. Hugo Odhner, who sees that letter as the sun of heaven itself.
Yet the latter imagined that he was in agreement with the former. 32 Mr.
Hyatt was faced with certain apparent difficulties and to avoid them he made
this reservation. The reason that he did not see that this reservation was not
necessary and indeed was out of place, was because he did not enter He
did in a general way see that genuine Doctrine drawn from the Writings is
Divine, and especially the doctrine that the Writings are the Word, On page 4 of
Dr. Acton's review, Bishop' W. F. Pendleton is quoted as follows: "The Word
as it is in heaven descends into the world, but it no longer veils itself in
figures, in representatives, in correspondences; it clothes itself in human
language indeed, but in the language of science and philosophy, the language of
the learned, the language of rational thought among men." This quotation
illustrates what
is said
in DE
HEMELSCHE LEER, namely that
in the Writings the veil has become thicker, It
is the very clearness of the letter of the Writings that makes the veil so
thick, that makes the appearances in the letter so strong
and thereby hides so effectively the internal sense. It is frequently said in
the Writings that it is harder to see the internal sense in the historical parts
of the Word than in the prophetical, for in the former the sense of the letter
holds the attention of the 33
THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON
mind,
while in the latter the presence of an internal is more evident. This is still
more the case with the Writings where the very natural rational forms hold the
mind fixed to the letter, and make it difficult to believe in their internal
sense. That
the rational form holds the mind more fixed and makes it more difficult to see
the internal sense, is evident from the first chapter of Luke verses one to
four, where we read: "Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to set forth in
order a declaration of those things
which are most surely believed among us, even as they delivered them unto us,
which from the beginning were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the Word: It seemed
good unto me also, having had perfect understanding of all things from the very
first, to write unto thee, in order, most excellent Theophilus that thou
mightest know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been
instructed". It is the natural rational form of these verses that makes
them most difficult to expound, for the letter holds the mind, by the rational
form of the presentation. So much is this the case that if the Old and the
New Testament had all been written in such a style, no man could have
been brought to believe that the Word has an internal sense,
and the. New
Church could never have been established. That
the Writings are written according to the language of correspondences and
representatives is evident from the fact that there is no other
language which
has any meaning. The laws of correspondence and representation are the
very laws of creation and of the human mind. How often are we told that there is
no communication between a higher degree and a lower degree than that of
correspondence, and that every degree of truth corresponds to a higher degree.
To place the Writings outside of the laws of correspondence and representation
would be to place them outside of all law
and order. The Writings clearly
teach that man and Angel can never be in truth itself, but only in the rational
appearances of truth, and that these appearances are in discrete degrees between
which there is no other communication than that of correspondence. On
page 4 Dr. Acton further quotes himself as follows: "The media in the
Writing's are rational ideas". That the 34 Writings
when first read do not present to the mind rational ideas, can be seen from this
consideration that the genuine natural rational can only be formed by the
Writings. Man before reading the Writings can have nothing but a remnant of a
rational; no genuine natural rational can be formed in a man until he has come
to live according to the letter of the Writings. The ideas he has derived from
the Writings previous to this cannot be said to be rational. That this is so is
clear from CONVENTION and CONFERENCE, which although they have the letter of the
Writings have not one single genuine rational idea. The genuine natural rational
(Ishmael) is born from the Lord (Abram as a father) and the affection of the
scientifics of the Word (Hagar as a mother), and with the New Church the
scientifics of the letter of the Writings. With those who are in a negative
spirit towards the Divinity of the
Writings this birth cannot take place, wherefore in reading the Writings they
remain in merely sensual appearances. On
page 9 we read: "Certainly we could not apply to the Writings
'without any difference or
reserve', the teaching that 'being inwardly spiritual and celestial, the Word
has been written by mere correspondences; and what is
written by
mere correspondences
is written
in the ultimate sense, in a
style such as in the Prophets and Gospels' (S. S. 8). Clearly the Writings are
not written in such a style." The more deeply one enters into the Writings
the clearer it becomes that they are written in such a style. The Prophets, the
historical parts of the Old Testament, the Gospels and the Apocalypse are all
written in a different style, yet this difference of style is but a variation,
essentially the style is the same, and the Writings are certainly written
according to the essentially similar style,
namely they are written by
"mere correspondences in the ultimate sense". There is no other style
in which the Word could be written. This does not mean that interior truths
cannot shine forth in the letter, for they do this in places in the Old
Testament and in many places in the Gospels. On
the same page we read: "As a result of applying to the Writings 'without
difference or reserve' the teaching concerning the Word given in ARCANA
COELESTIA, 8615, 35
THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON DE
HEMELSCHE LEER states that 'the Latin Word ha»s been so written, that every
particular therein even to the most minute corresponds to things that are in
heaven'. Yet reserve or rather discrimination seems here imperatively to be
called for. Otherwise we would be lead to the conclusion that every detail in
Swedenborg's manuscript, To
introduce grammatical and literal objections into a matter of principle, is to
think from particulars and not from principle. We are told that the law that an
object which is held close to the eye shuts out the universe, is in
correspondence with a similar spiritual law, and that with those who are not in
the affirmative one objection Dr.
