Title Unspecified       Editor       1982

Vol. CII          January, 1982          No. 1      In the sermon this month Rev. Eric Carswell writes of the mixed feelings change brings. We also have an editorial consisting of quotations from a sermon by Rev. Kurt Asplundh entitled "Making Things New." An external change you will notice this month is the new cover. More than a dozen designs were considered, and we wish to thank those who generously and cheerfully advised us.
     A change experienced widely in the church is a pastoral change. See for example in the news from Holland (p. 36) the anticipation of a new pastor. These changes require some adapting both by parishioners and by pastors, and we invite attention to a piece on this subject entitled "The Plowman Overtaking the Reaper." We have made an exception on the matter of anonymity and have agreed that the writer should be known as "one pastor."
     A theme in this issue is marriage and divorce. The article entitled "Mercy" notes that "a great and growing concern is the marital difficulties within the church." And the Schoenbergers in an open letter speak of being "concerned and saddened by the increasing number of church people whose marriages are floundering. . . ." Our contents for more than one issue will be addressed to such concerns.
     We are pleased to have a review by Richard Gladish of a grand biography of Swedenborg in January, the month of Swedenborg's birth.
     Most of us have been familiar with the word "conjugial" from our childhood. It is interesting that the defense of that word in this issue is written by Rev. Walter Orthwein, a man who joined the church in adult years and does not have that lifelong familiarity.


     We have received by air mail from Australia a copy of a new booklet by Mr. Basil Later entitled Shunning Evils As Sins. This is an excellent piece of literature, and we hope to have a review of it in the near future.



CHANGE       Rev. ERIC H. CARSWELL       1982

Behold I make all things new (Rev. 21:5).
Ye must be born again (John 3:7).
Create in me a clean heart (Psalm 51:10).

     The subject of this sermon is change. Nearly everyone reacts to the prospect of change with mixed feelings. On the one hand, some possible changes in our lives make us nervous or depressed. But on the other hand, we would also become discouraged if we could not hope for changes that would improve life in the future. Change is both feared and desired. We have been taught that the Lord is working constantly in thousands of ways to lead us to more and deeper happiness, but still we are not always optimistic. Why?
     As we think of changes there are two broad categories into which they fall. There are certain changes that go on around us, like a new job or moving to a new place, and there are changes that occur within our minds, affecting the way we react to what is happening around us. In terms of the sort of changes that occur around us, many people find that the idea of going to a new place or taking on a new job is the source of fear and doubts. On the other hand, certain aspects of our present lives may fill us with sadness, impatience or anger, and all we live for is the hope that something will happen to change the present situation. While we all have some control over the things that occur around ourselves, sometimes we may feel helpless to bring about change, or prevent some change that we do not like. This sense of helplessness may cause us to remember that the kingdom of heaven does not come from the things that are around us, but rather comes from what is within us.
     Can you think of some changes that have occurred in your life during the last year? Some of these changes may deal primarily with things around you and only indirectly with the life of your mind which will last to eternity. How are you different from what you were a year ago? Another way of asking this question is, In the eyes of the Lord, what essential changes have occurred in your life? Maybe you can think of a number of new ideas that have come to you in the past year. If these have been important, they will have affected the way that you lead your life. Maybe you have some sense of progress in fighting against the inclinations to do or think evil things that you have recognized in your regular self examination.
     But whether you sense any change or not, some have occurred in the last year, and more will take place in the coming year.


It is impossible to stand still in your spiritual nature. So long as you are making any choices at all, your eternal character is being formed. Now, does this idea fill you with dread? Hopefully it doesn't! The only thing that we have to dread is whether we have been kidding ourselves about trying to follow the Lord and doing what He teaches us in His Word. We need not dread the Lord's part in our regeneration. The Lord has seen what our quality tends to be at any point in our life, and He constantly works to lead us to a better life. We are told that if a man allows the Lord to lead him, he is led to heaven; and if he does not suffer himself to be led to heaven, the Lord works to bend him to a milder hell than he himself would strive for (AC 6489e).
     In terms of the Lord's constant upward pull on our lives, leading us to a higher state of happiness or at least to a state of less misery, the only sensible attitude toward the future is one of optimism. Do you have faith that the Lord really does see what is going on in your life and is at this very moment working to bring about changes that will affect you today, tomorrow, and to eternity? Even when the Lord's care and presence may seem remote, this faith can sustain hope for the future. Certainly if we do our part the Lord will lead us to greater happiness than we have yet known. As we face the future, do we have confidence that it will bring us more understanding, happiness, and peace? This confidence should not be considered unduly optimistic. The Lord does not ask impossible things of us before we will sense any benefit. The Lord promises us in the book The Doctrine of Life that the fight against evil inclinations is not horribly difficult for those who have not given free rein to the evils that try to flow into their thoughts and deeds. He promises us that if we will but resist an evil in our intentions once in a week or twice in a month, we will be able to perceive a change. (See Life 97.)
     Since we will be happier in the long run by following the Lord, what is it that keeps us from pursuing wholeheartedly the path to heaven? The primary idea that keeps us from this course is that we do not really believe that the future that the Lord holds out for us will be better than the life we already enjoy. We love the life that comes naturally to us. When we have nearly exhausted our patience trying to deal charitably with someone, it may seem that an eternity of this behavior would be unbearable. Fortunately, the Lord does not expect us to spend eternity doing things that we really don't want to do. The angels love to do what the Lord wants them to do. It is only those who have loved what is evil while in the world who are eternally frustrated. The wonder of the Lord's plan for us is that if we resist the part of our mind that does not want to obey Him, gradually that part of our mind will lose its attraction and finally become altogether quiet.


Then we will no longer have to force ourselves to obey the Lord; obedience is what we ourselves will desire. If we can have faith that greater happiness is truly what the Lord has in store for us, and if we can do our part in bringing it to pass, then the future will find us more greatly blessed than the past.
     As long as our life is going much as we might plan it, or at least is doing pretty well, it is not too hard to acknowledge the Lord's presence and guidance. This acknowledgment is much more difficult in times of trouble. The loss of one's job can be devastating, and so also is the tragic passing of a spouse or child into the spiritual world. While we may get some comfort from knowing that these changes are not really the will of God, but rather are permitted by Him, such events can shake our confidence in the future and even our concept of faith in God. However, if our faith in the Divine providence depends on having changes in the world around us go our way, we can benefit from having our faith challenged. The Lord's government affects every least thing in the world around us to help form our eternal character. Disappointments in our own plans can help us to remember the Lora's perspective.
     While we ourselves may become depressed by certain events in our lives, we may notice that some other people do not have this reaction. Even when life does not go as they expect, these people seem to be able to maintain a certain peace of mind even when saddened by what has occurred. We may guess that this peace of mind arises from a genuine confidence in the Lord and trust that He is working to bring some good out of all the changes that come about in our lives. The Lord's continual goal as He oversees the changes of our lives is that we should be withdrawn from evil inclinations and habits. (See DP 177.) While He does not directly desire that we should be miserable to accomplish this goal, He understands in His infinite wisdom what is necessary to bring about the needed changes in what we love. While the events around us may be the cause of pain and sad ness at times, we have the promise from the Lord that if we work to react to them with confidence in the Lord's guidance, then the life of our mind will continually progress into peace and contentment.
     Part of the mystery of the Lord's government of our lives is that it must remain invisible to us except in retrospect. If we could see or perceive the Lord's leading, either we would be bound to follow it and become little more than very complex robots, or, we are assured, we would resist its leading continually (DP 177). We would resist because the changes that this leading would bring about appear to be to our disadvantage.


Nearly everyone has been in the position of being able to say that if someone had told him a few years earlier what he would be doing in the present, he would have denied it and might even have found it laughable. Sometimes it is events beyond our control that have influenced what we are presently doing. At other times we find ourselves doing something different because our priorities have changed. We now want to do something that before we would not have. Because of changes like this, it is important that the Lord's leading is not known to us. Looking at the future from the perspective of what we love at present, it is very difficult to imagine being truly happy acting from a different motive. Our loving heavenly Father works with unimaginable care and patience to bend us slowly away from what we presently think and will, toward a new and better state of mind. His efforts are constant in trying to lead us to a better life.
     Faith in the Lord's efforts to protect and guide us is one of the fundamental beliefs of religion. The stories of the Old Testament show the Lord's constant presence and influence on the daily life of man. While His influence on our lives appears in a different manner than it did in the Old Testament, we can be assured that it is as constant and powerful. While the Lord was in the world, He clearly taught of His care for all men. He reminded us that the smallest parts of our lives are observed and directed by God. He presented this idea by saying that the very hairs of our heads are numbered. He said that not one sparrow falls without His knowing it, and assured us that we are of more value than many sparrows.
     As we look forward to the future, let us hope and pray that our faith in the Lord's love and care will increase. We can be sure that if we allow the Lord to work in our lives, there will be changes for the better in the coming months and years. If we do our part by approaching the Lord in prayer, reflecting on teachings in His Word, and seeking to bring His will into our daily lives, the future will surely be better than we have previously known. While it is true that our path toward heaven is a long and gradual one, if we work with the Lord, humbly acknowledge that it is He who will change our loves, at times we should be able to notice some change. At some point in the future we should be able to look back and clearly see that the Lord has entered more fully into our lives. The Lord promises that He will come and make all things new. The end of the book of Revelation promises, "Surely I come quickly." May we desire its words for us, "Even so come, Lord Jesus." Amen.

     LESSONS: Isaiah 1:10-20; John 3:1-15; DP 176-178 (portions)


MERCY 1982

MERCY       PATRICIA K. ROSE       1982

     We in the New Church are so fortunate to have not only the Old and New Testaments to guide and inspire us but also the Writings to infill those earlier teachings. Without the particulars that we have the privilege to learn, it is easy to misinterpret some of the Lord's teachings.
     One such subject that the Lord has infilled in the Writings is mercy. Webster defines mercy as withholding punishment; compassion for offenders; and tolerance. This is the concept of mercy we see used in the world today, and we have accustomed ourselves to that idea. But a study of the Swedenborg Concordance passages under the heading "mercy" adds a new dimension to our understanding of the subject, showing startling contrasts with each of the ideas expressed in the dictionary definition. A few quotations will show what I mean. (Emphasis has been added.)

The Lord indeed sees all and thus has mercy on all; but it is not said of any others that He has mercy on them than those who. . .are in good (AC 6851).

. . . the mercy of the Lord is toward every man who abstains from evil and wants to live in good . . . (AC 7051).

To be withdrawn from evils, to be regenerated, and thus to be saved is mercy, which is . . . mediate, that is for those who desist from evils and so admit from the Lord the truth of faith and the good of love into their life. Immediate mercy . . . is contrary to Divine order (AC 10659:4).

It was said [to one who was ignorant as to what mercy is] that there was sometimes mercy where mercy was not apparent, as for instance when one aims at the common good by punishing the evil and reducing others to order. Mercy is then exercised toward the community (SD 4346).

I spoke with spirits who thought that to be punished was against mercy; but it was said to them that it was of mercy, and of unmercifulness not to be punished . . . . The principle may be illustrated also by the case of a king who pardons the wicked and does not punish; he is guilty of more unmercifulness, for he thus tolerates the wicked in his kingdom, and increases their number (SD 442 1).

. . . the mercy of the Lord inflows with all, but is diversely received; and by those who are in evil is rejected (AC 7186:3).


[For the Lord to give mercy to those who have lived ill] is impossible because it is contrary to . . . the Divine which is order (AC 8700:2).

. . . when the Lord from love and mercy protects His own in heaven, they who are in evil are indignant and angry against the good . . . . Hence it is that they attribute wrath and anger to the Divine . . . when yet in the Divine there is nothing . . . but pure clemency and mercy (AC 8875).

That man is withheld from evil and is kept in good by the Lord is from pure mercy (AC 2412).

     To summarize these passages: The Lord's mercy is bestowed only on those who shun evils and live according to order; the evil do not seek mercy and actually reject it. From His mercy and by a great force He withholds man from evil as far as possible. The evil are punished so that the good will be protected. It appears that by allowing punishments the Lord is unmerciful but the reverse is true not to punish the evil is unmerciful. It is contrary to order for Him to give mercy to those who are living in disorder.
     The numbers in the Swedenborg Concordance under "mercy" do not describe how an individual shows mercy. But since the Lord is merciful to everyone, the way in which He shows mercy is an example for individuals as well as the church. As it is put in AC 5132, "The good of charity has [mercy] within it because it descends from the Lord's love toward the whole human race, which love is mercy* because all the human race is settled in miseries."
     * The Latin is misericordia which means misery of heart.
     AC 5480 defines mercy as "love grieving." If we combine this with the other teachings about the Lord's mercy, mercy is seen to be the charity in us grieving because someone who lives by the Lord's teachings is suffering and in misery. This, of course, does not mean that we should not grieve for those in disorder. Of course we should. But our love should long for them to have a change of heart and new way of life. TCR 428 cautions us not to have only natural compassion but spiritual, which involves making distinctions between those who should be benefitted directly and those who should not.
     With this infilled idea of mercy in mind, let's look at a particular facet of life to see how it applies.
     As reflected in the report of the latest Council of the Clergy meetings, a great and growing concern is the marital difficulties within the church. In order to exercise mercy in our relationships with others, it is important to see how the teachings of the Writings can guide us to see things in proper perspective.


     First, we may be aware of the teachings that warn us about what judgments not to make about others, without balancing this with what judgments we can make. Both aspects are presented in CL 523:

The Lord says: "Judge not, that ye be not condemned."(Matt. vii 1); by which can by no means be meant the judgment of the moral and civil life of anyone in the world, but the judgment as to his spiritual and celestial life. Who does not see that if one may not judge as to the moral life of those that dwell with him in the world, society would perish? What would society be if there were no public judgments? Or if everyone might not form his judgment of another? But to judge what his interior mind or soul is, thus what is his spiritual state and therefore his lot after death, of this one may not judge for it is known to the Lord only . . . . (See also AC 2284:3.)

Unless society condemns stealing, murder and adultery, it is encouraging them. This is easily illustrated by how readily a couple can get a divorce today free of guilt or shame compared with thirty years ago. It is even becoming more common in our church.
     Secondly, the Lord's teaching that we should forgive a sinner as often as he sins is stressed, but the equally important teaching of the Writings that it is repentance that earns forgiveness seems to be ignored. But can we tell who has repented? No, we can't be certain whether a person has repented any more than we can judge his motive. Again we must go by what appears to be the case. Since the Writings make it clear that it is impossible to wipe away evils in a moment (DP 233:5, 6), immediate forgiveness is a mistake. It deprives the person of the incentive to examine his action and motive, and repent of the evil. In fact, it encourages him to ignore it--he may feel there is no need to worry about it if society doesn't care. If the wrongdoer is given time to repent of his disorder and appears to be truly sorry by living differently, the support of friends can help him continue to progress. If the appearance is that there is no sincere regret over the disorder, we can only continue to hope for a change of attitude and behavior.
     Divine Providence 113 tells us that man must learn from sources other than himself that his lusts are evils. It is common knowledge that one who commits adultery looks on the new relationship as good and beautiful. Only through the Word and the eyes of others can the person see that even though externally it may appear beautiful, internally it can only be ugly. (See DP 318:7 and AC


Conjugial Love 307 emphasizes the need for a conjugial covenant to be entered into publicly so that when the newness of marriage wears off, a person is not easily led away from that covenant into unchaste things. ". . . to avert these transgressions, society has taken upon itself the guardianship of this covenant, and has enacted penalties against those who break it. In a word, the antenuptial covenant makes public the sacred obligations of love truly conjugial, establishes them and binds libertines [those who give rein to lusts] to obedience to them." Public pressure does serve to help us resist disorder by promising censure and punishment to violators. On the other hand, when the church performs second marriages where not justified, isn't it encouraging people to disorderly actions without the accompanying guilt? DLW 240 teaches that when a person "sees evil and fears punishment, he is able, by virtue of his freedom, to abstain from doing it." This, of course, doesn't guarantee that the person will resist the evil-he is still free to indulge in it, but society has alerted him to the consequences. This is reminiscent of the Lord's advice to Ezekiel concerning the evils of the Children of Israel: "I have made thee a watchman unto the house of Israel . . . . When I say unto the wicked, Thou shalt surely die, and thou givest him not warning, nor speakest to warn the wicked from his wicked way to save his life, the same wicked man shall die in his iniquity, but his blood will I require at thine hand. Yet if thou warn the wicked and he turn not from his wicked way, he shall die in his iniquity, but thou hast delivered thy soul." A similar warning is given concerning a righteous man who sins (Ezekiel 3:17-21).
     The internal sense in this case is not remote from the letter. "He should be instructed in the Word, which in itself is delightful. He should teach those that have the Word, and consequently are able to live according to the Divine commandments but they do not so live . . . . But that he might represent the Word, he would be guilty if he did not reveal their falsities and evils, and not guilty if he did reveal them . . . . He must not speak from himself but from the Lord" (Prophets and Psalms).
     We talk of how deplorable the divorce situation is in the church yet at the same time we are beginning to make it acceptable. Are we providing enough incentive to encourage our couples to resist divorce and remarriage?* Of course, we have to make a distinction.


When someone has broken the marriage covenant by scortation as specified in CL 468, the wronged spouse is spiritually free to remarry and should suffer no stigma from society. But two people that no longer wish to remain together because of incompatibility are not spiritually free to divorce--they can choose to live separately but should not dissolve their marriage covenant. The proper attitude to dissension within a family must be taught by the church--even a happily married couple has periods of disagreement and conflict. Young people contemplating marriage should have a clear understanding that separation rather than divorce is the orderly alternative if all efforts have failed to surmount their difficulties. Our present tolerance of divorce makes it seem a viable solution to dealing with life's problems. (A whole article could be written, of course, on what avenues a couple could pursue to try to save their marriage even from separation.)
     *A pamphlet by Rev. Bruce Rogers entitled "Marital Separation" gives a forthright review of the teachings on the subject, with sympathetic suggestions on how to apply them.
     In considering the doctrines that relate to divorce and remarriage (and other doctrines, in fact), it is vital that we think of them apart from individuals. We might be inclined to discount a particular teaching if we allow ourselves to be emotionally sympathetic toward someone who does not appear to have lived by that teaching. For example, if someone we like gets an unjustified divorce, and especially if a remarriage seems happy, we may be tempted to discount the Lord's teaching that this is not orderly. If the teaching seems harsh, we need to remind ourselves that it is eternal happiness that the Lord is lovingly directing us to, and the way to it may be paved with temporal dissatisfaction. As noted earlier, we must judge the person morally without making a spiritual judgment. (That is different from saying that we must judge the act but not the person--there is no such thing as action apart from individuals. Separating the action from the person contributes to ignoring disorder.)
     One of the attitudes in the church that I believe is destructive of our ideals is that of saying that a couple is free to get a divorce if they never had a true marriage in the first place. When discussing divorce, the Writings never say or imply that it depends on whether there was a "true" marriage. Since there are very few true marriages, that is hardly justification for divorce.
     The Lord tells us in CL 276 not only that marriage is to endure to the end of life in the world except in the case of scortation, but also that this is from Divine law. The church's service to its parishioners should be based on all of the Lord's Divine laws. It is not free to reject some laws if it is to be a true church.