Acton continues as follows: "Is it not more rational to interpret the
teaching of ARCANA COELESTIA, 8615, as meaning
that the Word is so
written that
every particular, even 'to the most minute, corresponds
on its own plane to things
that are in heaven, and since the Writings are written on the
plane of natural-rational truths, that every particular therein so
corresponds?" The same kind of reasoning; if followed, would lead to saying
that the New Testament, because it is on the natural moral plane has no
representation as to the words. In all of the Testaments,
on what plane soever they be, the
internal things are expressed in words, and the words necessarily
correspond exactly
to the ideas that
are expressed thereby. To make the ideas correspond and not the words,
would imply that Providence in the Second Coming worked only in generals and not
in particulars, which, as the Writings frequently show, is a fallacy of 36 natural
thought. Providence as to the least
particulars prepared the sacred languages for their Divine function; to deny
this in regard to the Latin would naturally lead to the Convention attitude of
mind. That even the letters of the Latin text have a spiritual signification is
indicated in the MEMORABILIA, where we read:
"In Heaven they have the Word and also books; in the spiritual
Heaven the writing is similar to the writing in the world, in Latin
letters" (n. 5561). The
review continues: "The frequent teaching that the literal sense of the Word
is written for the simplest sort of persons and for children, who believe only
in the appearances of things, can surely not be said of the Writings which,
though adapted to the simple, are yet designed to lead them to distinguish
between appearances and realities; and which sometimes are so manifestly and
specifically addressed not mainly to the simple but to the intelligent".
Could not exactly the same thing be said of the Gospel of John? Are there not
many things in both the Old and the New Testament that a child can by no means
understand even in the letter? That the Writings in their letter We
will here give but one illustration of how the literal which
"sets up the Church and regenerates man therein". The
review continues: "Moreover, unreservedly to apply the literal statements
of those Writings concerning the Sacred Scripture, seems opposed to the very
position advanced in DE HEMELSCHE LEER; for the core of that position is that to
understand the Writings we must enter into their spiritual sense, a sense which
is not apparent in the letter." It is the part of faith to acknowledge that
all truth is to be drawn from the Word and not from man's own intelligence; this
led to the belief that we are to learn the nature of the Writings from what is
said therein concerning the Word. For if we do not learn the nature of the
Writings from this source we only make conjectures from our own imagination. But
how the teaching therein given is to be applied cannot be seen by the literal
minded; to see this requires enlightenment from the Lord, and for a time the
Church may remain in some obscurity as to the applications, for the matter is
not an easy one. On page 12 we read: "Whether or not one agrees with what is said in the above exposition he can entertain no doubt, but that they are couched in language with which he has been made familiar by the Writings. There is nothing new or strange in them, and the thoughts which they express might easily have been gathered from a plain reading of the Writings, without any recourse to the science of exposition". The language of doctrine as well as doctrine must be drawn from the Writings, yet the language differs according to doctrine; the language of CONVENTION and the language of the GENERAL CHURCH are both drawn from the Writings, yet there is an essential difference even as to language between the two. This
is what All
truth is plainly stated in the letter of the Writings, but it cannot be seen
there unless a man is in illustration. 38 Could
not the same remarks be
used with regard to the
Writings, which say they are from the internal sense and that the letter must be
put aside, and yet continuously quote the letter as confirmation? This apparent
paradox is expressed in the ARCANA COELESTIA as follows: "All the doctrinal
things of the Church ... are given
through the external of the Word; but they are given to those only who are in
enlightenment from the Lord, when they are reading the Word, for then light
flows into them out of Heaven through the internal sense" (n. 10548). When the letter
of the Word which is in the external memory is ordered by the Lord, internal
truth appears, the Lord
draws these truths from the
external into the internal memory, this drawing
up is from the internal sense. On
page 13 of the review we read: "Moreover, why should truths be thus
concealed in the Writings? They 39
THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON
with
all possible clarity. And if the Writings are thus thickly veiled, how can they
be considered as the coming of the Lord in glory? Would it not be the clouds