If the church takes a firm stand, for example, on not performing or blessing marriages of divorced persons except in the case of just cause, it will be strengthened considerably. This gives the couple a chance to really think about the gravity of their action. If they still decide to get married, it can be done legally through other means without being sanctioned by the church.
     There is a tendency now to exercise "mercy" by excusing a person who commits adultery and allowing remarriage by the church if there appears to be repentance. Again, this is in direct disregard of the Lord's instruction. Nowhere do the Writings say or imply that even if a person is truly sorry for his adulterous disorder he can remarry. Since remarriage is not allowable for those who are incompatible, it certainly is not permissible for those who have broken the sixth commandment. We should rejoice when a person shows signs of repentance, but that does not blot out his/her disorder and entitle him to remarry. Our strength in abiding by the Lord's laws will stress to our young people the importance of making a wise choice of a married partner and working to build a good marriage.
     It is sometimes pleaded that the Writings express the ideal way to live and many do not attain that. True. But that fact in no way means that the church should lower its standards; rather, it should try to encourage those individuals and help lift them up to the Lord. If they are sincerely trying they will study the Lord's teachings, worship Him and change their lives to reflect His commandments. The church organization is to provide instruction and inspiration to lead its members to do the Lord's will and become part of the true church.
     But what about the danger of causing people to leave the church? Our goal, and especially that of our priests, should be to serve as the Lord's instrument in establishing a true church, not merely accumulating members without regard for whether they want to live by His prescribed truths. If the church sets the example of professing belief in the Writings yet in its ministrations to its people ignores some of the Lord's teachings, how can it expect its members to do otherwise? By teaching truths such as in Conjugial Love but acting contrary to them, the church separates faith from charity, a practice it at the same time condemns. Ironically, the Catholic church is setting a good example by firmly upholding its ideals in the race of today's pressures.
     Surely our concept of mercy needs to be re-examined. Although the emphasis here has been on the disorder of unjustified remarriage, the principles are just as applicable to all disorders, great and small.


All of us, and our ministers especially, must be watchmen so that those who are tempted to commit evil or are already indulging in it can be helped to see that it is wrong. Watchmen should, of course, guard what is their own responsibility: parents their children; a school its students; a pastor his flock; employers their employees and vice versa; etc. We certainly are not to seek out everyone who doesn't live as we think he should so we can set him straight. But as a part of the "public," each of us has a responsibility to uphold the Lord's principles. Those who tend to be critical of the church or individuals for upholding the Lord's concept of mercy are actually critical of Divine laws.

     "What would society be if there were no public judgments?" Look around you and see, even within the church. At this time when the world cares less and less about open disorder, we in the New Church should fight it with renewed dedication and determination. "Adultery, the love of ruling, and deceit will be especially shunned by those who will be of the New Jerusalem" (SD 6053). There is evidence of all three in our church. Are we satisfied to live peaceably with adultery, dominion and deceit? Or do we want to be of the New Jerusalem and fight against these evils? An individual can become a true church by shunning evil and upholding good, but it is also vital that the church organization as a unit uphold the Lord's teachings as it serves its congregations. As the General Church of the New Jerusalem, let us declare our allegiance to the Lord as did Joshua, ". . . as for me and my house, we will serve the Lord" (Joshua 24:15). Let us be truly merciful.

SUGGESTIONS FROM DR. BRUSH       Editor       1982

Editor's note:
     We are indebted to Dr. James S. Brush (who is working for a year at the University of Aarhus in Denmark) for communications on the subject of divorce. Some of the contents of this issue are directly related to his suggestions, and there will probably be further useful results. Dr. Brush has deplored "the apparent wide acceptance of divorce" in a church "which believes the doctrines of CONJUGIAL LOVE to be a direct revelation from the Lord." He has urged the publication of material dealing with this. And he asks us to look directly at the issue of people "shopping around" for "a minister who will perform a disputed remarriage." How shall we prevent the situations arising if a couple finds one minister unable in conscience to perform a ceremony and is inclined to try to find a minister with another point of view? Our attention is invited to this question.




     A special vocabulary has come into use in the New Church, and it is something we all have to reckon with. Some of the words in our New Church vocabulary are not so unusual, but have taken on new, fuller meanings in the Writings (e. g. "regeneration," "correspondence," "discrete"). Other words are unique to the New Church, two outstanding examples being "conjugial" and "proprium." These are Latin words which have been used by New Church people in the belief that there is no satisfactory English equivalent.
     From the earliest days of the church, the use of the word "conjugial" has been debated. In the front of the standard green volume of Conjugial Love you'll notice the statement by the translator, Samuel Warren: "The retention of the name 'Conjugial Love' instead of 'Marriage Love' as a translation of Amor Conjugialis is at the express desire of the publishers and not according to the judgment of the translator." A more recent translation, by William Wunsch, was entitled "Marital Love."
     The General Church has historically taken a strong stand in favor of using "Conjugial Love," and has rejected suggestions that this be translated into some English phrase. Now, though, the use of "conjugial" is being questioned by scholars within the General Church, and it is proposed that we drop this Latinism and use "marriage love."
     I am not a language scholar or an expert on translation, but I will venture an opinion because I see this as more than a technical or scholarly question. The word "conjugial" is a word used, understood, and loved by most New Church people, and this, I think, is an important consideration. Some who advocate dropping the word recognize the affection we have for it and share that affection themselves, but they seem to think that this has no bearing on what is correct. They say we mustn't let affection blind us to the fact that "conjugial" is an improper usage.
     It seems to me, though, that affection has a very real and legitimate place in translation, and especially in considering how or if to translate "conjugial." The affections New Church people have bound up with the word "conjugial" are part of the meaning that word has for us . . . a very important part. This special word expresses the special idea of marriage taught in the Writings. It seems appropriate to have a new and unique word for the new, spiritual ideal of marriage.


     Some argue that Swedenborg never intended to use an unusual word, that "conjugial" is a perfectly well known Latin word, a recognized form of "conjugal" and that it simply means "marriage" in no special sense. The Rev. Donald Rose, though, has noted that "conjugial" was extremely rare in Swedenborg's time, and had not been used by any other writer for at least 1,000 years. (The Roman poet Ovid, who died in 17 A. D., used the form "conjugial." I've never heard of anyone else except Swedenborg using it.)
     I appreciate the desire to make the Writings more accessible to people outside the organized New Church. It is said that people new to the church have trouble with the word "conjugial." But do they? I have not found this to be so. It is a new word, of course, but this only serves to introduce the fact that the whole concept of marriage is new in the New Church. I was talking recently with a lady who came into the church a couple of years ago, and I noticed that in our conversation she used the term "the conjugial" very naturally.
     This term, "the conjugial," by the way, seems to be a useful expression. What would replace it? The "marriage principle," perhaps? Nothing seems quite satisfactory.
     Our young people in the New Church seem to like the word "conjugial," and I believe having it helps strengthen the ideal of marriage with them. The Rev. Ormond Odhner noted that they might "talk less about 'finding a marriage partner,' 'a married partner,' 'a marital partner,' than they now talk about 'finding a conjugial partner. Would that be a good thing, or not?" he asked. (NEW CHURCH LIFE, July 1979, p. 323)
     I suppose it could be said that such an advantage has nothing to do with whether "conjugial" is a proper usage linguistically, but in this case I think it is an important consideration. Isn't one of the reasons given for dropping "conjugial" that it would be more convenient for newcomers to the church? Why, then, shouldn't its advantage for those in the church be given weight too?
     In some special circumstances where it would be awkward or confusing to use "conjugial," there's nothing to stop us from using "marriage love" in that particular instance. For example, in several newspaper columns I wrote about marriage, I didn't want to take the space to explain the word "conjugial" and it was unnecessary to introduce it, so I simply used "marriage love." If on a pamphlet aimed especially at people outside the church it was considered best not to complicate things by using "conjugial," well, then, use "marriage" for that particular use.


     It isn't an either/or proposition. We can retain the use of "conjugial" in the church and still use "marriage" when that seems best suited for certain occasions. We can accommodate without abandoning "conjugial" altogether.
     It has been pointed out that "conjugial" isn't a translation, isn't an English word. But as in the case of "proprium," no English word is really satisfactory. There is a use in the words we have borrowed from the Latin of the Writings, such as esse and existere, scientifics and cognitions. They preserve distinctions and remind us of meanings which otherwise might be lost.
     Many Christian churches use the Greek word agape rather than the English "love," when speaking of a particular kind of love. The English word "love" is too general and just doesn't convey the specific meaning of agape, since Greek has several different words for different kinds of love. This seems similar to what we have done in adopting the Latin "conjugial."
     There is always the danger of using these words of our special New Church vocabulary merely as "in" words or shibboleths without thought about what they actually mean. But the way to avoid this is to keep their meaning in mind, not drop the words.
     Swedenborg could have used the far more common word "conjugal," but he quite deliberately chose to use the rare "conjugial." Why? Why did the Lord inspire him to choose that unusual word? Certainly it was to make a distinction. This is lost if we use "marriage" or "marital" or "conjugal." There is nothing special about those words.
     There are such various ideas about marriage in the world that I doubt we are clarifying anything by using that word rather than "conjugial." It could actually be misleading to refer to "marriage love" because people would assume they knew what we meant, when in fact the whole idea of "marriage love" in the Writings is new and unknown.
     No doubt there is a danger of over-idealizing conjugial love to the point where it has: little connection with our actual lives. The Rev. Frank Rose has said that a person can tell who his "conjugial partner" is by simply looking at his marriage certificate. (NEW CHURCH LIFE, July 1979, p. 320). This provides a healthy balance to a too mystical idea of a conjugial relationship. Mr. Rose was writing about the phrase "conjugial partner," which he noted does not appear in the Writings. But as far as the concept of the conjugial itself is concerned, surely it involves much more than a certificate of marriage.


     Mr. Rose wrote: "The Latin word conjugialis is a poetic spelling of a very ordinary word describing a very well known love, the love that married partners have for each other." But the point is, I think, that the Writings do not use the "very ordinary word" in its ordinary form, but rather the poetic form. This serves to remind us that, though the word may be ordinary, what it refers to is poetic, and more than poetic, spiritual.
     There is no poetic spelling of "marriage" in English. If we adopt this ordinary word, might not this indicate that the love it refers to is . . . ordinary?
     Strictly speaking, a purely natural love between a husband and wife is not "conjugial." Yet are we to make this judgment? Aren't we to assume that our marriage is one of conjugial love? Perhaps this also is a reason why the one term is used for marriages of all kinds, even ones which interiorly examined are not conjugial.
     The joining together of evil and falsity is "conjugial" in a sense-a hellish counterpart of the conjugial of heaven-but conjugial love itself is "celestial, spiritual, holy, pure, and clean, above every other love which is from the Lord" (CL 64). This familiar quotation refers, not just to "love truly conjugial," but simply to "conjugial love."
     Do these words of CL 64 describe "marriage love" as the world understands it, and as it will understand us if we adopt that term?
     The Writings do speak of "love truly conjugial" when it is said to be "so rare at this day that it is not known what it is and scarcely that it is" (CL 58). Does this mean that it is only "love truly conjugial," and not "conjugial love," which is so rare? Is the one something special and the other just ordinary? I do not think so, as can be seen from other statements to the same effect in which just "conjugial love" is mentioned.
     For example: "After His advent, conjugial love will be raised up anew by the Lord, such as it was with the ancients; for this love is from the Lord alone and is with those who are made spiritual by Him through the Word" (CL 8 le). Note that "conjugial love" is said to be only with those who are made spiritual through the Word. This seems to make "conjugial love" (not just "love truly conjugial") something very special which had been lost and was to be restored. It is not ordinary.
     The word "love" generally means something good and noble. We may refer to "evil loves," or the things devils love, but we understand that these loves are more properly lusts. The word "love" covers a whole spectrum of meaning, but still, by itself, the word stands for something good which is the essence of the Divine.


Certainly there are kinds and degrees of "conjugial love" also, but the phrase itself stands for genuine conjugial love, which is "above every other love."
     The fact that the phrase "love truly conjugial" sometimes appears does not mean that "conjugial love" refers to something ordinary. Does the common expression "true love" mean that whenever just "love" is mentioned it must be untrue? To me the word "love" presumably means "true love," unless the context indicates otherwise, and the expression "true love" is just a way of giving emphasis. "Love" alone is a noble word and the fact that the expression "true love" also exists doesn't make "love" any less exalted.
     The purpose of the term and the book Conjugial Love was to elevate the whole concept of marriage, which had become debased. Having a special new word serves this purpose. The advantage of the word "conjugial" is that it is not used by the world today to refer to a common love which is not spiritual. But if we use "marriage love," we'll have to explain continually that we mean genuine marriage love. But what is "genuine marriage love"? The word "marriage" is so debased that this is like saying "genuine common ordinary love," or "genuine natural sensual love"-which certainly isn't what we mean!
     The word "marriage" seems to refer only to something between two people. It is hard to see how "marriage" applies to an unmarried person. But "conjugial," because it refers to a spiritual essence, does apply to those who are not yet married. They can have the "conjugial" in them even though unmarried. In fact, the Writings say that there may be conjugial love with one partner in a marriage even though not with the other (CL 226). So another disadvantage of the term "marriage love" is that it seems to exclude those who are not married, while "conjugial" includes them. It is above or prior to person. I suppose we could speak of an unmarried person possessing "true marriage love," or of one partner in a marriage having "marriage love" while the other does not, but this seems confusing.
     A distinction I think we can make, then, is between "marriage" and "conjugial." They don't mean the same thing. Marriage has more of a connotation of an actual relationship between two people, while "conjugial" refers more specifically to the essential spiritual love which is the origin of marriage and should be in it (but may not be) and which can exist in the heart of one who is looking toward marriage but is not yet married.


     I am out of my depth in any scholarly discussion of linguistics. I certainly appreciate the need for such scholarship, and I found Mr. Nemitz's article in the September LIFE interesting and illuminating. I can't disagree with the information Mr. Nemitz presented so clearly, but I'm not convinced his conclusion necessarily follows.
     One problem I have is that the experts seem to disagree. In a 1960 article, the Rev. Norbert Rogers referred to some of the same facts as Mr. Nemitz, but Mr. Rogers was explaining why "conjugial" was a good choice (NCL, July 1960, p. 300).
     "The conjugial of one man with one wife is the precious treasure of human life" (CL 457). I don't think this means the same as "the marriage of one man with one wife is the precious treasure of human life." Many people today would laugh at that, because their idea of marriage is so natural. It doesn't say "the conjugial love" of one man with one wife-if it did perhaps we could translate it as "the marriage love"-but it just says "the conjugial." This puts the focus not so much on the marriage relationship, but on a spiritual essence which is within it, called "the conjugial." It is a love, but more than a love; it is a yearning for a special kind of oneness, and the valuing of that yearning and that oneness.
     As I read through the index of Conjugial Love under "conjugial love" and then under "marriage," it seems to me that the two terms are not interchangeable. For example, we read: "Conjugial love cannot co-exist with an unchaste love of the sex. . ." (CL 44). And, "where there is no religion there is no conjugial love" (CL 239). The meaning of such passages seems to be lost or weakened if we substitute "marriage love," because it is a more inclusive term. There may well be marriage love with people who have no religion, but not conjugial love.
     It seems to me we can't go wrong by simply borrowing from the Latin and sticking with the word the Writings use. I think New Churchmen have been doing this for all these years for reasons greater than just linguistic error. "Conjugial" is an unusual word in English, and it was an unusual spelling even in Latin, but the disadvantages of this don't seem very great, and it even has some advantages.
     Discussing the appropriateness of such a term is useful in that it leads us to think about what is really meant. But whatever term we use, the doctrine is the important thing.





     The Swedenborg Epic: The Life and Works of Emanuel Swedenborg, by Cyriel Odhner Sigstedt, The Swedenborg Society, London. Cloth, pp. 444 + Foreword, Notes, References, and Appendices. Price, $12.00.

     We understood that for several years the Swedenborg Society of London has been contemplating publishing a new life of Swedenborg. But after looking for authors capable of handling so great an assignment, they decided to reissue Mrs. Sigstedt's work, originally published in 1952. After a careful re-reading of the newly-issued volume, we commend their judgment. For this biography is a tremendous accomplishment, and a thoroughly readable and accurate account of the life and works of Emanuel Swedenborg-that "mastodon of literature" in Emerson's phrase whose published works, both secular and religious, totaled, according to Dr. R. L. Tafel, one hundred and forty!
     Mrs. Sigstedt, born in Sweden, and capable not only in Swedish but also in German, Latin, and English, was well-qualified for this task. She was able to refer freely to Swedish books and periodicals, find her way about Swedish archives and royal libraries, as well as conscientiously visit Swedenborg's dwellings and places of accomplishment. These included the Swedish Diet and College of Mines, as well as old iron and copper diggings such as the famous one at Falun, where Swedenborg had to descend and examine at no little peril to himself; not to mention sites in Europe where Swedenborg researched and wrote-yes, she was the one for the job.
     The historical, economic, political and social backgrounds for this 84-year story are also well filled in; we see Swedenborg against the backdrop of his place and time; and the complex and often supercilious currents of Swedenborg's psychological environment are well assessed. The "pivotal position" of Swedenborg in the history of thought-"where the ancient and modern worlds came together" (p. ix)-is well defined.
     But let us point out a few of the many items of interest for the modern reader who-if he is like this reviewer-will find a great many things in this vast cornucopia which he did not notice before.
     First, a nice image: ". . . until the shock of atomic fission split the lethargy of this generation" there was scant concern over the origin of matter (p. 74).