that have come? Would we not still be waiting for the glory?" The answer to
the above is to be found in the following quotation from the Gospel of Matthew:
"Who hath ears let him hear. And the disciples came and said unto Him: Why
speakest Thou unto them in parables? He answered and said unto them: Because it
is given unto The disciples represent "the good of Doctrine from the Lord" (A.E.624), and thus those who are in the good of Doctrine, that is men of the internal Church. To these it is said that unto them it is given to know the mysteries of the Kingdom of Heaven, but to the others it is not given. For to others in the New Church the words apply: "Because seeing they see not and hearing they hear not, neither do they understand". It is clear from all that is written in CONVENTION that to them the Writings are nothing but dark clouds, that totally hide the Glory of the Lord. This truth Mr. Hyatt clearly saw forty years ago. Dr. Acton himself states the reason for these clouds, "the needs of the age", which also after the Second Coming, certainly for many centuries, are the same. The Lord made His Coming at the time of the lowest ebb of spiritual life, how could inmost truths be revealed to such an age unveiled? This truth is plainly taught in the ARCANA COELESTIA, where we read: "But these are the least and the most general arcana which man is ignorant of; if the singular things were told him, he would not apprehend even one" (n. 642). There
is also a number in the ARCANA COELESTIA to the effect that if more interior
things were revealed, they would not have been understood; and if understood
they would have been denied in spite of their truth. Concerning" the
generals 40
REV. THEODORE PITCAIRN to
which the Writings refer in the above quotation we read as follows: "Man
can know nothing of the truth of faith except from the things revealed in the
Word, where all things are said generally. Generals are nothing but the spots of
a cloud; for each general comprehends in itself a thousand and a thousand
particulars, and each particular a thousand and a thousand singulars; the
singulars of the particulars are what illustrate the generals. These singulars
are never so completely revealed to man; both because they cannot be described,
and because they cannot be apprehended, thus not acknowledged and believed; for
they are contrary to the fallacies of the senses in which man is... . It is
quite otherwise with the celestial man.... In him particulars and the singulars
of particulars can be insinuated" (A. C. 865). From the above it is evident that in the inmost sense it
cannot be said that the Lord has come in Glory until some time in the future
when the celestial Church will be again set up. In the literal sense the giving
of the Writings in a literal form was the Second Coming of' the Lord. In the
internal natural sense the Lord made His Second Coming to the New Church when
the Church acknowledged the Writings as Divine. This Mr. Hyatt In
the quotation from the review Dr. Acton speaks of the limitations or rather lack
of limitations of the scribe, and what Swedenborg sought to do. When speaking of
the descent of the Divine Human in the Second
Coming through the Divinely prepared instrument, how can we speak of what
Swedenborg sought to do, or of limitations? The Writings are the infinite
unfolding of the spiritual sense of the Word, in an infinite letter of their own
accommodated by Divine Wisdom to the state of the world. It is true that if the
state of the world had been different 41
THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON
the
letter of the Writings would have
been different. For the teaching
given that "the external sense of the Word was changed and different on
account of that nation" (A. C. 10461), has an application to the Writings The
review continues "DE HEMELSCHE LEER criticizes those who call the Writings
the internal sense of the Word. But do not the Writings so designate
'themselves?" The Writings are indeed the internal sense if seen from
within, but not if seen from without. Concerning seeing from within we read in
the ARCANA COELESTIA as follows: "Speaking with Moses signifies to perceive
clearly from within. . . . It must here be told what it is to see from without,
and what to perceive from within. Those who when reading the Word are in
enlightenment, see it from within, for their internal is open, and when the
internal is open it is in the light of Heaven. This light flows in and
enlightens, although the That
the literal sense of the Writings when seen from without is not the internal
sense of the Word, is manifest from many things which are said concerning the
Word. as that, "the Word. in the letter cannot be apprehended except
through Doctrine out of the Word, made by one who is enlightened" (A.C.
10324). That the enlightenment here referred to is not the enlightenment in
which Swedenborg was, but the enlightenment of the men of the New Church, is
manifest from the long number on the subject in the APOCALYPSE EXPLAINED (624).