     Perhaps you (like me) have supposed that Swedenborg in his job as Assessor of the College of Mines, spent a few hours around a conference table several times a month, like a modern board member for a large corporation. But no! Swedenborg, our author tells us after dredging through hundreds of volumes of Board of Mines minutes, had to go out and examine conditions in mines, settle disputes and engage in litigation; hear the stories of those who were wronged, or thought they were, and himself conduct careful human research, plus personally-with help, no doubt-testing the quality of iron and steel, and taking action if it didn't come up to standard.
     He had to deal with people. King Charles XII was a hero and a warrior king who had the sweetest way with people-his only social fault a tendency to twist buttons off your coat. But Swedenborg came to realize that it was a fortunate thing that he himself fell out of favor with the king so subtle, so powerful was his sphere of dominion-matchless in this world.
     The author here draws an interesting conclusion:

     It is especially interesting to see Swedenborg as a man of law, a dispenser of justice, because it must have been the weighing and balancing of facts and opinions which developed that wonderful instrument-his mind. Not by dreaming and musing, not by mystical speculations, but by a practical life among the problems of human beings, the exercise of justice with judgment, was this mind built up . . . . When the facts of his life are analyzed in their true chronological order, we find in all his experiences a remarkable sequence and progression (p. 101).

     And evidence is brought to light that Swedenborg did not at once renounce marriage when he learned that Emerentia Polhem preferred another; he was also a suitor at age 38 for the hand of a bishop's daughter (p. 105). But after the second young lady turned him down, he rented an apartment, hired a servant, and settled down to his life-long studies with an air of finality.
     Although Swedenborg took an active and conscientious part in government as a member of the Swedish House of Nobles, he made his various rational suggestions for fighting inflation, liquor control, and promoting the steel industry in Sweden through written papers called memorials. He was not a ready speaker, saying "I have not the gift of teaching" (p. 93). Yet-not a teacher?
     In the careful analysis of Mrs. Sigstedt, we learn that Swedenborg did not exactly originate the concept of pure and total motion creating matter, or the mathematical and mechanical underpinnings of all creation, or the idea of vortices; however, he put these elements together in new ways, and always with the fundamental thought of an infinite Creator over all (p. 74f).


     After his explorings of the physical universe in search of wisdom, he came to a break in the path, a gap beyond which lay the undiscovered country of the soul. Sigstedt puts it thus:

     He had blazed a trail, a path to faith. But this path was to lead him into the bitter valley of renunciation before it ascended the mountain peak of Faith. We shall see his course changing . . . his very ego repudiated, before he could attain the object of his quest (p. 173).

     The end of the earthly road led to a place of discernment and intuition; and his philosophical doctrines of order, series, degrees, and influx were some of the tools he fashioned and used, along with symbolic logic and the science of correspondences. Nevertheless, we find in Swedenborg not the cloudy mysticism of a Jacob Bohme but a rational structure and method still operating in supra-rational realms.
     Like any book, this one raises a few questions. We read, "The torture of the damned consists purely in their being restrained from committing evils" (p. 266). But how about being beaten, robbed and tortured by their fellows?
     Again we read, ". . . there is every evidence to show Swedenborg's complete trust in democracy . . . . dear to his heart-because of the freedom it granted-was the liberal form of government" (p. 287). But later we read of Swedenborg that his rational form of mind "ran into classical . . . molds rather than liberal channels" (p. 296). Actually, Swedenborg favored the government which bestowed the greatest degree of freedom-with-order. Certainly many of Swedenborg's followers, especially in the nineteenth century, had grave doubts about democracy because of its tendencies to excesses. Despite their mistakes, Swedenborg thought the best governments of Europe to be those of England, Holland, and Sweden, because they gave the most freedom to all classes.
     It has often been disputed whether Swedenborg believed in a New Church organization, distinct from the old, or a gradual permeation of new ideas into old forms. The quotation on page 348 speaks of his having "indulged the fond hope that the ecclesiastical establishment would, by a tranquil, gradual illumination, assume the form of his New Church." This seems to combine the apparent opposites.


     Mrs. Sigstedt leans heavily on the work of Rudolph L. Tafel, especially in his Documents and credits him but nowhere mentions the Rev. William H. Benade, the American gad-fly who first saw the need and stung Convention and Conference into supporting the work of preserving and recovering Swedenborg's unpublished manuscripts. It was he who picked Tafel out of his St. Louis university--whose uncle had begun the work-and raised funds and agitated for the years between 1866 and 1871 until the work was largely done. Our author also puts John Clowes down as a non-separatist. But Clowes himself did not dispute the need to establish a New Church organization-his concern was with the when and the how. He himself was established in a life-incumbency in the St. John's Church of South Manchester, an agreement he accepted when he became its rector-according to the Rev. Samuel Beswick, who claimed to have heard it from Clowes' own parishioners.
     There is, as they say on TV, much, much more to learn, enjoy, and comment on in this fine work. Those of you who read it when it first came out in 1952, try it again-you'll find much you'll be glad to be reminded of. Newcomers, congratulations on the opportunity that lies within these pages.


     [This is a very human selection from the letters of Bishop W. H. Benade to Horace P. Chandler, the Boston publisher. It starts with some mild humor and word-play, then becomes serious with a statement of Benade's conviction of what a New Church magazine should be, and closes with a few words showing concern for, and close knowledge of, Chandler's family relationships. At this time Chandler was a member of the editorial staff of the New-Church Magazine, and had tentatively offered Benade the editorship.]

     Pittsburgh, Nov. 11, 1874
     It is very cheerful to know that you expect your head to "quite clear". . . . All right, my boy, I shall now look forward to your seeing many things in a new light--and you evidently need new light, although you have brought photos from the Holy Land [word-play on photos, meaning "light" in Greek]. Your promise is very like that of the old fellow with his "choice brandy"-"Come to my house-I've got some magnificent old Cognac."-"There, my boy, smell that!"


     About the Mag . . . . I have been thinking "sum" about the editorial business. There is a need for a Mag., and therefore a use-and never like to go out of the way of a use, if I ca n possibly do anything to promote it. I wish you could find some one better fitted to do this work, but if you insist on putting the question-I will say that I will undertake it-on certain conditions:
     1. (to begin in the material plane) That you include in your estimate of the cost of publication a reasonable salary for the Editor. I cannot afford to work for nothing, any more than you can . . . . My "professional and other duties" are quite as exhaustive of my time as are those of other folks-and far less remunerative. People are liberal in asking our opinions and advice, but they keep the fees in their own pockets. . . .
     2. That the Monthly be changed to a Quarterly. . . .
     3. That with this change, the whole tone, drift, and animus of the Mag. be changed. That the Mag. cease to be Swedenborgian and become New Church. That it place itself squarely and firmly upon the ground of the New Dispensation, as a living dispensation of truth and good, and not as a Swedenborgian dispensation. That all articles published in it be written from this standpoint; and that none be admitted which are not so written, or which imply a question of this, or the possibility of establishing any thing for the New Age as true~ and worthy of acceptance on any other ground. You see the position. I will have nothing to do with editing any of B's infernal nonsense about the Church, the Ministry, etc., or of P's thoughts about "Swedenborg's Truths," or of D's superficialities on the subject of sacrifice, and "sich." If you will consent to my conditions--and you know me well enough that I mean all I say, I will consent to do my best. Otherwise not. So put these things into your pipe and puff. . . .
     Give my love to Grace and the papooses. Best regards to your Father and Mother. I am glad for your Mother's sake that she will be relieved from the cares of her house, and hope that your father will manage to make himself comfortable. I feel just now as if I'd like to sit down for a good talk with him-and you-provided you'd keep silent.
     Yours as ever,
          W. H. Benade

     [This is the way Benade always signed himself never by a nickname or just a first name. He kept the older man's dignity despite the easy familiarity of tone. P.S.-Benade didn't get the editorship. RRG]




     (Amos 9:13)

     When a new pastor comes to a society, and after the genuine goodwill welcome and accommodation, and reassurances of "we'll see how this pastor does things" have settled down to the crunch of the new pastor actually doing it his own way, a number of alternatives present themselves. The custom is, of course, not to make any drastic changes during the first year of one's new pastorate, so as not to upset anything genuine. However, by following the mold of the previous pastor, one may end up doing things in a way which does not "fit" one's own enlightenment.
     Taken for granted, there is charity and innocence. The new Pastor's Council is very cooperative in pointing out "Well, Rev. So-and-so used to do this, or used to do it that way," leaving the new pastor obliged to agree, "Well, I can certainly see why he did it that way," but in his mind wondering, "Do I want to do it that way at all?"
     The basic problem of applying ideas to practical situations is very salubrious and healthy, whatever the solution. It is a learning process, in which new food is given, or spiritual food is given in a new way. The members of the congregation who have "bees in their bonnets," put there by previous pastors, provide the greatest challenge. Should the pastor say bluntly: "Well he ain't here anymore, but I am!"? No, but he could say, "Well, I'd like at least to try it for a while. And as long as everyone sees that there are spiritual reasons for it, it will be fine."
     And that's the crux of the whole change-over: to do something because the Lord teaches it. The New Church is to have no external separated from the internal (see AR 918). That means that all the habits and traditions of a previous pastor can sail out the window with the greatest of all possible ease, provided there is a spiritual reason for change. Granted, there should be no change for the sake of change.
     Every pastor admires and learns from his colleagues. But no pastor can fit into the mold of any other pastor. Only the "office" is in some measure interchangeable. But the person filling the office? Never.
     What does a new pastor love? He loves the members who, with open eyes, look for new opportunities, and look to the new pastor for small changes, which will clearly be improvements; and with a dash of "heck with the past."


     No previous pastor is really maligned by such changes. He was the plowman and sower. Now it's the harvester or reaper's turn.
     Former pastors know all this. They rejoice in the progress and change that follows their move from a former society (quelling the impulse to say, 'Well they finally did what I was trying to get them to do, silly so-and-sos'). And new pastor A knows that former pastor B rejoices in A's progress, while also A rejoices that B is doing so well after C left, and so is C, and so forth.
     So over all, it's fun doing the Lord's work. There is cooperation galore, with more to spare. Let's just keep in mind that the "former ways" should not be quoted to the new pastor after one year in office. That would sorely tempt the new pastor to blast off a sermon to active states (not that he would ever succumb, mind you).
     And the end result, as Amos prophesies, is an abundance of paradise.
          One Pastor

ADVICE ON MARRIAGE       Polly and Paul Schoenberger       1982

Dear Friends,
     Over the past few years, we have become concerned and saddened by the increasing number of church people whose marriages are floundering into separation or ending in divorce. We personally have derived strength in our own relationship not only from the Word and our ministers but also from practical hits of advice passed on to us by our friends and relatives. We began to wonder if these common sense tidbits, these "marriage maxims" we all keep in the back of our minds, might not be gathered and printed in some useful form. Certainly something as basic as "Never go to sleep angry" has its deep roots in Divine Revelation; but its simplicity and directness might provide more help to a young, newly married couple or a couple beginning to experience difficulties, than a number in the Writings.
     What we hope to do, then, is provide an adjunct to the wonderful truths of the Word from the layman's point of view. And this is where you come in. If you wish, would you write down and mail us the best advice you would give to people contemplating marriage? (Here's your chance!)


     When asked this question recently, a wife immediately replied, "I always remember what my mother told me. She said to go on the assumption at all times that your husband loves you and has your best interests at heart. When he says things that hurt you, remind yourself that he really does love you, and that he probably has had a bad day at work or isn't feeling well, and that, therefore, his anger isn't really directed at you." Sounds simple, doesn't it? But we're always amazed at the number of tense times that don't turn into full-scale arguments because this sort of reminder is softly repeated in the back of one of our minds.
     If you feel that there is a problem with regard to marriage in the church, and you also feel that you might have something to offer, read on. We plan to publish these responses anonymously, although we thought it might be interesting and possibly helpful to note whether it is a wife or a husband speaking, his or her age, the number of years married, and the number of children. But including that information, likewise responding to this letter, is optional, of course.
     The woman's advice given above is the sort of thing we're looking for: specific, practical, and short. Whatever has given you strength in your marriage will be useful, we re sure, whether it be advice from another source, reading a specific section of the Word, or something you, or you and your partner, have devised on your own. If you feel that what you want to say will be repeated by many others, go ahead and send it in anyway. The fact that it is repeated says something to us all.
     We hope that you will reply and help us in this effort. Be assured that the last thing we're trying to do is pry into the beautiful, but personal, marriage relationship; but rather we're hoping to glean from you those ideas that have helped you achieve that relationship. Also, we are not trying to take over the ministers' job, but rather to approach a problem from a different tack. Lastly, thank you for your time, and we encourage you to send us your response as soon as possible. Thanks again!
     Polly and Paul Schoenberger,
          7433 Ben Hur Street, Pittsburgh, PA 15208


     The Directory of the General Church appeared last month (pages 629-639). Next month we will publish again the full list of places of worship.




     Reflections on a Dedication

"The Lord keep your going out and your coming in from this time forth and even forevermore."

     With this simple but moving blessing, Bishop King closed the Word and formally dedicated a new building, opening the doors to a new way of life for all retired New Church men and women everywhere. Cairnwood Village, a long-time dream for many, had become a reality.          
"That a house may be built, the materials must be provided, and the foundations laid, and the walls erected; and so finally, it is inhabited. The good of a house is the dwelling in it" (Char. 129).

     As the formal dedication ceremonies began on October 9, 1981, Charter Day, I was reminded that it had been exactly one year ago on Charter Day, 1980, that Bishop King had turned the first shovel of dirt for the construction of Cairnwood Village, less than one hundred feet from the spot where the building now stands, all but completed. Most of the same people were there, joined by many more who had come to see.
     Following readings from the Sacred Scriptures and the Heavenly Doctrines, Cairnwood Village president Bill Zeitz presented Bishop King with a brass key as a symbol that this village would "serve as a retirement home for those men and women who loved and supported the uses of the New Church." The Bishop responded on behalf of the General Church, "acknowledging that it [the village]" has been set aside for the spiritual and natural uses which come together in a distinctive New Church retirement home. May it serve as an instrument in the Lord's hands to promote the growth of His specific church among men. And may all who dwell here worship the visible God, the Lord Jesus Christ in spirit and in truth." The Bishop placed his hand upon the open Word and pronounced the following dedication:

     "And now in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and in the presence of this assembly that has labored so diligently in preparing this place for its distinctive use, I do dedicate this retirement home, recognizing this repository and copy of the Word as the center of its worship and life. May the Lord's blessing be upon all those who live and worship here, and may they find in the uses to which these premises have been dedicated, their exceeding great reward."


     I thought of the many years of patience; the countless hours of volunteer time and talents; the exhaustive research and expert planning; the watchful concern and selfless devotion to the fulfillment of a need for a continued life of independence and freedom with a sense of peace and security. These were the things that built Cairnwood Village and would be known and cherished by those who soon would call this their home. The good of this home surely would be the dwelling in it.
     Following the service, in the beautiful dining room with its tall windows and open beams, visitors moved along freshly painted halls and were treated to a tour of one- and two-bedroom sample apartments. These sample apartments were specially furnished for this occasion. Many expressed surprise at the large closets and ample kitchen cupboards. Others noted the sprinkler systems and twenty-four hour call buttons placed in strategic locations for security. I enjoyed the view of the fields and woods from the privacy of each patio or balcony, and thought how nice it would be to relax there with a good book on a warm summer evening. It was particularly enjoyable to see the large commons area for gatherings, a library and a small area, perhaps for a residents' convenience shop. Every detail had been planned for privacy, personal security and comfort.
     The first phase of Cairnwood Village is almost complete. By December residents began to move in and experience a new and independent way of life. It is these pioneers who will soon fill Cairnwood Village and give it the life intended by those who never once refused to give up a dream.
     It is more than twenty years before I will be eligible for residency at Cairnwood Village. Yet, when that time comes, my generation will owe a great debt of gratitude to those who have given it life. Thank you in advance for this special heritage.

     Note: All baptized New Church members of any recognized New Church organization are welcome to apply for residence in Cairnwood Village. For further information write Cairnwood Village, Box 303, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009.



DIVORCE IN THE NEW CHURCH       Editor       1982


     Editorial Pages

     The title of this editorial is a pain to read. To some of us a phrase like that is almost a contradiction in terms. This is not a pleasant subject to talk about, but regardless of how much we are talking about it these days it is weighing on our minds, and it is heavy on our hearts.
     Are the clergy paying attention to this matter? Just look at two pages in our issue of last August. Addressing the ministers the Bishop spoke of "growing concern in the church, by both priests and laymen, over the increase in divorces and separations." More than one minister suggested that the subject of divorce and separation is "perhaps even the most important issue facing us" (pp. 414, 415).
     It is gratifying to see attention in doctrinal classes being given to the teachings bearing on this subject. This month and next month we will be inviting you to reflection and reading about it.
     What is the statistical picture? In 1972 a writer in NEW CHURCH LIFE suggested that the divorce rate within the church might be comparable to that outside it (p. 474) and powerfully presented the "paramount importance" of the teachings concerning divorce being "re-emphasized to the members of the church as a whole." An attempt is now being made to find out what our divorce rate is, and we expect to publish information on this later this year.
     Your attention is invited to a pamphlet entitled "Marital Separation" available now from the General Church Book Center. A review of this clear presentation by Rev. Bruce Rogers will appear in our next issue. Hopefully you will have read it by then. Its opening sentence is: "We have seen in the twentieth century a growing public tolerance and even approval of divorce."
     As you try to understand this subject in your own mind remember two points from the Writings. The first is that no matter how clever you are you cannot view this subject wisely unless your thoughts have a "stable point" for a foundation. That stable point is the picture of conjugial love as first given by the Lord and as intended by Him (see CL 57). The second point is that the human mind has a way of twisting and faltering as it enters into this subject. It is vulnerable first to an ambiguous attitude and finally to what the Writings call "affirmative-negative."


To guard against this the Writings speak of certain clear and beautiful knowledges which "serve the understanding as an introduction to its reasonings."
     What are those knowledges? They are, "That there is a love truly conjugial; that this love is not possible except between two; that neither is it possible between two except from the Lord alone; and that on this love is inscribed heaven with all its felicities." (See CL 332 and the several headings which demonstrate this.)
     We will be recommending some reading, and we will be willing to help people obtain the things we recommend. We will be recommending two editorials by the late W. Cairns Henderson. Fortunately these are both included in the book of his selected editorials, and that book is available.
     For the moment we would mention one sermon in particular. Some sermons, for some reason, stay in the memory. How vividly I remember a sermon I heard in the Bryn Athyn cathedral more than a dozen years ago. The text was "What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." Among the helpful things in this sermon by Rev. Dandridge Pendleton is real food for thought on what our reactions should be when we see others in marital disorder. Fortunately the sermon found its way into the LIFE in 1979(p. 491), and if you have difficulty finding it you can write to us.