That the literal sense of the Writings as seen from without is not the spiritual
sense itself, is evident from this, that "spiritual truths and goods are
innumerable, and for the most part unutterable" (& C. 10917) 42
REV. THEODORE PITCAIRN On
page 14 of the review we read: "It is not contended (wrote Bishop W. F.
Pendleton), that the Writings are the Word such as it is in heaven in its
entirety or fullness". Yet if seen from within this is exactly what the
Writings are; the words entirety and fullness in the Writings refer to the
letter, in which the Word such as it is in Heaven is in its entirety and
fullness. The above quotation would
seem to imply that the Writings are part of the internal sense of 'the Word such
as it is in Heaven; but how can it be said that the Writings which are the Lord
Himself in His Second Coming and are therefore infinite, are not the Word in its
entirety and fullness? If by this is meant that the literal sense of the
Writings as seen from without is not the Word such as it is in Heaven in its
entirety and fullness, it must be replied that in such a case the Word such as
it is in Heaven is not seen at all, for if so viewed not a single spiritual
truth is visible in the Writings. In such a case even the genuine truth that
appears in the letter is not seen, but is immediately falsified. Further
on the same page we read: "The Writings arc indeed clothed in
correspondences, but these correspondences are rational truths. What man can
question this?" The Writings are indeed rational truths clothed in
corresponding natural language, yet no one can see anything genuinely rational
in them unless he has a rational mind which has been created by the Lord, for
the teaching given is, that the Lord can only dwell in His Own with man and can
by no The
review continues: "DE HEMELSCHE LEER seems to recognize this
[namely that the correspondences in the Writings are rational truths]
when it says: 'the correspondences [in the Writings] are indeed of another kind
than in the case of the sensual ideas, where they are based upon the difference
between the natural and the spiritual'. And yet, curiously enough, it
immediately adds: 'But also the rational ideas such as God, the Lord, ... the
Natural 43 THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON World,
Heaven,... Salvation, Regeneration, etc., in the different degrees are entirely
different and they stand in relation to
each other
by correspondence
only'." The Writings viewed from within are indeed rational, that is
spiritual and celestial truths clothed with natural language, and so they were
in the mind of Swedenborg, but when viewed from without they are merely sensual
scientifics. This is obvious from the fact that the age in which the Writings
were given, as well as the present age, is a merely sensual scientific age, and
in such an age all the words of human language are merely sensual scientific
words as to the ideas they convey; this applies to all words even such as God,
the Infinite, the Divine, etc. When the Writings were first read, the words due
to men's previous education and life could only convey sensual scientific ideas
to the mind. Nevertheless those who accepted the Writings and loved the Lord as
they saw Him there, had an immediate influx from the Lord into the things which
they read, which But
the above can best be illustrated by examples. We will take for illustration
the word Lord.
With those who do not accept the Divinity of the Lord, the word Lord
represents a merely corporeal idea. With the Old Churchman who in a general
sense acknowledges the Divinity of the Lord, the idea is still external natural,
for he thinks from the appearances of the letter of the New Testament, and
merely from the external life of the Lord on earth, he therefore thinks of the
Lord from person and not from essence. With those in CONVENTION
who do
not acknowledge the
Writings as the Lord in His Second Coming, the idea is almost similar, for their
ideas concerning the Lord are still governed by the letter of the New Testament.