     Last October Rev. Kurt Asplundh preached a sermon in the Bryn Athyn cathedral under the following text: "No man also having drunk old wine straight way desireth new: for he saith, The old is better"(Luke 5:39).
     This sermon is available from the Sound Recording Committee. We have chosen certain paragraphs from it to fashion an editorial for the new year. This is by no means a fair summary of the sermon. It is but one of its points taken from its context.

     We are inclined to say, 'the old is better.' And instead of examining and judging what we hold to be true, or what the church teaches as true, we close our minds to new truths. We are inclined to think from old prejudices and traditional viewpoints rather than from the perspective of new spiritual principles revealed by the Lord.

     It is a principle of the Divine mercy that changes in man's holy states of worship, especially those inseminated in anyone from infancy, must be made with "a gentle and kindly bending" (AC 1992:4).


The Lord never breaks, but bends these states successively over a period of time.

     It is generally true that old wine is better than new. That which has aged is usually preferable to what is newly bottled. A vintage year is prized for its more delicate flavor and smoothness. Symbolically, an old wine would suggest time-tried principles of life which have proven effective. Does not experience prove to be a good teacher? In matters of moral or civil life this is true, perhaps, but not necessarily in matters of the spirit.

     Thee truths the Lord provides His church are not merely human principles shaped by long experience into acceptable and workable patterns to serve our natural life. They are Divine principles, laws of order revealed by the Creator of all order both spiritual and natural. As such, they are discretely superior to man's best thought. They are a new wine without compare. And if they are to be received we must furnish new bottles, fresh and flexible external forms of thought and action in which they can be accommodated.

     One of the qualities of the New Church would seem to be a pliable and yielding external form rather than a rigid one. Thee application of truth in our life is not as in the days of Moses, by strict obedience to external requirement. Nor will it be, as in the Christian era, a non-discriminating charity, flawed perhaps with merit and hypocrisy. Let it be, instead, an enlightened and rational application of internal dictate to the ever-changing states and situations of life. This should not be taken to mean a religious life without standards or stability, but one in which the unchanging internal principles of truth may be implemented with judgment and justice.

     We know how slowly we come to accept a new idea when we have long been convinced of an old one, particularly if that new way of thinking challenges our loves and our way of life. We resist the change.

     A great responsibility lies before us as individuals and as a church organization. As individuals we must allow the influx of new truth to stimulate a new response to life in us. We must be ready to change where change is called for even when our inclination is to resist. As a church organization, we must make every effort to form our structure, our uses and our life according to the dictates of the truth newly revealed for the New Church. We must be free to allow the Lord to shape us into an instrument of use in His hands and for the promotions of His ends.




Dear Editor,
     On a trip around the world in the summer of 1981 I took along a copy of Divine Love and Wisdom--the most profound exposition of creation and the nature of infinite and finite matter extant. In my hotel in Delhi I found not only a Bible but also a book called the Holy Geeta. The text of this book was written some twenty-five centuries ago and is recognized as one of the great philosophical treasures of mankind. Aldous Huxley has written that the "Bhagavad-Geeta is perhaps the most systematic spiritual statement of the perennial philosophy." As a Swedenborgian I believe its insights derive from the Most Ancient and Ancient churches, which in the passage of time underwent some perversions. In the hope that some readers of NEW CHURCH LIFE might like to compare the teachings found in DLW and the Geeta regarding the nature of creation and matter, the following brief comparison is offered.
     Basically, DLW declares that the Infinite Creator made the universe by finiting Himself. DLW also asserts that the Infinite's Esse is Love or substance itself and that its form or Existere is Wisdom. DLW further asserts that in God-Man infinite things are one distinctly. It also avers that God is the only Man and that human beings, made in His image and likeness, are recipients of life but do not have life in themselves. It further states that matter, although derived from the Infinite Divine, is inert and has no life in itself.
     The Divine, apart from space, fills all spaces of the universe and is in all time, apart from time. Finally, the Divine, in things greatest and least, is the same.
     The fundamental difference between DLW and various Hindi faiths is the belief that the Infinite Divine is within all matter. This is implicit in the concept of reincarnation and the need for the human soul to escape from its entanglement with the created universe and return to a reunion with the Divine Self. Yet this admixture is not always clearly stated as the following dicta by Lord Krishna indicated.* (4) All this world is pervaded by me in my unmanifest form (aspect). All beings exist in me, but I do not dwell in them. (5) Nor do beings exist in me-behold my divine yoga supporting all beings, but not dwelling in them. I am myself the "efficient cause" of all beings. (17) I am the father of this world, the mother, the supporter and the grandsire, the one thing to be known. (3)


He, who amongst mortals, knows me as unborn and beginning less, as the great lord of the worlds, is undeluded and is liberated from all sins. (8) I am the source of all; from me everything evolves. (20) I am the self, seated in the hearts of all beings; I am the beginning, the middle and also the end of all beings. (Note the similarity with "I am the Alpha and Omega, the first and the last.")
     * From the Holy Geeta, with commentary by Swami Chinmayononda, published by central Chinmaya Mission Trust, Bombay, India.
     Subsequently the Geeta talks about the path of individual souls passing through many reincarnations. (55) By devotion he knows me in essence, what and who I am. Then, having known Me in my essence, he forthwith enters into the supreme. Then, to quote the Swami, "The misconception that he is an individual ends, and he, rediscovered, becomes or awakens to the infinite Brahman-hood, the state of Krishna-consciousness."
     Currently, there are some 700 million Indians who subscribe to one or another version of the Geeta. There are close to 500 million Bhuddists who also believe the general philosophy just described. The system is one of pantheism and not religion in the Christian sense. Christ once said to His disciples, "The harvest is plentiful but the laborers are few; pray therefore the Lord of the harvest to send out laborers into His harvest." How can we reach the harvest of the devotees of the Geeta?
     By preparing men who can discern its wisdom, despite its perversions, and gently point out its errors. In particular the fallacy of reincarnation must be addressed, and its destructive implications understood. DLW points the way. Man is a recipient of life and has no spark of divinity within himself. Man's individuality comes about by the differentiated material receptacle into which the Divine life inflows at his conception. The closer man comes to the Divine the greater is the delight in his apparent self-life sustained by his realization that all of his life is made possible by the inflowing Divine into the receptacle of his finite being. Thus man does not lose himself in the Divine consciousness, but instead is conjoined to, but separate from his Divine Creator. For, after all, the purpose of creation is a heaven from the human race, so that the Lord could love and be loved by creatures outside, not inside Himself.
          Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania


Church News 1982

Church News       Various       1982


     It has been quite a while since news of the San Francisco Bay Area circle has appeared in these pages. But we have been active, joyfully welcoming new friends and members, but sadly bidding farewell to those who departed to other locations and endeavors.
     Three families, however, did return after a few years' absence. Tom and Mary Aye returned in October 1980, after two years in Glenview where they helped construct and "get on the air" the Midwestern Academy's radio station, WMWA-FM. The Jonathan Cranches, who had lived in the Boston area, moved back to their home in Palo Alto, as did the Walter Cranches, who had lived in Glenview for several years. Now we regret that Walt and Janelle will be leaving at the end of November to make their home in Durban, South Africa. We will sorely miss them and their strong support given to all. We are sorry to lose another couple-Douglas and Jennifer Johnson-who with their three young sons have moved to San Diego. There are many friends awaiting their arrival in that southern city. We know Doug and Jenn will be happy there.
     Among the new arrivals are two new babies born last month: one, a son, Jason, to Chris and Joanne Ebert, and the third son for Doug and Jenn Johnson, named Mark, who came just before their move to San Diego. We also have newlyweds in the area. It is a joy to have Stuart and Stacy Pendleton living in Walnut Creek, close enough to see frequently. In addition, Phoenix lost Bob and Merrily Evans and their five children and we are indeed happy that they chose to move to San Jose. The Pittsburgh society is not quite so "Joy-ous" since Joy Gladish moved to the Bay Area. We are indeed happy these people decided to help swell our ranks.
     Through the many years of the San Francisco circle, the pastors were shared with the Los Angeles church-Revs. Harold Cranch, Larry Soneson, Norman Reuter, Geoffrey Howard, David Simons and Cedric King. Under these fine men, we grew spiritually, and their loving guidance created a lasting bond of affection we feel for each of them.
     Through these years our Sunday school grew, which partly necessitated our making two moves from our house of worship in order to gain larger accommodations for our growing needs. This growth and the prospects for further growth gave us reason for serious thought and planning. Earlier this year, we took the giant step! We asked Bishop King for a full-time pastor. That request was granted, and in his wisdom, Bishop King chose Rev. Wendel R. Barnett to serve as our minister. We felt we had "come of age."
     A search committee was promptly formed to find a parsonage. Moving with persistent diligence, we found one in San Jose. The Women's Guild planned a welcoming party, a barbeque, and in July we welcomed our new resident minister, Wendel, his lovely wife Gwen and their young family, Chandra, Benjamin and Michael.
     The search committee, also with great alacrity, located a temporary place of worship, suitable for our needs until we can locate permanently. Now we are on our way to being the "fastest growing circle in the church," for we have an average Sunday worship attendance of 30 adults and 20 children, as well as an average of 18 at doctrinal class. Our subject of study this year in these classes is Rev. Barnett's dissertation "Actual Repentance." Our classes are most inspiring and instructional, giving us all a new understanding of the subject which we can take unto ourselves and apply to everyday living.


     The San Francisco circle and Bay area have much to offer friends and visitors. We look forward to seeing you and extend a standing invitation to all who might be passing this way to get in touch with us. You might find that you would love to live here! We shall welcome you with open arms.


     With apologies for the long silence from this country, we like to give a general outline of what happened in the Dutch circle during the past years.
     Having no permanent pastor living in Holland, we are very happy to welcome every two or three months the pastor of England. It is very much appreciated that in this way we have the opportunity to attend Divine worship and doctrinal classes regularly.
     Since November 1972 we have been "served" by Rev. Erik E. Sandstrom, who-as we regret-left for Australia this summer. His kindness and friendship will long be remembered. We all wish him and his family a very good start in the new surroundings.

General outline of events since 1972:
     November '72-baptism (Rev. Sandstrom's first visit); '73-four visits; '74-four visits; June '74-3 baptisms; '75-four visits; February '75-baptism; September '75-new orders of service; '76-four visits; Bishop King's visit July '76; '77-five visits; September '77-request for longer visits and for minister to learn Dutch; October '77-baptism; '78 five visits; Rev. Boyesen visit in August '78; October '78-first sermon delivered in Dutch; October '78-departure of Adri and Mieke Braam for Canada. '79-six visits; July '79-confirmation; September '79-baptism. Need for missionary work discussed, longer visits; first 3-day visit September '79,' visits to isolated members, those in special need, missionary meetings with; young people, preparation and translation of pamphlets; '80-five visits (3-day); May '80-Mr. Weimer could attend; September '80-missionary pamphlets ready, start missionary work.
     We now look forward to meeting our new visiting pastor, Rev. Robert McMaster, to whom we wish also from this place a very warm welcome.
     Finally, we send best wishes to members and friends of the General Church all over the world from this country where so many a New Church edition saw its first daylight in printing.
     Ed Verschoor,
          Nijkerk, Holland.


     As with regard to heaven, so with regard to hell, man has only a very general idea which is so obscure that it is almost none at all. It is such as they who have not been beyond their huts in the woods may have of the earth. They know nothing of its empires and kingdoms, still less of its forms of government, of its societies, or of the life in the societies. Until they know these things they can have but the most general notion of the earth, so general as to be almost none. The case is the same in regard to people's ideas about heaven and hell. Arcana Coelestia 692





     General Church of the New Jerusalem
     The annual meetings of the Council of the Clergy and of the Board of Directors of the General Church have been scheduled to take place in the week of March 8th to the 13th, 1982, at Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania.

ORDINATIONS              1982

     Odhner-At Lake Helen, Florida, November 22, 1981, the Rev. John D. Odhner into the second degree of the priesthood, the Rt. Rev. Louis B. King officiating.

     Synnestvedt-At Atlanta, Georgia, November 8, 1981, the Rev. Louis Daniel Synnestvedt into the second degree of the priesthood, the Rt. Rev. Louis B. King officiating.

ACADEMY SUMMER CAMP 1982              1982

     The Academy Summer Camp will again be held in Bryn Athyn this year. It will run from Saturday, June 26th, through Saturday morning, July 3rd, 1982.
     We hope to send information on this camp to all interested young people presently in the 8th and 9th grades. In the past we have occasionally missed someone and therefore would appreciate hearing from you if you have any children in that age group not at present in New Church schools. If you would also include names and grade levels of other children in your family it will help us in future years. Please write to: ANC Development Office, P.O. Box 278, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009.
     This camp has been quite popular with the young people who have attended and we now have some of the first "campers" in the secondary schools' dormitories. We feel that adjustment is made easier on many students who have spent some time here at the camp and have made friends with local students and other potential ANC students prior to attending the Academy.


     The first California District Assembly of the General Church of the New Jerusalem will be held June 17-20, 1982, in the San Diego area, Bishop Louis B. King presiding. All members and friends of the General Church are cordially invited to attend. For information please contact the Rev. Cedric King, 7911 Canary Way, San Diego, CA 92123.


JANUARY 29, 1688 1982

JANUARY 29, 1688              1982

MARCH 29, 19772

May we suggest the following books:

     Swedenborg, Life and Teaching, Trobridge      Rexine     $4.00
                              Paper          1.95
Swedenborg Epic, Sigstedt                         12.00
Swedenborg's Preparation, Acton                    1.60
Swedenborg as a Physical Scientist, Dingle               1.60
Swedenborg and Ideas of the Universe, Gardiner          2.30
Swedenborg's Search for the Soul, Gardiner               1.60
Letters and Memorials of Swedenborg, Acton
                         Two volume set     8.00

Illustrated Life of Swedenborg, Bogg               1.40
The Happy Isles, Sutton                         3.25
Swedenborg, Servant of the Lord, Odhner               3.50
                                        Please add postage

GENERAL CHURCH           Hours 8 to 12
BOOK CENTER               Monday thru Friday
BRYN ATHYN               Phone: (215) 947-3920
PA 19009


Notes on This Issue 1982

Notes on This Issue       Editor       1982

New Church Life
Vol. CII           February, 1982               No. 2


Rev. Donald L. Rose, Editor           Mr. L. E. Gyllenhaal, Business Manager

     Second-class postage paid at Bryn Athyn, PA


     In this issue Rev. Geoffrey Howard points out that the fury of the hells is bent upon the destruction of marriage. It was in order that we might have such warning that Swedenborg was permitted to perceive from hell a sphere, or a kind of unceasing endeavor to dissolve marriages (HH 384). And yet, do our young people, as Mr. Howard suggests, sometimes "enter marriage naively expecting to receive the fruits of conjugial love in unbounding plenitude"?
     We may well need more direct teaching on the subject of marriage. Your attention is called to a series of four doctrinal classes now available from the Sound Recording Committee. They are classes given by Rev. Kurt Asplundh on the promise of conjugial love. The titles are: 1) Preparation for the Ideal. 2) Building and Strengthening the Marriage. 3) Threats to Marriage. 4) Preserving Marriage. The Sound Recording Committee's code numbers on these are 20AS67-106-109.
     Rev. Asplundh's sermon in this issue presents teachings on the masculine and the feminine, and the implications of such teachings in education are taken up in some reflections by Rev. Willard Heinrichs, who asks us to think further on some of the passages with particular attention to the relationship of the heart and lungs.
     The letter "i" in "conjugial" (or in the Latin conugialis) has given rise to considerable discussion in the pages of this magazine. See the list of key references at the end of Dr. Odhner's scholarly article. This subject received much attention over a period of years in NEW CHURCH LIFE three quarters of a century ago. If your interest is enkindled by recent discussion, consult the NEW CHURCH LIFE index under "Translation."
     The book of selected editorials by Rev. Cairns Henderson, mentioned twice in this issue, is advertised on page 88.

DANGER TO MARRIAGES              1982

     A chapter in Heaven and Hell says of certain evil spirits, "Nothing is more delightful to them than to break up, marriages" (HH 488).




     The woman shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment: for all that do so are abominations unto the Lord thy God. (Deut. 22:5)

     The Jews had a number of rules and regulations governing every aspect of their lives, external as well as religious. An example of this is the law that a woman should not wear the garment of a man, nor a man the garment of' a woman. Why, we may ask, would the Lord include such a minor and seemingly unimportant law among His commandments? The reason for this can be found in the fact that the Jewish Church was what the Writings call a "representative" church. That is, the internal things of heaven and the church were represented by the external laws of that church. "Every one can see that the statutes [of the Jews] contain within them secret things of heaven. . . ." We read, "Apart from such secret things they would be merely civil and public laws like the laws of other nations on earth. . . ." (AC 8974).
     The Writings teach further that Christians are not bound to observe or literally keep many of these Mosaic laws. They have been abrogated or canceled by the Lord as to their external observance because their internal significance has now been revealed (AC 8972:2).
     Two things should immediately be made clear: First, not all the laws of the Word have been canceled. The commandments which are laws of life, such as the commandments of the Decalogue and other laws that teach charity to the neighbor, are still to be altogether observed and done, we are told (see AC 9349). And, secondly, even those laws which no longer apply to us in their literal form teach a spiritual lesson which we are to observe.
     Such is the case with the law we have chosen for our text. While it is of little concern to us that women may physically put on men's clothing, or men dress in women's garments, we must beware of representing, even in ultimates, a denial of the distinctions and differences of the sexes. For "God created man in His own image . . . male and female created He them" (Gen. 1:27). It is this unchangeable law of Divine order and creation that is represented by this statute of the Jews. (That a woman "shall not wear that which pertaineth unto a man, neither shall a man put on a woman's garment . . ." and that it is an "abomination" to do so-Deut. 22:5.)