When the Writings are seen as the Lord Himself in His Second Coming, the idea of
the Lord becomes internal natural, that is similar to the idea of the Lord in
the natural Heaven. Nevertheless as the idea is from the letter of the Writings
and its natural rational appearances and apparent finiteness, the idea is not
essentially spiritual although it is from the spiritual. When the Writings are
acknowledged as having a spiritual sense, and it is acknowledged that this 44
REV. THEODORE PITCAIRN spiritual
sense which is The Lord, will be manifested by means of the Doctrine of the
Church, and that this Doctrine will grow to all eternity, then a genuinely
spiritual idea of the Lord becomes possible. The celestial idea of the Lord is a
discrete degree above the spiritual idea of the Lord, the Celestial are indeed
the only ones who truly see the Lord, but as at the present time we cannot have
even the commencement of a celestial idea, the celestial idea of the Lord cannot
be described, or even thought of. If a spiritual For
a further illustration take the word infinite. The word infinite as used by the
scientist is a merely natural scientific term thought of from time, space,
mathematics or physics. The idea of infinite as used by the Old Churchman who
says that God is infinite Love and Wisdom, is entirely indeterminate and is
therefore no idea, the basis of his thought of love and wisdom is merely
personal. The CONVENTION idea of infinite differs not essentially from the Old
Church idea. The idea of the word infinite as held by those who acknowledge the
Divinity of the Writings is an interior natural idea, for they acknowledge that
the Writings contain infinite Love and Wisdom; the idea is not spiritual for the
reason that they do not see how the infinite Love and Wisdom of the Lord will be
manifested in the Church. As the Celestial alone are in the particulars and
singulars of the Word (see A.C. 865, quoted above), they alone can see the
Infinite of the Lord as in an image, but as said above, of this we can at
present have no idea. From
the above it is manifest that the abstract ideas of the Writings differ
according to the discrete degrees of the human mind and that there is no other
relation between them than that of correspondence. Hence it is manifest that
those who have only the interior natural degree of the mind opened cannot have a
single spiritual idea, and that those who have only the interior natural and
the" spiritual degree of the mind opened cannot have a single celestial
idea, and this no matter how much they may have studied the Writings. On
page 15 we read: "We have the teaching that the revelation now made is the
crown of all revelations because 45 THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON it
is based on. an open intercourse with angels and spirits never before granted to
mankind." Before a man can see the Revelation which is the crown of all
Revelations from within, he must have a corresponding intercourse with Angels
and spirits, although with man this intercourse is not at the same time external
as it was with Swedenborg. That this intercourse with Angels and spirits does
not start with the commencement of the Church, but comes some time afterwards is
clearly taught in ARCANA COELESTIA 8794. The
review continues: "Its nature moreover [that is, the nature of the
Writings] was represented by the lifted veil,
signifying that now the Word is laid
open." We have already treated
of those to whom the veil is lifted, namely those who were represented by the
Lord's disciples; that the veil has not been lifted in the case of CONFERENCE
and CONVENTION is manifest. Further
on page 15 we read: "Entrance into the understanding of ulterior truths is
no longer limited by the nature of
the revelation, as
was the case in the Old Testament and in the New." That this is true is
abundantly shown in DE HEMELSCHE LEER where treating of the Writings as the Holy
Spirit, where it is shown that with the New Church a miraculous pouring out; of
the Holy Spirit, such as took place on the day of Pentecost, is not necessary,
for now the Holy Spirit itself is present in the Church in the Writings.
Nevertheless that there are limitations on.
the part of man is obvious, and that these limitations cause the Writings to be seen
under a heavy veil which can only be removed according to the opening of the
degrees of the mind of the Church. This is evident merely. from this fact that
the Lord made His Second Coming at a time when there was no longer any genuine
good and truth in the world and men were therefore in danger of extinction. The
truths in the Writings are indeed continuous from the Lord, but these continuous
truths can. only be seen as the degrees of the mind are opened. On
page 16 we read: "[In the Writings] the Lord is plainly revealed in His
glorified Human to such as will see." True, 'but in the word see many
arcana are involved including the discrete degrees of sight, and the teaching 46
REV. THEODORE PITCAIRN that
it is the Lord alone who sees in man and that man. cannot see any truth from
himself. The
review continues: "Into this revelation we are, of Dr.