     It is of vital importance that we recognize and respect the differences of the masculine and feminine minds which are inherent and immutable from creation. God, our Creator, Who made man "male and female" has revealed and described the nature of true masculinity and true femininity in the Heavenly Doctrine of the New Jerusalem. The teachings of His Word in the revelation for the New Church are our only sure guide to a rational understanding of the difference between man and woman. These are our defense and protection against the widespread denial and blurring of this difference and its threat to the conjugial relationship that the Lord intends. For not only did God create man male and female. He said, "they two shall be one flesh" (Matt. 19:5).
     Let us look, then, for the internal meaning of the law concerning the garments of man and woman. What secret of heaven and the church is hidden within this law? Garments in the Word signify those qualities of affection and thought that we acquire or put on in life. Just as we select garments from our wardrobe and dress suitably for a particular occasion so, spiritually speaking, we clothe our spirit with attitudes, affections. and intelligence to suit our needs in life. So, in the Word, we read of the Lord's priests being "clothed with justice" (Psalm 132:9), and that "fine linen is the righteousness of saints" (Rev. 19:8). The Lord's enemies are clothed "with shame" and those not arrayed in wedding garments cannot enter the kingdom of God. These, and other passages, support the direct teaching of the Writings that spiritual garments are woven of justice and truth and righteousness, or their opposites. These clothe the spirit and exhibit the quality of man in the spiritual world much as garments of linen and wool clothe the earthly body.
     But the warning given in the text is that the garments of men and women must not be interchanged. The truly feminine qualities of life the affections, the intelligence, the attitudes which are appropriately feminine -are distinct from truly masculine qualities of life. They should not be confused or commingled. It is this distinction that is being challenged in today's world. Nor is this a new challenge. Even when the work Conjugial Love was being written over two hundred years ago, Swedenborg was given to write that many believed it possible for women to perform the offices of men if only they were initiated into them from their earliest age, as are boys. In other words, the belief was held even then that women could put on the garments of masculinity to enable them to perform the offices of men as well as men.


"They can indeed be initiated into the exercise of [these offices]," the Writings declare, "but not into the judgment on which the right performance of the offices inwardly depends" (CL 175). Nor is it possible for men to enter into the offices proper to women and rightly perform them, we are further told, "because they cannot enter into the affections of women" (CL 175:4). "Because from creation and hence by nature the affections and perceptions of the male sex are so distinctive. . ." the Writings add, the representative law was given to the Jews that the garments of man and woman should not be interchanged. "The reason is," we are told, "that all are clothed according to their affections in the spiritual world. . ." and this law pictures the distinction that exists from creation.
     A woman cannot put on the affections of a man, although outwardly she can act like a man. Neither can a man put on the affections of a woman.
     The Writings leave us in no doubt whatever about the distinction of the sexes not only as to biological form and function, but as to every least disposition of mind, and every inclination of spirit. "Nothing whatever in them is alike" (CL 33). In the male, the masculine is masculine in every part of his body . . . and also in every idea of thought, and in every grain of his affection; and so likewise the feminine in the female. Let us turn then to consider these differences.
     What is a ma n? What is a woman? There are many ways to answer these questions, but let us look at the essential thing of each which is the root cause of all consequent differences of mind, body and action.
     The essential thing of both man and woman is a love. With man it is the love of growing wise. This is the gift of God which inspires every man from his birth and forms the essence of his life. The love of growing wise, which is a masculine love from the Lord, reaches out to acquire wisdom. Therefore, while man is inmostly a form of love, his love is clothed over with the wisdom he acquires. This is plain from man's affections, ways and appearance, for his affection is an affection of learning, understanding and being wise; his ways are predominantly intellectual, involving judgment and reason: and his physical appearance hard and rough.
     The essence of a woman also is a love; not the same love of growing wise that inspires man, but the love of man's wisdom and how that wisdom can be put to use. This womanly love exhibits itself in her affections, ways and form, for her affections are stirred in loving science, intelligence and wisdom. yet not in herself, but in man, and so of loving those products of man's love; her ways are domestic and protective, nurturing uses and perceptively moderating spheres of life to protect what is of value; and her appearance in comparison with man is softer and more beautiful.


     The Writings give many direct teachings concerning this distinction between the masculine and feminine sex. "Men were created to receive light, that is, wisdom, from the Lord," we are told, "and women were created to receive heat, that is, the love of wisdom of the man" (CL 137). "It is masculine to perceive from the understanding, and feminine to perceive from love." We read again: "Men are forms of science, intelligence, and wisdom, and women, forms of the love of these with men"(CL 187e). One wise angel describing the relationship between himself and his wife said, "She is my heart, and am her lungs" (CL 75).
     In making this distinction between man and woman, the Writings may seem to ignore the intellectual qualities of women and the affectional qualities of men. It is certainly true that women as well as men have an understanding, and that men as well as women have a will. The Writings do not teach that women are unable to think or that men are unable to feel emotion. "Everyone," we read, "whether man or woman, enjoys understanding and will; but with the man the understanding predominates, and with the woman the will predominates; and the character [of each] is determined by that which predominates"(HH 369).
     It can be said that both men and women think; but man thinks from the understanding while woman thinks from the will. "And because the understanding perceives things which are above the body and beyond the world" while the love or will "does not go beyond what it feels", there must be a difference in the wisdom of men and women. The Writings teach that there is indeed a difference and that the wife's wisdom "is not possible with the man, nor the man's [rational] wisdom with the wife"(CL 168). Rational wisdom "climbs into a light in which women are not. . ." Thus women do not speak from it and, when in the company of men where such matters are discussed, remain silent and simply listen (CL 165).
     It is for this same reason that women should not become preaching ministers. We are told that "women who think in the way men do on religious subjects, and talk much about them, and still more if they preach in meetings, do away with the feminine nature, which is affectional . . ." (SD 5936).     
     On the other hand, the Writings point out that wives have a better knowledge of their husbands' moral wisdom than they do. They have a perception of the affections of the husband and use the highest degree of prudence in moderating them"(CL 166).


When a wife seeks to turn her husband's wisdom to good use, seeking wisdom from him and inspiring him in his quest for ever greater understanding of truth, the Lord blesses both. They find delight in use, man from seeking the means for it, woman from turning those means into beautiful forms of it. They also find delight in each other. Their conjugial relationship grows. The wife becomes more a wife and the husband more a husband. She becomes increasingly feminine, he increasingly masculine.
     The Writings, then, in describing the distinction between me n and women, in no way set men above women as superior in intelligence and wisdom. in fact, the Writings record what one angel wife said to Swedenborg about the supposed comparative wisdom of men over women: "You men glory over us on account of your wisdom, but we do not glory over you on account of ours; and yet," she added, "ours excels yours. . ." (CL 208:2).
     The Writings do not describe a competition between the masculine and feminine natures but a beautiful compatibility. What is masculine and what is feminine are complementary, created for conjunction into a one. "Nothing whatever in them is alike," we are told, "and yet, in their single parts, there is what is conjunctive. . ." (CL 33). For they two "shall be one flesh" (Matthew 19:5). "The two affections, that of woman and that of man, can be united only as between two, and never in a single person" (CL 175e).
     Swedenborg once wrote about an experience which made the difference between the genius of men and women, even from birth, clearly plain to him. He mentions watching through his window in a great city the gatherings of boys and girls. "I have several times seen them in the street where more than twenty were gathered together every day," he wrote. "There the boys, following their inborn disposition, played together by making a great noise, shouting, fighting, striking blows, and throwing stones at each other; while the girls sat quietly at the doors of the houses, some playing with infants, some dressing dolls, some embroidering pieces of linen, some kissing each other, and what astonished me," he adds, "they yet watched the boys just as they were, with pleased looks. From this," Swedenborg concludes, "I could clearly see that man is born understanding and woman love. I could also see the nature of understanding and love in their beginnings; and thus, what the understanding of man would be in its progression without conjunction with feminine and later with conjugial love" (CL 218:2).


     Here, then, is the meaning of the law in Israel that the woman should not wear the garment of a man, nor the man a woman's garment. A woman should not seek to change the nature of her feminine affection and enter into a competition with men in the acquisition of knowledge and intelligence for its own sake. The indication is that women who destroy their affectional nature develop a tendency to "take up with crazes" (SD 5936). We might say they become carried away with themselves in causes and campaigns. The emotional will of woman continues to drive her, but she has lost the balance of a rational judgment. She is led blindly by whatever favors her love.
     There is a grave danger for a woman who falls into the love of her own knowledge. This is more fatal than the conceit of man in his love of his own knowledge. He, at least, can hold knowledge separate from his affections; woman cannot. Her love must remain ardently opinionated because tied to her affections. And because love of her own knowledge is from natural and not spiritual affection, which affection is perverted and self-centered in both sexes, she becomes immersed in sensual lusts and cupidities from which she has no protection.
     Neither should men depart from their intended masculine affections. What becomes of a man who loses his love of growing wise, who simply rests content in what he already knows or hears from others? He becomes intellectually lazy and slothful, and of no use to society. If he allows himself to be mastered by cupidities of self-indulgence, sloth and intellectual deceit, he forfeits his God-given ability to rise above the world and worldly concerns in the pursuit of wisdom which alone can be the salvation of both man and woman. Man has the responsibility to seek wisdom. When he fails to exercise this responsibility, there follows a failure of the conjugial and a breakdown of the orderly relationship of some masculine and feminine natures.
     If there are women today who want to become like men, it is perhaps because too few men are acting like men. The Writings comment on what is missing in some, perhaps many, marriages on earth: "A wife," we read, "becomes more and more a wife as her husband becomes more and more a husband, but not the reverse, for rarely if ever is it lacking that a chaste wife loves her husband," we are told. "What is lacking is love in return on the part of the husband; and this is lacking on account of there being no elevation of wisdom, which alone receives a wife's love" (CL 200).


     There is confusion in the world today about what is truly masculine. What is portrayed in the popular media is a gross distortion of what the Word presents. A man should be strong, courageous, honest, eager to learn not only natural but spiritual truth. He should be dedicated to the truth and should cultivate both moral and spiritual virtues. But he does not have to be coarse or crude to prove his masculinity. He should not be chauvinistic, callous or cruel. He may be bold, but not foolhardy; confident, but not conceited; competitive, but humble.
     The list of desirable masculine traits could be lengthened and a list of virtues which are especially feminine could be added.
     We see, then, something of the challenge that faces the New Churchman from the consideration of but one minor statute of the Jews which no longer applies in its literal form. This law represented and still signifies an essential law of heaven, the law of the conjugial relationship established by the Lord at creation. In its spiritual sense, now revealed for the New Church, it has both deep and practical application for the men and women of the church. It applies to us personally in how we strive to be masculine and feminine and shun the powerful inclinations to forfeit the heritage of our sexuality. It applies to the goals and means we seek in raising our sons and daughters to be true men and women in the image of God. It applies to our church in our family units and in our society units where the cooperation of the masculine and feminine natures is essential for the happiness and strength of family and society uses. Above all, it applies to husbands and wives in their efforts to establish the conjugial relationship and develop it in their marriage. "For the marriage of love truly conjugial is the union of two in thought and will, in truth and good . . . They who are in it love to think and will each as the other, and thus to become as one man. The image and likeness of one is in the mind of the other, and they dwell together in all things of life even to the inmost. They who so dwell together on earth dwell together as angels after death" (Liturgy, p. 95).
     It is written: "He who made them at the beginning made them male and female, and said, For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave unto his wife; and they two shall be one flesh. Wherefore they are no more two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let not man put asunder" (Matthew 19:4-6). Amen.

     LESSONS: Deut. 22:1-12; Matt. 19:1-12: CL 175




     Editor's note: The address delivered at the tenth South African Assembly last August is available in its entirety from the author who has agreed to the publication of this shortened version.

     Since its inception the New Church has welcomed the possibility of the restoration of conjugial love with joy and anticipation. If we believe in the Lord and if we believe in the guidance of His providence then we believe that we can enter into marriage and enjoy something of its interior delights from heaven. If we have a knowledge of the truths pertaining to the reception of conjugial love, and if we believe in them, then it fundamentally alters our whole approach to marriage as well as our conduct within its bounds.
     Too often people enter marriage naively expecting to receive the fruits of conjugial love in unbounding plenitude. Indeed, during the time of betrothal and in the early stages of the marriage union, both partners are given to "feel the conjugial to be enkindled in their hearts" (CL 44:6). This, however, is a borrowed state; an initial state of promise which the Lord provides for every new state that we contemplate entering. However, the maturity of every state can come about only through enduring the bitterness of temptation, through steadfastness in the Lord.
     As with all spiritual undertakings we should not enter into marriage simply to seek the rewards of conjugial love. It is far healthier to enter it mindful of the Lord's order, that is from a desire to serve Him and to serve the interests of our partner. If that is our attitude of approach we will be approaching marriage from a point of view of its use and it is from the idea of use and service that the delights of conjugial love can gradually become sensed, never in their fullness, but as occasional glimpses, fleeting perceptions new and then.
     Conjugial love is a spiritual love and spiritual loves do not convey their full interior intensity during life in the body. While we live in this world our primary consciousness is centered in things pertaining to physical sensation. Thus, the body '"dulls and absorbs the sensation that two partners are a united man and as one flesh" (CL 178). Thus we can never judge the state of conjugial love in our own marriage or in that of anyone else. "This is known to the Lord only; nor does the Lord reveal it until after death" (CL 523).


The Lord keeps man in relative obscurity as to his spiritual state because this best preserves his freedom to make each single choice from the basis of principle. Is the Lord to be served or is self and the world to obtain mastery? In heaven no angel lives for the sake of reward. The angelic mind is in the determination to apply itself to use for the sake of use and "every angel has conjugial love, with its virtue, its potency, and its delights, according to his devotion to the genuine use in which he is" (CL 207).
     While the delights of conjugial love can never be perceived in the fullness of their interior intensity during life in this world, that does not mean that there is no perception of interior delights whatsoever. Thus we are taught that "the heavenly nuptial sports in the soul are not in the least perceived by man; but from there they insinuate themselves into the interiors of the mind, under the appearance of peace and innocence, and into the exteriors of the mind under the appearance of blessedness, happiness, and delight" (CL 183:7). These interior delights further make their manifestation through gestures of tenderness and love. They produce a sense of "inmost friendship" which may further descend into the body and produce, when the occasion is appropriate, "the actual sensation of conjugial love, as the delight of delights" (CL 183:7).
     It is probable that few pause to reflect upon the security and love that they receive from their partner in marriage. It is too easy to take their presence for granted, or to remember negative aspects only. Although the ardour of conjugial love can never be fully manifested to our perceptions while we live in this world, nevertheless it is essential to reflect upon those good states that we have known and which we still know, and express our gratitude for them to the Lord and to our partner. Expressions of gratitude inspire humility and love. They inspire us to enter more completely into the service of the Lord as well as of our partner: As we do this, we think less of ourselves and more of our partner, and along with this the blessedness, the happiness, the delight, and the pleasure in marriage increase.
     The concept of conjugial love is an ideal. It is an ideal of which we must first have knowledge. Secondly, we must believe that it exists and believe in its reality. Thirdly, we must enter into marriage being guided not only by the heat of the moment, nor by the heart alone, but by a mutual attraction guided and moderated by revealed principles. Every marriage which commences according to this Divinely prescribed order may continue to grow and develop spiritually.


     It is against this order that the dragon has levelled his attack. In striking against marriage, against the home, and against the family, he has struck at the very cornerstone upon which the stability of society ultimately depends.
     Let us remember the prophetic vision. The dragon was not triumphant. Michael and his angels cast him out of heaven (see AE 736). The woman and the Man Child remained unscathed. Nevertheless, "the dragon was wroth with the woman and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, who keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ" (Revelation 12:17). New Churchmen, as well as anyone else, are subject to the attack of the dragon. However, if the mind is armed with the truths given in the Writings, and if we live by them, then we are told that the falsities of sensuous reasoning "fall to nothing before the spiritual truths rationally understood," and confirmed by life (AR 564).
     The Lord has promised that "conjugial love will be raised up anew." That is the promise given to the New Church. The possibility has been provided. Whether it descends or not depends upon our commitment to the Writings in faith and in life. Parents have a large measure of responsibility in this regard. They have the charge of setting an appropriate environment in the home as well as that of instructing and leading their sons and daughters according to the teachings given to the New Church. Sometimes this responsibility seems like an onerous burden. We feel inadequate and ill-equipped. However, if we believe in New Church values ourselves, our example, as well as the sincerity of our respect for the Lord's order, will carry great weight. The Divine power of the Lord is within His truth and it is His power alone which can defeat the dragon. Let us not be afraid then to enunciate in clear and unmistakable terms what the Lord has commanded. Every least aspect of His commandments is given to protect a blessed heavenly love. Only in this way will these values become espoused by the next generation.
     It is imperative that our young people know these values and I know them to be Divinely commanded. Only through obedience to Divine principles, out of religious conviction, may our young people ever be withheld from the sensual persuasions to which they are subject. We need to be able to help them face the challenging issues that confront them.
     Many question the value of the marriage covenant today. They ask: "Is there any difference between living together and being married? Is it not prudent and sensible to have a trial period of sexual experience before taking the final step of marriage?"


     To these questions the Heavenly Doctrines offer their unequivocal answer. They tell us that the marriage covenant is "an essential element" whereby "consent . . . is established" (CL 306). It exists for the protection of conjugial love. It is a vow taken before the Lord, before a priest, and before men as witnesses. The covenant implies "exclusive devotion of the love of the one consort to the love of the other" (CL 306). Its laws restrict the intimacies enjoined upon it to one man and one woman united in marriage. The covenant is restricting because conjugial love can descend only where that order is observed, followed, and loved. If the idea of the covenant is disregarded, then the sensual of man rules. It is in this lowest region of the mind that "all the concupiscences of evil and lasciviousness" reside. It is "unchaste from birth." It is subject to attack from the dragon. The consequences are revealed: "That from this region, cold in respect to marriage and neglect of the married partner, together with loathing, has its beginning and origin is well known" (CL 305).
     In this world we are all subject to temptations. The fury of the hells is bent upon the destruction of marriage. None of us is above temptation. Sometimes "by reason of enticements to things unchaste, coming from unchaste persons," remembrance of the contracted covenant can vanish. Nevertheless the establishment of the covenant is for the purpose of "averting these transgressions" (CL 307).
     Physical intimacies between man and woman belong properly only in marriage. That relationship was established to become the ultimate forum wherein the interior delights of conjugial love might descend and convey intimacy of expression to the consort in the fullness and power of ultimate delights. Conjugial love is like a fountain, from the source of which ever more blessed delights flow. These interior delights are bounded by the laws which protect them. Hence it is that with women, through whom that love descends and affects men, there is implanted an "innate modesty" (CL 292:3). That modesty is implanted to protect conjugial love from defilement. Hence it is that chaste women feel a deep sense of modesty. We are taught why this is. "The organs devoted to generation in both sexes correspond to societies of the third or inmost heaven." From this "it is evident that from creation they are holy, and therefore they are devoted solely to chaste and pure conjugial love" (AE 985:3). In the marriage covenant, physical delights may serve to open the mind to a perception of interior conjugial delights.


Outside its bounds they foster the love of lasciviousness and adultery from whence come states of cold and loathing.
     Finally, we will address ourselves to the second question we raised earlier. "Is it not prudent and sensible to have a trial period of sexual experience before taking the final step of marriage'!"
     Again, the Writings answer clearly. "During the time of betrothal [that is before marriage], it is not lawful to be conjoined corporeally, for thus the order which is inscribed on conjugial love perishes"(CL 305).
     The reasoning advanced favoring this procedure is based on the assumption that sexual compatibility is the prime ingredient for a successful marriage. The Writings, however, reveal that marital compatibility commences from a spiritual origin. When both husband and wife share the same spiritual aspirations and goals, invariably these things give rise to "inmost friendship" and in their descent produce "the actual sensation of conjugial love" which is felt "as the delight of delights" (CL 183:7).
     A distinction then must be made between conjugial love and the love of the sex. Conjugial love descends out of the highest heaven from the Lord. On the other hand, the love of the sex is in itself a purely natural and sensual love which man shares in common with the animals. Considered in itself it is neither good nor evil. It becomes one or the other depending upon the quality of the love that guides it and controls it. We must remember that the love of the sex has its seat in the lowest region of the human mind, that is in the sensual, and this is said to be "unchaste from birth. That from this region, cold in respect to marriage and neglect of the married partner, together with loathing, has its beginning and origin is well known. Yet there are various differences in the result of premature conjunction" (CL 305).
     The point is that conjugial love does not "commence from the burning heat of the flesh" (CL 312). If it does it tends to destroy the inner sanctuaries wherein conjugial love dwells. The love of the sex then should be held in a place of subservience through restraint, imposed by reason, which sees and is committed to the Lord's order.
     While the Writings reveal the existence of conjugial love and also reveal the orderly approach toward its reception, they also teach the way of repentance. Mistakes made from ignorance or through loss of rational restraint can indeed be forgiven. However, the obliteration of a mistake is more difficult than avoiding one. Every breach against Divine order brings a certain consequence to bear. Every trespass always carries with it its sense of anxiety and guilt.


Through serious repentance a new beginning can be made. When a virgin surrenders her virginity, for example, it has a very profound effect upon her. It is her "crown of chastity and the token of conjugial love" (CL 503). If it is improperly surrendered it will leave a tragic scar upon her memory. It is bound to be followed by severe states of sorrow and regret. Thus we are taught "that the virgin gives up her soul and her life to him to whom she gives up her virginity" (CL 504). To surrender virginity to a husband is to open the way for the influx of conjugial love. Then they must devote themselves solely to each other.
     There are temptations which invade every marriage. Everyone is subject unto the attack of the dragon. The mistakes that we might make in failing to uphold the Lord's revealed order do not close heaven to us nor do they prevent the possibility of one day receiving conjugial love. However, to recover from mistakes requires serious repentance and a very determined effort. Through mistakes we render ourselves more vulnerable to subtle and destructive doubts and uncertainties within our marriage. These are breathed upon us by the fire of the dragon. Surely we do not want to see our children suffer under his influence. Let us therefore make every effort to become more fully committed to the ideals of our religion, for that priceless pearl of life, conjugial love, can be attained through their means.


     Applications for assistance from the above fund to enable male Canadian students to attend The Academy of the New Church at Bryn Athyn, Pa., U.S.A., for the school year 1982-83 should be received by one of the pastors listed below as early as possible.
     Before filing their applications, students should first obtain their acceptance by the Academy immediately, as dormitory space is limited.
     Any of the pastors listed below will be happy to give any further information or help that may be necessary.

The Rev. Geoffrey S. Childs           Rev. Christopher R. J. Smith
2 Lorraine Gardens                    16 Bannockburn Road. R.R. 2
Islington, Ont. M9B 4Z4           Kitchener, Ontario N2G 3W5

The Rev. William H. Clifford
1536 94th Ave.
Dawson Creek. B.C. V1G 1H1




     I would like to make clear at the outset that what follows is not to be considered as a doctrinal study, but merely some reflections which may eventually lead to such a study. These reflections should not be regarded as a criticism of the educational practices of the General Church, past or present. At best, they may serve as just another small contribution toward the church's educational effort.
     A central goal of New Church education is preparation of the church's children for conjunction with the Lord in His heavenly kingdom. The full realization of this end is only possible where conjugial love exists. To prepare children for conjunction with the Lord is to prepare them for entrance into a true marriage partnership, either in this life or in the life to come.
     The teaching implicit everywhere in Conjugial Love is summed up in the following from the indices for Angelic Wisdom Concerning Marriage. "Conjunction with the Lord becomes full through love truly conjugial; not full, however, from the male alone, nor from the female alone." "The reciprocal union of love and wisdom with male and female together is an image of God and a likeness of God" (cf. AE 984:2, 3; SD 6110: 10). So it was that an angel husband of the Most Ancient heaven was led to declare of his marriage: "We are one; her life is in me and mine in her. We are two bodies but one soul. The union between us is like the union of the two tents in the breast which are called heart and lungs, she being my heart and I her lungs. But here by heart we mean love and by lungs wisdom. Thus she is the love of my wisdom and I am the wisdom of her love. Therefore her love veils my wisdom from without, and my wisdom is in her love from within. Hence . . . the appearance in our faces of the unity of our souls" (CL 75; Coronis 37:5; SD 6110: 14).
     How shall we provide in our educational efforts that such a beautiful and satisfying end may be promoted? The Word draws our attention to three degrees of use that need to be served regardless of whether the child be girl or boy: uses for sustaining the body, for perfecting the rational, and for receiving what is spiritual. "For man [home] cannot be conjoined with the Lord unless he be spiritual, nor can he be spiritual unless he be rational, nor can he be rational unless his body is in a sound state.


These three are like a house; the body like the foundation, the rational like the superstructure, the spiritual like those things which are in the house, and conjunction with the Lord like dwelling in it" (DLW 330).
     From subsequent teaching it seems evident that men and women together, and especially as parents and teachers, are going to be involved in all three areas of use. These are summarized as follows: "Uses for sustaining the body relate to its nourishment, its clothing, its habitation, its recreation and enjoyment, its protection and the preservation of its state . . . . Uses for perfecting the rational are all things that give instruction about the subjects above mentioned, and are called sciences and branches of study, pertaining to natural, economical, civil and moral affairs, which are learned either from parents and teachers, or from books, or from communication with others, or by reflection on these subjects by oneself" (DLW 331, 332). We are then told that the subjects just mentioned perfect the rational only so far as they provide a superstructure in the mind promoting higher uses, uses for receiving the spiritual from the Lord. These latter uses "are all things that belong to religion and to worship therefrom; thus all things that teach the acknowledgment and knowledge [cognitionem] of God and the knowledge and acknowledgment of good and truth and thus eternal life, which are acquired in the same way as other learning, from parents, teachers, discourses, and books, and especially by applying to life what is so learned; and in the Christian world, by doctrines and discourses from the Word, and through the Word from the Lord. These uses in their full extent may be described under the same heads as uses of the body, as nourishment, clothing, habitation, recreation and enjoyment, and preservation of state, if only they are applied to the soul" (DLW 333; also see Char. 163, 164, 130:2, 3; TCR 186, 482, 494; DP 335; HH 528-531; AC 128, 129).
     In summary then we may say that in respect to both boys and girls, New Church parents and teachers in varying degrees and ways will be performing uses for sustaining the bodies of their children, uses for perfecting their rational minds, and uses for receiving what is spiritual from the Lord. Also, in every case lower uses will be performed in such a way that higher uses will be promoted thereby, and finally there will be conj unction with the Lord in a marriage of one male with one female that is truly conjugial.
     In performing these uses, however, New Church people dare not ignore a central reality that is clearly announced everywhere in the Heavenly Doctrines. "Everyone, whether man or woman, rejoices in understanding and will; but with the man the understanding predominates, and with the woman the will predominates, and the character is determined by that which predominates" (HH 369).


The significance of this difference in what predominates and the resulting difference between the human male and the human female is well known to the church. The following is but one very small part of a large body of teaching declaring some of the differences between male and female. "The male is born intellectual and the female voluntary; or what is the same thing, that the male is born into the affection of knowing, understanding, and being wise, and the female into the love of conjoining herself with that affection in the male. And because interiors form exteriors after their own likeness, and the masculine form is the form of understanding, and the feminine the form of the love of that understanding, it follows that the male has a face, voice, and body different from the female; that is, a harder face, a harsher voice, and a stronger body, and, moreover, a bearded chin-in general, a form less beautiful than the female. They differ also in their attitudes and ways. In a word, nothing whatever in them is alike; and yet in their single parts, there is what is conjunctive; yea, in the male, the masculine is masculine in every idea of his thought, and in every grain of his affection; and so likewise, the feminine in the female" (CL 33; see CL 32, 48, 61,66, 75, 100, 159, 161, 168, 187, 292, 382; AC 770; AR 533, 543; AE 270, 863: 17; SD 1061, 6110, and many other passages).
     While clearly distinguishing between male and female in respect to their affections, wisdom, intelligence, applications, ways and form, the Word for the New Church also constantly emphasizes the complete interdependence of the masculine and feminine for a full existence spiritual and natural. Of particular interest to us here is the role of the female in the production of that conjugial union which is the most perfect image and likeness of the Lord. In our education of girls, surely we can do no better than to define what that role is and prepare them for eventual entrance into it. Now when we think of the woman's role as defined in the Word, very often our attention is drawn to Conjugial Love No. 91 which speaks of a woman's application as being "to such works as are done with the hands, called knitting, embroidery, and by other names, and which serve for ornament and for the adornment of her person and the enhancement of her beauty; also to various offices which are called domestic and which adjoin themselves to the offices of men which . . . are called forensic. Women apply themselves to these from an inclination to marriage, that they may become wives and so be one with their husbands."


In this teaching the primary role of the female as a wife is emphasized. In other familiar teachings, as in the following, the role of the female is extended to include "the education of little children of both sexes, and of girls up to the age when they are given in marriage" (CL 174, 176). We are told that by these maternal offices or duties "above all others . . . women conjoin themselves to their husbands" (CL 174).
     Teachings such as these have been troubling to many people in the church at this day. Many see them as being rather narrow in their scope and as assigning to women a role that is altogether too passive, external and lacking in challenge. They wonder if girls are to be prepared only for such a role. There is an appearance that such teachings may be somewhat dated, primarily describing the accepted role of women in Swedenborg's day. It is my conviction that the problem is not with the teachings, but with our understanding of them, that there is much more in those teachings than immediately meets the eye, that rightly understood, these teachings, we will find, are really very broad in their scope and they present women with a role that is intensely active, internal and full of challenge. A central focus of our education of girls looks to their becoming wives and hopefully also mothers. To this end they will be trained in domestic offices. But how should we define "domestic"? While external feminine duties in a physical house must be included, the following teaching would seem to suggest that our definition of domestic should extend beyond this. "In offices proper to men, understanding, thought, and wisdom play the leading part, but in offices proper to wives, the leading part is played by the will, affection, and love; and the wife performs her offices from the latter, and the man performs his from the former. Therefore, by their very nature their offices are divergent, yet in their successive series they are conjunctive" (CL 175). See CL 176 and refer back to CL 91. Clearly these passages emphasize the conjugial relationship and the home as the primary focus for feminine offices. At the same time, however, these offices while retaining their central focus, might assume a broader definition, depending on what we understand by the words "in their successive series."
     How then shall we understand these words? The Word, in a previous passage, appeals to our common perception in regard to discerning the offices proper to men and women. "They are many and various, and everyone knows how to classify them according to their genera and species if only he exert his mind to the distinguishing of them" (CL 174). But what should we do in an age dominated by the learned of the world, many of whom shut out common perception which "comes by influx from heaven, and descends into thought even to sight," trusting instead to "principles or . . . ideas obtained from the world through sight"? (See DLW 361; AE 955:4.)


Is there no way in which we can obtain practical guidance from the Word in this matter? I believe that there is. Let us remember all those teachings in the Word which associate the female and her functions with what is voluntary, with the will and its affections, and that associate the male with what is intellectual, with the understanding and its activities. And by way of confirmation, let us also take note of the following interesting passage: "As established from creation the masculine sex pertains to the class of spiritual things, but the feminine sex to that of celestial things. Hence it was a precept of the first marriage that the man should cleave unto his wife, that is to say, intellectual things must be associated with celestial things, that they may become one body" (so 1061). Let us then associate these teachings with what the celestial angel said of his marriage: "The union between us is like the two tents in the breast which are called heart and lungs, she being my heart and I her lungs. But here by heart we mean love and by lungs wisdom" (CL 75; Coronis 37:5).
     In short, I would suggest that if we would gain some practical insight in respect to how the female and the male should relate to one another in their respective offices or duties in their successive series, we would do well to study thoroughly how the heart and lungs relate to each other in the body. We should note that in everything of the body there are those things which have to do with the heart and those that have to do with the lungs and that "where both do not act, and each distinctly take its turn, there cannot be any motion of life from any principle of the will, nor any feeling of life from any principle of the understanding" (AC 3889; see also AC 3887; DLW 376; cf. Char. 144; SD 499-500). We are told that "from the correspondence of the heart with the will and of the lungs with the understanding, everything may be known that can be known about the will and understanding, or about love and wisdom, therefore about the soul of man" (DLW 394). Might not the same teaching apply to understanding the proper relationship between the male and the female in every unit and level of society, be it natural, spiritual, or celestial?
     While reading of the offices of the heart relative to the lungs and the rest of the body, we might reflect at the same time on what is said of the marvelous interior, perceptive wisdom that may develop with chaste women in marriage. (See CL 156e-176, CL 194, 195, 208, 256, 258, 259, 293, 294 and elsewhere).


I believe that a clear correspondence will emerge progressively, and that we will see that we would do well to educate our girls to function as a heart in all areas of human life in their successive series. Then of a surety their offices will properly adjoin themselves to the offices of men and the two will be truly and humanly conjunctive.*
     * It should be observed that in DLW 402, differently from other passages already cited, the heart is associated with the masculine and the lungs with his consort or wife. Why is there this apparent reversal? I believe that in the supreme sense the relationship between the heart and lungs represents the relationship between the Lord as Bridegroom and Husband and the Church as bride and wife. (See TCR 37:3.) Moreover, I think that this reversal is also representative of the state which progressively develops in a marriage that has become celestial. Responding to the love of his wife, the man has progressed from the love of knowledge to the love of intelligence to the love of wisdom. When he comes into this latter love from the Lord, this love in him, to a growing degree, serves his wife as a heart, her conscious wisdom of this his love can then serve him as a lungs. Such a marriage is truly and fully reciprocal and of the husband and wife in this marriage it may be said "he is love veiled over with wisdom," and that with her "the inmost is that wisdom of the male, and its clothing the love therefrom" (CL 32).
     In seeking to understand how to educate girls for a truly feminine role in human society there are many other avenues besides the above that we might explore. For illustration, let us return to the statement in Conjugial Love regarding a woman's application, "that it is to such works as are done with the hands, called knitting, embroidery, and by other names, and which serve for ornament and for the adornment of her person and the enhancement of her beauty" (CL 91). While I believe that a girl is to be led to apply herself in the manner here describes, nevertheless, again I believe there may be more to this teaching than is immediately apparent to the eye. In the other life, in their education, girls are also involved in knitting and embroidery. But is that all that they are involved in? Obviously not, for every external activity in the spiritual world corresponds with an activity of the mind and is representative thereof. In respect to knitting, the correspondent spiritual activity is clearly illustrated. In SD 6087 Queen Christina is said to have been "in a certain spiritual work which corresponds to knitting" (Cf. SD 6009). In the marvelous way in which she bent a certain pope and his cardinals toward the acknowledgment of the one true God, we have, perhaps, a striking example of how feminine wisdom and intelligence can be employed in a task that might defy the best efforts of masculine intelligence and wisdom. But if knitting and embroidery are to be regarded not only as proper natural applications of the female but also as representative of mental applications, more than a few scattered passages are needed. Fortunately there appear to be series in the letter of the Word that may serve for a better development of this teaching. Already some in the church are examining what is said about the work involved in the building of the tabernacle of Israel. We read there of the "weaver," the "thinker," and the "embroiderer." There the work of the "weaver" would seem to correspond with the heart-like operations of feminine wisdom, the work of the "thinker" with the lungs-like offices of masculine intelligence and wisdom, and the work of the "embroiderer" with feminine intelligence. (See AC 9598, 9688, 9915, 10331, 10332; for other references to "embroidery" and "linen" see Potts Swedenborg Concordance.)


As regards feminine intelligence specifically, it is said in several places in the Word to be modest, elegant, pacific, yielding, gentle, tender, beautiful, lovely, like the women themselves. Moreover it is said to be connected with "external matters called economical and domestic" (of domestic economy and the household). (See CL 218; 1st Index of Angelic Wisdom Concerning Marriage.) Surely such intelligence with its focus and wonderful effect on the fabric of life admirably corresponds to the work of embroidery. In respect to the role of women as embroiderers attention should be drawn to a letter from Rev. Kurt P. Nemitz appearing in the NEW CHURCH LIFE. March, 1979
     We have mentioned but two possible approaches to a better understanding of the role of women in human society. Surely further study will bring to light other possibilities that might influence our education of the feminine mind. Before closing we would briefly and in a very general May, address the question as to what is the best environment in which to prepare girls for entrance into feminine wisdom and intelligence. Reflecting on what is said of the character and concerns of her more interior wisdom and more external intelligence, on what is said of the heart and lungs relationship, and on the work of the "weaver" and "embroiderer," it seems evident that there is a dual focus in the education of girls. On one hand there is a looking to ends, purposes and ideals, and on the other hand to the practical implementation or applications of these same in human life. In reflecting on what is said of masculine intelligence, especially in its beginnings, on what is said of the functioning of the lungs, and on the work of the "thinker," in educating boys there seems to be much more of a concentration on the means which will be necessary to bring ideals into application. I believe that such a difference of focus should probably suggest a difference of approach when it comes to interesting and involving feminine and masculine minds in many of the various subject fields that appear in a school curriculum. With girls the consideration of the subject matter of any particular field of study might well begin with a concentration on its ultimate usefulness. The entrance into the particulars of a field study might best be made through examination of practical applications of the knowledges proper to the subject. I believe that the following passage, directly relating to religious instruction, suggests something of the approach that we should have in the education of the feminine mind generally. "Females both old and young, when they perceive that paradisical things are given [exist], are more allured to the knowledges of faith than in any other way, and that moreover they are introduced [into these knowledges] through such and similar things as through a portico" (SD 3852).