Acton then adds a long section, in which he contends that the teaching given in
DE HEMELSCHE LEER that the Doctrine of the Church does not refer to the Writings
but to the Doctrine drawn from the Writings by the Church, is not true. The
Writings viewed from within are indeed the Celestial Doctrine itself, in all its
infinity. Yet this infinite Doctrine cannot be said to be the Doctrine of the
Church, for the Church knows scarcely anything about it, and doctrines that are
not known in the Church cannot be said to be the Doctrine of the Church. The
Doctrine of the Church is the Doctrine that it has drawn from the Word, and in
the 47
THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON disclosed
from the Lord, but because such continuous truth is infinite in its essence, it
cannot be seen by men; it is only that truth which the Lord
opens the eyes of the Church to see, that is actually in the Church and
can be called the Doctrine of the Church. In
the review we read: "This conclusion [namely that the doctrinals
drawn from the Writings are
so many mirrors of the Lord]
would be a logical one once it is conceded that the Writings are a letter
of the Word in which the spiritual sense is not apparent; for then the truths
revealed by the Lord through Swedenborg would most certainly be
interrupted by the thick veil of a Letter which cannot be pierced by the
gaze of the rational mind, but must be interpreted by the laws of Biblical
exegesis." There was no interruption in the giving of the Writings, nor
would any interruption be seen by a celestial The
review speaks of the gaze of the rational mind, yet man has no genuinely
rational mind until the second or spiritual degree of the mind is opened by the
Lord (see A. C. 5145). Yea, "a truly rational man is no other than he who
is called a celestial man" (A. C. 6240). A man can therefore only become
rational according as the mind is opened according to order. Dr. Acton
apparently speaks disparagingly of "the laws of Biblical exegesis" as
applied to the Writings; yet the laws of the exposition of the Word are the very
essential laws of the formation of the human mind; these were the laws by which
Swedenborg's mind was prepared for the giving of the Writings, On
page 17 we read: "As a confirmation, I might again note
the fact
that DE HEMELSCHE LEER frequently
appeals to the plain teachings of the Writings and not to their internal sense
to establish what it draws from those Writings by its mode of exegesis." Do
not the Writings do the same in regard to the Old and the New Testament? Further
on the same page we read: "By usage, the term 48 internal
or spiritual sense has come to
connote a letter more or less remote from the truth which it clothes and the
Writings are far from being such a letter." Does Dr. Acton think that the
sensual scientific man of our age can enter immediately into the celestial and
spiritual things of the Word such as they are in Heaven, by reading the
Writings, and that it is not necessary for a man to progress according to the
laws of order laid down in the Writings? Would not such progress be like taking
a fish out of water, or like a bird trying to fly into the ether? All progress
into interior things is according to discrete degrees, that is, it is according
to correspondence, for correspondence is
the only relationship
between a higher and a lower degree. On
page 18 we read: "What, for instance, could we understand as the internal
sense of those many passages where Swedenborg sets forth in rational language
the deeper That
the "fundamental truths of Christianity", as presented in the literal
sense of the Writings, have a spiritual 49
THE REVIEW BY DR. ALFRED ACTON sense
that by no means appears in the letter when viewed from without, will be shown
elsewhere, for the subject is too extensive to enter upon in this paper. On
page 19 we read: "From these passages it would On
page 21 (footnote) we read in reference to DE HEMELSCHE LEER and the Principles
of the Academy: "It cannot yet be known whether in the future they will
prove imperishable." Any one who has any spiritual light can know that the
Doctrine of the Academy that the Writings are the Word, will prove imperishable.
When the celestial New Church is
established the particulars and singulars of Doctrine will be perceived as true
or not true, wherefore it will. be seen what is imperishable down to the
minutest detail. This is what is signified by the words of the Lord: "Let
your communication be yea, yea; nay, nay: for what is more than this cometh of
evil." That
at least the general principles of DE HEMELSCHE LEER will prove imperishable, we
have no doubt. 50 for
the struggles and temptations it had to pass through in coming out of the Old
into the New. In the first states the doctrines as seen by the Church were
living truths effective for the regeneration of the Church, but after the Church
has entirely separated itself from the false doctrines and organizations of the
Old Church, the falsities and evils of the Jews, the Roman Catholics, and the
Protestants, those truths which caused the Church to separate, from these
bodies, become historical and no longer effective in the Church in its spiritual
warfare. Then if these historicals This
may be compared to the teachings of the Lord when on earth, which in their
letter were effective truths with the Apostles in the warfare with Jewish
externalism. But in later times, because the church did not realize the
application of the words of the Lord to the Christian Church, it also fell into
literalism and came to its end. That
the Lord is not enthroned in CONVENTION and CONFERENCE is manifest, for the Lord
in His Second Coming in the Writings of the New Church is denied. There are two
great miracles the Lord performs in regard to the New Church. The first was the
giving of the Writings, which is said to be greater than all miracles, the
second is the opening of the eyes of the Church to see the Divine Truth within
the Writings. As long as the Church does not acknowledge that all seeing of
truth within the Writings is a Divine miracle, and remains in the appearance
that a man can see any truth from his own mind, the Lord is not truly enthroned.
How often it is said that all good and truth are from the Lord and nothing from
man, and that all good and truth
that arise in the Church are Divine. Every doctrine must either be from the
Divine of the Lord or if not it inflows from hell, for a man can think nothing,
either true or false, that has not one of these origins, for man of himself can
think nothing. Is it not a truth that as long as a man believes that he can
think anything true from himself, the Lord remains un- |
|