By "paradisical" I understand "heavenly," and what is heavenly exists when ends or ideals are realized in useful applications.
     If a difference of approach is truly indicated for education to be most effective, then for the most part our education of girls and boys, when they are no longer "infants" or "little children" (CL 174, 176) (the age of nine or ten?-See AC 2280), should probably be separate. I would envision that this relative separation in the educational process would continue in some measure up to the age when girls may be addressed by men and associate with them, or up to an age when they may be given in marriage (the age of seventeen or eighteen?) (CL 174, 176). As others have observed, such an educational policy seems to agree with what is done in the heavens. In other areas of human life we generally accept, at least intellectually, angelic example as an eminently suitable guide. Apart from the pressures of the modern world, why should we be hesitant in implementing angelic example in our educational efforts? Moreover, it might be observed that the mode of educating the feminine sex in the spiritual world does not in the least inhibit the eventual development of relationships with the masculine that are truly conjugial.
     As regards who should bear the primary responsibility for the education of girls, for guidance again would appeal to angelic example ore one hand and to the indications of Conjugial Love (nos. 174, 176) on the ether. Surely what is accomplished in school and how it is accomplished should be a valid extension of what should be done in the home. However, while holding to the principle that women should have the primary involvement in the education of girls, boys being the primary responsibility of men, I feel that we should at no time neglect the implications of the teaching regarding the Proper coordination of the offices of husbands and wives in the home. "But these offices become conjoint by consultations and mutual support and by much else which is of mutual assistance"(CL 176). The faculties of a boys school and a girls school will be involved in regular consultations and mutual support. As in a home, I would anticipate that there would be times when men are teaching girls and women teaching boys, and times when both sexes are instructed together for their mutual benefit.
     The opportunities are endless for the development of an educational system which will best serve the Lord's end of a heaven from the human race.


The conjugial relationship between male and female which epitomizes that end will be ever more effectively promoted so long as we always keep that end clearly in view, and each rising generation strives to attain that end by their best understanding of the means for its attainment that the Lord has provided in His threefold Word.


     Of Horace P. Chandler of Boston, Bishop Benade wrote thus:

     It was strange how he and I came together. I can scarcely tell how it was, but I suddenly found that I knew and loved him, and he seemed to see something in the older man which he liked, and thus the matter was settled. I do not believe in people growing old at heart, and so I like young folks best. The angels are all young-never grow old; and if we would become angels we must try to love and live as they do.

     But it was to Horace Chandler's wife, recently a Unitarian, now having doubts about her ability to keep up spiritually or doctrinally with her New Church husband, that Benade wrote comfortingly:

     I think I can appreciate what you say in regard to religion. Don't let the apparent want of sympathy with Horace give you too much anxiety.


I am sure that it does not so affect him, for although he will desire to be one with you in that, more than in all other things, he well knows that you need time, and that you can only grow together with him in a state of freedom. Your attachment is more for Unitarians than for Unitarianism. I suspect that you have never troubled yourself much about doctrines and systems of theology, but you were brought up among people whom you learned to like and respect, and for their sakes you accepted their views as correct.

     Now just here comes in a trouble from certain states in professing New Churchmen. They do not discriminate between people and the faith which people think they believe in. Because the Unitarian doctrine concerning the Lord is contrary to our doctrine they are disposed to speak harshly of Unitarians, who may be, in reality, much better men and women than they are themselves. This is an un-Christian state, and quite opposed to the life of the New Church, and to the doctrine, which teaches that the Lord does not ascribe evil and falsity to a man which the man does not ascribe to himself by his own conduct. It is a state which produces sectarianism in us, and thus brings about a condition the very opposite of that which the New Church is designed to produce.
     We have a great deal of narrowness and bigotry among us; there is no doubt of it; and it was this which excited opposition in you. Now, I should be very sorry to see you a "Swedenborgian." For this would be to become a sectarian. We are not to be the followers of a man, but of the Lord. Swedenborg is no more to us than Peter or Paul were to the men of the primitive Christian Church-the medium or agent through whom the Lord gives us the truth, which is found in the internal or spiritual sense of the Word. We are not to receive this as Swedenborg's, but as the Lord's teaching-a teaching which is for all men and does not belong to only a few.
     Of course you want to be one in faith with Horace, and you will be, for a good wife grows ever more a wife; ever more united to her husband. They learn to think and will alike, and this especially in matters of faith. For religion is the inmost principle in life. From that flow and by that are determined all our ideas and thoughts in respect to our duties and the various concerns of our existence. United in the center of their hopes and thoughts, husband and wife grow to be one, ever more and more, in all their actions. And this union is the source of their joy and happiness.
     And when so united, their children are born better children. From both parents they inherit a conjugial principle, that is, a disposition which renders them susceptible of all good influences, and a tendency in favor of whatever is true and right. True marriage is heaven on earth, for it is the Church. . . .

     (William H. Benade to Mrs. Horace P. Chandler, Nov. 13, 1868.)




     Prompted by Mrs. G. P. Dawson's (belated) communication (Oct. '81) regarding an article written by me and published in NEW CHURCH LIFE (Oct. '79), "Further on 'Conjugialis,' I began working on a "simple response," but found in the process that some points in her letter require more than a curt discussion.
     The Rev. M. Nemitz' article of Sept. '81, "Is It Time to Say 'Marriage Love'?" (which presented itself, surprisingly, as though the subject had never been discussed previously),* spurred Mrs. Dawson to utter her misgivings-which I am sure are shared by others-about an assertion to the effect that the term "conjugial," which from custom has acquired a special acceptability in New Church vocabulary, is in fact an inadequate rendition of conjugialis-the adjective pertaining to conjugium, "marriage."
     * See the bibliography at the end of this article
     Regarding the content of the communication, the main theme appears in the statement: "But, purely linguistically*, there are other valid arguments for the retention** of the word 'conjugial'. . ." (p. 540). The punch line on which the subsequent presentation by Dr. John Chadwick (seeking to justify the admittedly coined term "conjugial") stands or falls is that "marriage love" is a curious expression which will surprise most English speakers" (p. 541). Can this be called a valid linguistic argument? I beg to differ; most English speakers would not be surprised by it; whereas they most certainly would be and are by the term "conjugial love."
     * Italics ours
     ** Italics hers
     What the note Mrs. Dawson quotes from A Translator's Guide is really attempting to justify (on the grounds of the existence of Latinic adjectives in English corresponding to Anglo-Saxon nouns) is the coining of a Latinized adjective for "marriage." It is asked, "Why not then marriage/conjugial?" The reasons why not are what this discussion is all about. This is hardly a valid argument for the '"retention" of a word that has no legitimate existence in the first place and no meaning in the English language as known to the world in which we live and to which Swedenborg (i.e. the Lord through Swedenborg) was speaking.
     Note Dr. Chadwick's own statement. "'There is little doubt that conjugialis amor means "the love which is appropriate or peculiar to persons in the married state.'"


Now this is the truth of the matter, but the term "conjugial love" does not convey this meaning.
     Mrs. Dawson states: "To take but one example, the use of the soft vowel 'i': Dr. Odhner apparently chooses to ignore completely references which indicate why Swedenborg may have been led deliberately to insert the 'i' and the arguments thus inferred which might justify the retention of the distinctive word 'conjugial' in English translation." Regarding this suggestion (originally made by John Clowes) that the vowel "i" softens: the passages brought to bear (SD 1147, 1645-6) as though they were confirmatory of this thought actually relate to the contrast between vowels and consonants, not between different vowels. The relevant teaching regarding vowels is, rather, SD 5112 (italics ours):

     When the spiritual angels speak, their words, which are intellectual ideas, have an affinity with the vowels e and i. . . .
     The words of the celestial angels have an affinity with a, o and u: for which reason [their speech] falls into such words as contain these vowels. When, therefore, man speaks with them, he is then diverted from words that contain e and i, to words in which a, o and u occur.

"Spiritual" vowels are, in modern linguistic terms, "close," while the heavenly ("celestial") ones are "open." Do the close (constricted) vowels soften?
     "Dr. Odhner apparently chooses to ignore completely. . ." is a rather strong charge to address against a student who has given more attention in New Church literature to the significance of sounds in Latin as a vehicle of Divine revelation than anyone hitherto; to illustrate which, allow me to quote from Alpha and Omega* (p. 35):
     * Odhner, J. Durban. 1978. Alpha and Omega, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009: Swedenborg Scientific Assn.

     Referring back once more to the sound-spectrum first presented in the discussion of Alpha, i.e.



these passages indicate that the labial sequence (3p) in the sound-spectrum pertains to the celestial, and the velar sequence (ek) to the spiritual, that is, so far as the vowels are concerned.*
     * Examples of this contrast are in the Latin pairs (italics ours):

(celestial)           (spiritual)
amor                    fides, sapientia
angeli                spiritus
voluntas                intellectus
sacerdos                Clerus, rex
auxlire                videre
aurum                argentum

     In supremis Expansis sunt qui Angeli caelestes vocantur. . .; illi, qui ibi, Angeli caelestes vocantur ex Amore caelesti, qui est amor in Dominum; in Expansis sub illis sunt qui Angeli spirituales dicuntur. . . , illi, qui ibi, Angeli spirituales dicuntur ex Amore spiritualis, qui est Charitas erga proximum;. . . (NJHD 4).

     These examples leave little doubt about the significance of sound-elements also in the Latin revelation-or of the author's conviction of Swedenborg's consciousness of their significance. (In manuscript, I have encountered cases where, in relation to the spiritual, Swedenborg deleted voc[antur] and substituted dicuntur.)
     The selection of fluvium in preference to flumen (SD 1147) is the more understandable if one looks fluvium in the light of the labial series of the sound-spectrum shown above, which is the "celestial" branch; as well as the passage in SD 6063, ". . . n signifies evil." This selection clearly impedes a lapse from the labial to the dental sound-chain. (Do see Alpha and Omega, pp. 36-9.)
     I would even add to this that conjugialis, containing both the spiritual vowel "i" and the heavenly ("celestial") one "a," is richer than conjugalis, and more expressive of the teaching that marriage love is "heavenly, spiritual, . . ."*; quite contrary to Clowes' suggestion that the letter "i" makes this word "better adapted to express the pure and celestial affection which it is meant to denote. . ."** (italics ours). If the "i" sound makes it better adapted to express a celestial affection, why is it that man is diverted from "i" when speaking with celestial angels (SD 5112), and, in fact, that they will not pronounce it, but change it to [u]*** (5622)?
     * CL 64
     ** See reference under Clowes at the close of this article.
     *** The translator has y, which is misleading for the English reader.


     While it is one thing to recognize the indubitable significance of lots and tittles" (or at least that they have a significance, whether or not we see what it is) and the fact that Swedenborg was highly aware of the meanings of vowels; even, that there is evidence of a "selection" of words on account of the vowels: it is entirely another thing to propose that "Swedenborg may have been led deliberately to insert the 'i' " in conjugialis. This is tantamount to saying, that he inserted the "i" in conjugium!
     If Mrs. Dawson finds the term "non sequitur" offensive (p. 540), I am sorry; but it just seems that the arguments people prefer in defense of "conjugial" are most often based on errors of reason or of fact. Take for example the statement in A Translator's Guide.

      . . . the normal classical word is conjugalis, but its metrical shape prevents it from being used In dactylic verse, since it contains a cretic (long, short, long); . . . (p. 57).

Just the opposite of this is true. The correct stress features of conjugalis are [. ./.] whereas those of conjugialis are [././.]. Consequently, conjugialis fits very poorly in dactylic verse, where it tends to be misstressed as [/. ./.], as in the relevant lines from Ovid:

     atria conplentur, nec conjugialia festa*
     nec mea virginitas V nec conjugialia iura**
     tunc quoque mansit amor V nec conjugiale solutum***

     * Metamorphoses 5:3 (accents ours; however, there is yet another valid interpretation of the meter, i.e:. . . V nec conjugialia festa (etc.); for the word conjugialis is phonetically representable as [kon jug ja lis:. ./.], thus denying it the syllabic element otherwise contributed by the stem-vowel -i-: the same as happens in "atria" at the beginning of the line).
     ** Id. 6:536
     *** Id. 11:743

Metrically, conjugal- would be quite adequate, if not better:

     . . .V Nec conjugalia festa (etc.)

all which shows that Ovid used conjugialis rather in spite of than because of its metrical shape, on the basis of a semantic choice.
     Summarizing: the argument is not whether there is significance in the composition, letter by letter, of words selected to embody the text of Divine revelation. The Latin language was undoubtedly prepared by Providence to become the optimum embodiment for the revelation of the Lord's Second Coming.


But the words selected by Swedenborg were existing Latin words, having specific semantic content and linguistic acceptability in contemporary and classical usage (despite totally unfounded assertions to the contrary).
     Then we come to another-the emotional-aspect of this matter.* I refer to Mrs. Dawson's phrase, ". . . the word 'conjugial'-now so well-loved in the New Church." The redaction "in the New Church" is a rather broad generalization. Recent expressions of deep questioning, not only about the enigmatic nature of this term, but also about its linguistic raison d etre (it was a man who was not disposed to join the New Church who invented it, however much he may be praised as a historical proponent of its doctrines) might suggest that the attributive "so well-loved" is a more subjective than objective characterization. It is really not apropos to appeal to tradition in support of a practice. The "old church" may, on similar grounds, refer to its so well-loved conception of a tri-personal Godhead, deeply rooted in the affection of many. Is it not a daily lesson along the path of reformation and regeneration that one's affection for or love of something does not make it right?
     * touchingly expressed (though admittedly with no claim to a linguistic rationale) by the Rev. W. Orthwein in his recent communication to NEW CHURCH LIFE (Jan.'82): a further endorsement of tradition associated with his "newly-found home."
     What some seem to fear at the prospect of a downgrading or dequalification of the term "conjugial" as a proper translation of conjugialis is a loss of "distinctiveness." What is distinctive, in this respect, is a new revelation concerning marriage. It is the New Church conception of marriage, and thence true marriage itself, that must be preserved. And surely, the first requisite and best beginning for the achievement of this end is a right translation of the work on marriage love!
     The term "conjugial" has indeed acquired a special viability in the church. Not only in doctrinal and liturgical but also in social contexts, it occupies a prominent and sensitive place. According to 20th century principles of lexicology, this by itself makes it "accepted." You can find it in the Oxford English Dictionary (qualified as "Swedenborgian"). Thus it is "accepted" because it occurs among Swedenborgians. But a word is not acceptable as English merely by being accepted as a dialect rendition of an English word. There is in fact in the true English language no word "conjugial"; its apparent existence and acceptability are due only to the practices of misguided translators, and have been the cause of profound confusion in terms and even misconceptions regarding teachings on marriage.


The question is what Swedenborg (i.e. the Lord through Swedenborg) intended. If Swedenborg ever uttered in Swedish the equivalent of conjugialis, there can be little doubt but that he used the Swedish word aktenskaplig or aktenskaps-, "of or pertaining to marriage."
     Clowes' patent doctrinal and linguistic mistake regarding the in conjugialis tumefied into a more serious error in respect to scholarly prerogative. Since when has a translator the right to make up his own language, instead of facing and solving the problematique of the target language?
     New Church society, in its understandable but dangerous tendency toward isolation, must especially beware of confusing sound scholarship (in translation, as in doctrine) with an ingenious but dilettante forcing of concepts.* This latter will not withstand the test of time dictated by the need of the human race for a reliable presentation of the Divine message. However, it is predictable that it will take many years, perhaps several generations, before the emotional attachment to the term "conjugial" comes into its true perspective in the society which thus far-notwithstanding all its failings, and from the pure mercy of the Lord-has borne the name "New Church."
     *-sharply exemplified, alas, by statements in the Rev. W. Orthwein's article which "muddy the waters," e.g. by confusing nominal use of English "marriage" with its adjectival counterpart, thus implying that there are those who would translate conjugiale as "marriage." No one I know of in the relevant literature hitherto furnishes him with a precedent for that error.
     The danger of inadequate terms acquiring acceptability by default is that people start reading (or imagining) into them something that is not there. Such an exercise are the ratiocinations regarding some supposed distinction between conjugialis when coupled with vere, and when not.*
     * See the reference under Sandstrom at the close of this article.
     But speaking of dangers, there is only one that frightens me. As translation is a kind of interpretation, translators will inevitably hold differing views; and it would be just as wrong for me to insist that the word "conjugial" be forbidden, as it would be for someone to tell me I have to use it. What scares me are titles like "Is It Time to Say. . .?" or "Let's Keep . . ." as though some kind of binding agreement or legislation were called for.


I say, let there be translations! and let time tell which are the better ones! Where there is charity, neither will differences in this matter cause divisions.*
     * cf. AC 1834:2, DP 259:3

     * * *

     The interest being shown by the Swedenborg Society in matters of translation under discussion in NEW CHURCH LIFE is much appreciated, not only generally by its readership but especially by those directly involved in this work-members of the General Church Translation Committee. The many fruits of your labors, which we believe reflect not only serious scholarship and intellectual fidelity, but also profound reverence for the sanctity of this task of presenting the Writings in their true spirit, constitute an important element of the foundation upon which the effectiveness in use of the General Church today is anchored. On specific points, you may be sure that the views of Swedenborg Society scholars are not being ignored, nor will be neglected in the future. Under the Lord's leading-whatever divergences of opinion may arise-there is reason to trust that His will in these matters will ultimately prevail.

Key References on "conjugial" (listed chronologically)
Clowes, John. 1794. "Preliminary Observations by the Translator," Conjugial Love, London: Old Bailey.
Potts, J. F. 1906. "Conjugial," NEW CHURCH LIFE. p. 738. 1910. "Translator's Note," Conjugial Love (Library Edition), New York: American Swedenborg Printing and Publishing Assn.
Wunsch, William F. 1938. "Translator's Preface," Marital Love, New York: Swedenborg Publishing Assn.
Acton, Alfred. 1953. "Translator's Preface," Conjugial Love, Margate, Great Britain: The Thanate Press (Academy of the New Church, publisher).
Rogers, Norbert H. 1960. "Conjugial versus Conjugal," NEW CHURCH LIFE. p. 300.
Henderson, W. Cairns. 1962. "Our New Church Vocabulary" (Editorial), NEW CHURCH LIFE, p. 70.
Rose, D. L. 1975. "Conjugialis," A Translator's Guide, p. 51, London: The Swedenborg Society.
Chadwick, John. 1975. "Conjugialis," idem, p. 57.
Odhner, Ormond de C. 1979. "Conjugial" (Editorial), NEW CHURCH LI FE, p. 319.
Rose, Frank S. 1979. "Conjugial Partners" (Communication), idem, p. 319.


Odhner, J. Durban. 1979. "Further on 'Conjugialis,'" idem, p. 445.
Nemitz, Kurt P. 1981. "is It Time to Say 'Marriage Love'?" idem, p. 468.
Dawson, Nancy. 1981. "The Word 'Conjugial'"(Communication), idem, p. 540.
Briscoe, Beryl G. 1981. "The Word 'Conjugial'"(Communication), idem, p. 591.
Sandstrom, Erik E. 1981. "The Word 'Conjugial' " (Communication), idem, p. 650.
Orthwein, Walter E. 1982. "Let's Keep 'Conjugial,' " idem, p. 14.


     This pamphlet by Rev. N. Bruce Rogers summarizes the teachings of revelation relating to divorce and separation. It is well put together and clear. Quotations are few, making for good readability, yet references are copious, providing the interested reader amply with numbers to look up in case he wishes to look further into the subject.
     Mr. Rogers has refrained from giving his personal interpretation to anything, preferring only to put the ideas of the Writings into simple statements, letting them stand on their own merits. The result is a brief, straightforward restatement of the Divine laws relating to divorce and separation.
     In summary form the booklet covers the general law of marriage, the law of divorce, and the law of separation, with the three grounds for separation, blemishes of the mind, blemishes of the body, and impotence before marriage. Concubinage, because it is related to divorce and separation and is treated in the Writings, is also discussed.
     For a New Church person this booklet clearly states the reasons for keeping a marriage together and gives little comfort to anyone contemplating divorce.
     The author's end is, as he has stated, to "indicate what is Divinely permissible and what is not . . . to provide some sort of balance to the kinds of attitudes with which we are surrounded from the world, that there may be wisdom in the future."


Editorial Pages 1982

Editorial Pages       Editor       1982


     It is not easy to put your finger an the things that led to a marital breakup. What couple that has seen their marriage erode away can articulate clearly what the causes were? Many couples experience times of disaffection which they can't explain.

     "Would the following phenomenon be one of the ingredients in this complex realm? We refer to a phenomenon that begins without a hint of evil intent, but which leads to vulnerable states in a marriage. This is something that can sneak up on the best of people. In fact it happens sometimes to the angels!
     If you were in a situation in which the giving of happiness to another automatically brought great happiness to yourself, you would be onto a good thing. You would experience one of the wonders of heaven. For in heaven it really works. You make another happy, and you get as a consequence more happiness than you gave.
     Now it is almost inevitable in such a situation that a human being will sometimes incline to the giving of happiness for an obvious motive. Instead of thinking of the happiness of the other, he looks to good consequences for himself. Marriage is a kind of heavenly relationship in which we experience "a mutual desire of mind and heart to do the other every good." Doing good to the partner in the good days of marriage brought a wonderful return, but what of the times when that doing has lost its quality? One is reminded of the phrase in the second chapter of Revelation. "Thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works."
     Do the works. In a hellish situation the attitude on doing good to another goes like this: "Why should I do it? What will I get out of it?" (HH 556) But we are not talking about a hellish state. Nor are we suggesting that it is wrong to anticipate blessings to self from marriage. It is not in an evil context that the Writings speak of the beatitudes which a lover "promised to himself" in seeking consent (see CL 333). We are speaking of a subtle shift in motivation in well-intentioned people. Let us look at the phenomenon in the heavenly state.


We read that when an angel does good to another without thought to his own happiness "then good flows in unto him together with good fortune and bliss much more than he gives, and this with continual increase. But as soon as the thought occurs that he desires to communicate what he has for the sake of obtaining in himself this influx . . . the influx is dissipated" (AC 6478).
     Well-disposed spirits are vulnerable to actual manipulations by evil spirits who accomplish their ends "secretly by directing their affections to themselves; and so far as this is done they turn the faces of the well-disposed spirits away from heaven, and to the same extent obscure their understanding" (HH 558). They can even take good affections in another and bend them around ingeniously bringing about harm "so secretly that the other knows nothing of it" (HH 579).
     One wonders about some of the well-intentioned literature that proliferates at this day. Useful ideas about fulfilling one's potential can be turned to a variety of ways of thinking of self-fulfillment and self-actualization. Without intending evil a person can start thinking, "Perhaps I am not getting enough out of this relationship. Maybe I would get more for myself if this marriage were not limiting me so much. Don't I have a right to more happiness?" A person honestly struggling with this kind of thought is not to be condemned. But it is a vulnerable state in which real help may be sorely needed. We would quote here from a pair of editorials done in this magazine in 1964 by Rev. Cairns Henderson. We commend the reading of these in their entirety as they appear in the book of his Selected Editorials on page 110.


     In holding to this teaching the church is not without deep sympathy for those whom it seems to consign to a half-life of loneliness, unhappiness, frustration, or even real tragedy. Yet it is necessary to make a distinction between what is real and what is apparent; and, in the case of what is real enough, between what is temporal and what is eternal. One of the most dangerous beliefs extant in the world today is that men and women have a "right" to happiness, especially in marriage: a right which transcends every duty and obligation and makes everyone and everything else subservient to its exercise and fulfillment. This supposed right is appealed to every day to justify easy divorce; for the theory is that if a man or woman cannot find happiness with one mate, or think they can find it with another, they have an inalienable "right" to be free and to try again.


     Nothing, however, could be more destructive of true happiness. It puts a premium on selfishness and discourages all effort. The simple facts are that no one has such a right and that happiness is not to be "found"; it is granted to those who are willing to strive for it, and who realize that the striving will certainly involve temptation-perhaps much of Its bitterness and suffering. The very temptations that a man and woman face in their marriage may be those upon victory in which their regeneration, and therefore their true and lasting happiness, depend. Happiness lies, not in yielding, but in patient loyalty to the truth.

     The desirability of helpful reading matter relating to marriage is evident. We look to new efforts in this field by priests and laymen. Let us not overlook the things that are already available, for example in back issues of NEW CHURCH LIFE. Many of our readers have back issues or live near libraries where they are available. Here are just a few of the sermons and articles we would recommend.
     Safeguards of Marriage, H. L. Odhner; 1952 p. 319. The Uses of Friendship in Marriage, M. D. Rich; 1962 p. 54. The Preservation of the Conjugial, M. Pryke; 1966 p. 54. The Eternity of Marriage, F. L. Schnarr; 1967 p. 75. Apparent Love in a Covenant for Life, R. S. Junge; 1966 p. 97. Protecting the Conjugial, W. Heinrichs; 1972 p. 313. Second Love Preferred, R. R. Gladish; 1971 p. 124. Divorce, W. D. Pendleton; 1974 p. 155. Tenderness in Marriage, P. M. Buss; 1974 p. 56. Repeated Marriages, G. de Charms; 1975 p. 538. Marriage and True Morality, G. Childs; 1976 p. 323. Imaginary Heavens and Conjugial Love, A. Acton; 1977 p. 124.
     The above list is only a sampling. Readers are welcome to make further reading recommendations.
     Of course reading the actual passages in the Writings is of paramount importance. We will be saying more on that subject.


     Concern about troubles in marriage has led some pastors to do series of doctrinal classes on this matter. (A series recently given in Bryn Athyn is available on request.) Pastors who have concluded that the most useful thing to do is to present as directly as possible the straight teaching of the Writings have been finding that they need to change the phrasing as they make a point of doctrine. This is not because the Writings are not clear; it is because translations have not always carried into English the directness of the Latin original.


     Yes, we need pamphlets and classes and sermons on this subject, but obviously we need the straight teachings themselves. Some people have said that they found difficulty reading the work Conjugial Love, and in the last couple of years we have heard people say that we do not have an English translation of this work that really does the job.
     In our February issue last year we published an outstanding article by Dr. David Gladish entitled, "Why Is It Hard to Read Swedenborg?" He said, "Ironically, Swedenborg's Latin prose is crisp, concise and utilitarian, compared to our most available translation of it." He showed that the Latin of the work Divine Providence is 40,000 words shorter than the English translation! Yes, it is almost a third shorter in its original expression.
     Among those who have responded enthusiastically to Dr. Gladish is Rev. Eric Carswell. Last May he wrote in the LIFE that he read a sample effort of more crisp phrasing and found it "refreshingly clear and actually better able to convey unpretentiously the sense of the passage."
     One wonders whether the work Conjugial Love is much shorter in Latin. A chapter that deals most directly with troubles in marriage begins at paragraph no. 271. Suppose that paragraph were rendered something like this:

     We have considered the reasons for coldness and separations, so this brings us to the reasons for a pretense of love, friendship and thoughtfulness in marriages. Everyone knows that married couples live together and have children these days even though coldness separates their minds. This would not happen unless there were an appearance of love that at times is like the warmth of genuine love, and imitates it. You will see that such appearances are necessary and useful and that homes, and therefore communities, could not hold together without them.
     Besides, a conscientious person might labor under the idea that if he and his mate disagree in their minds and get alienated inwardly it is their own fault and something against them, and they could grieve in their hearts on account of it. Yet there really is nothing they can do about inner differences, and all they need to do is to quiet the troubles that arise from their consciences by keeping up an appearance of love and approval. This may even bring back a friendship with the love of marriage somewhere within it for one partner if not the other.

     The above rendering of CL 271 comes from 145 words in the Latin original. Both the Acton and Warren translations take more than 200 English words to express this.


The above only takes it down to 181 English words, but brevity is not the main point. It is the matter of a more readable rendering of this straight teaching that deserves further attention.

     In the December issue of Lifeline John Sutton says, "Many of our so-called translations are really transliterations in which every Latin word has its English equivalent." This is in a review of Life in Animals and Plants, which, Mr. Sutton says, "is definitely a translation." (Readers are reminded of the review of this fine translation that appeared in the October issue of the LIFE.)
OLD AGE 1982

OLD AGE       BRUCE HENDERSON       1982

Dear Editor:
     The editorial in the November, 1981 issue on "The Subject of Old Age in NEW CHURCH LIFE" mentions "a long silence about old age after 1923" until publication of a sermon by the Rev. Frank Rose on "The Uses of Old Age" in 1968.
     I was certain that my father, the Rev. W. Cairns Henderson, must have addressed the subject while he was editor of the LIFE. Sure enough, I found an editorial-coincidentally on "Use and Old Age"-appearing in 1956. (It is reprinted in the collection of his work, "Selected Editorials.")
     The editorial notes that while use is so often related to occupation, on earth and in heaven, "there is one notable exception here on earth, and a clear understanding of it may be of aid and comfort to those who are in the evening of their days."
     The editorial is characteristically gentle and sensitive in understanding but discouraging any thought of self-pity or uselessness in old age. It explains that "a man's spiritual use is the influence he has upon others, for good or ill-the impact of his character upon other men. In this interior view, use does not cease with compulsory retirement, or even with the weakness of more advanced years. A character formed by the choices of a long lifetime of experience, and expressing something of the real wisdom of life, may have a far greater effect upon others than its possessor realizes; even if that character is revealed mainly in a truly patient attitude toward the limitations or infirmities of old age.


Wherever its sphere is received it has much of value to give, much that only wise old age can give."
     The message is as enduring as are so many of his editorials. It reminds us that the elderly should never feel less a part of the church because they are less active in it. Their steadfastness and affection for the church strengthens it and inspires the rest of us.
          Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania


Dear Sir:
     What is the most trampled-upon comma in the Liturgy?
     It is surely the one at the end of the Lord's prayer after the word "glory." As a result of such ignominious treatment, this poor, inoffensive, little comma dare not raise its head, much less its voice; so it remains completely unnoticed. Clergy and laity alike have conspired to say the last line of the Lord's prayer as if it were: "For Thine is the kingdom, and the power, and the glory forever." The sense then is that it is only "the glory" to which "forever" applies. Surely the word "forever" applies equally to "the kingdom," "the power" and "the glory"-but not to the "the glory" exclusively.
     All that is needed to restore the proper meaning is for us to be aware of this unthinking habit and make a pause before saying "forever."
     How has this habit developed? Could it be that we are not thinking of what we are saying? It is very easy to do, especially since we have been repeating these words since childhood. True, the less we think about the words the faster we can get through it; but that is hardly our aim. We are seeking conjunction with the Lord and heaven. We are uttering the sacred words of the Lord's own prayer, the perfect prayer. Each petition is a universal of the Lord's kingdom, so the prayer as a whole is intended to conjoin with every society of heaven.
     It would seem good to remind ourselves frequently of this, speaking the words deliberately with a distinct feeling of speaking to the Lord. This will safeguard us against one of the first signs of externalism-"vain repetitions."
          Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania


Church News 1982

Church News       DONALD P. GLADISH       1982



     The 6th Ohio District Assembly of the General Church was hosted by the South Ohio circle at the General Church building in Glendale, Ohio, a suburb of Cincinnati.
     Because this assembly coincided with the dedication of the new addition to the historic Glendale church, the South Ohio circle invited each of the ministers who had served the circle in the past: Rev. Victor Gladish, Rev. Norman Reuter, Rev. B. David Holm, Rev. Daniel Heinrichs, and Rt. Rev. Louis B. King. In addition, Rev. Kenneth Alden, who serves the North Ohio circle was a guest of the assembly. Adding our own Rev. Stephen Cole, the assembly included a total of seven General Church ministers, each of whom contributed both directly and indirectly to the teaching and joy of the occasion.
     The South Ohio circle is fortunate to have, in Glendale, the use of the St. Edmund's facilities which include dormitories as well as dining hall service. Accordingly, many of the guests of the assembly, as well as some of the residents of Cincinnati, chose to stay at St. Edmund's and enjoyed the camaraderie of visiting with one another.
     Friday evening was marked by an informal open house at the new addition to the Glendale church. Refreshments were provided by the ladies of the South Ohio circle and everyone enjoyed a visit and reunion with the friends we see only occasionally. It was a comfortable and delightful evening.
     On Saturday morning, the assembly convened at the church for registration and to hear the excellent episcopal address by Rt. Rev. Louis B. King. Bishop King's address to the assembly     was concerned with the distinctiveness of the New Church. The three uses of Divine revelation are to provide a picture of the Lord, to provide the tools to help us remove the roadblocks so that
we can follow the Lord, and to provide the truths to build a habitation for the Lord. By using the Lord's truths we can build a new spiritual body.
     After the episcopal address, comments were made by several of the ministers and questions were put to the Bishop from the floor.
     We were fortunate in having so many capable and articulate ministers at the assembly, so it was most enjoyable to have three of the ministers address the afternoon session. Rev. Kenneth Alden spoke first on the subject of "Our Neighbors in the Christian World." Rev. Daniel Heinrichs followed with a talk on the relationship of the church specific to the church universal. Rev. Victor Gladish spoke about how the church universal serves the church specific.     
     When these three talks had been given, the three ministers formed a forum to field questions and comments from the floor, and a lively discussion followed.
     On Saturday evening the banquet was held in the dining room at the St. Edmund's facility. We had hoped to hold the banquet in our new building but the building commissioners have not permitted us to install a stove in the kitchen and, until we have that ability, our cooking at the church building is restricted to coffee and tea.
     Alan Childs of northern Ohio was toastmaster for the banquet and he provided his usual depth of intelligence and wisdom to the assembly.


This time he added a large portion of humorous memories that he had from his youth of each of the ministers present.
     When Alan had completed his introductions, we were treated to the meat of the evening, the subject being "The Center and Its Satellites." Bill Alden of the North Ohio circle, currently living in Louisiana, talked with intelligence and understanding on the subject of "The Satellites" and was followed by an enlightening talk by the Rev. David Holm on the subject of "The Center." These areas, though miles apart, serve one another in performing various uses to the church specific.
     Fortunately, this circle is a singing group and we concluded the banquet with toasts and songs appropriate to the occasion.
     On Sunday, the church service was administered by Rev. Norman Reuter, Rev. Stephen Cole and Rt. Rev. Louis B. King and was followed by the Holy Supper service.
     It must be noted that 100 people were counted as attendees for the church service and the dedication of the new addition to the Glendale church building.
     Following the service, the congregation adjourned to the new addition, which is a part of the existing church. The addition was dedicated to the uses of New Church study and social life. The keys to the new addition were given to Bishop King who kindly returned them so that we would have access in the future.
     This was a most satisfactory and enjoyable occasion. While the Ohio District is still relatively small in population and the South Ohio circle still not distinguished by its numbers, the progress that has been made and the marvelous new families and individuals who have joined our group are impressive. The sense of camaraderie and the doctrinal expertise that existed during this weekend gives all of us a deeper sense of purpose and dedication. We look forward to the future growth of the church in this area.
     For those readers who have skipped geography or who haven't looked at their National Geographic magazine lately, Cincinnati is the hub of America's great midwest. Those of you who are seeking an adventure outside of the east can find everything in Cincinnati that you would find in New York without the danger of being killed as you seek your fortune. There are hills; there are trees; there are opportunities. Best of all, there is a growing General Church center with plans for a school.

ACADEMY OF THE NEW CHURCH              1982

     Each year the Academy Boys and Girls Schools invite 9th and 10th grade students from other areas to visit the Academy for a few days. These visits have been useful in interesting students in Academy education and preparing them for it.
     In order to facilitate planning for the visits we invite the students from different areas on a rotating basis. In the spring of 1982, we will invite students from Ohio, Michigan, and Pennsylvania. In the fall of 1982, it will be students from Washington, New York. New England, New Jersey, and Southeastern United States and in the spring of 1983 Canada and Northeastern United States students.
     Those who wish to participate in one of these visits may contact me, or their pastor, for further information.
     In addition to these group visits, individual students. parents, and others are welcome to visit at any time. Just write or give me a call.
     T. Dudley Davis,
Director of Student Services Academy of the New Church





     Items submitted to this magazine should be typed double-spaced. This is important both to typists and proofreaders. Please do not ask to make changes after you have once put the copy in our hands.




     MARCH 8-13. 1982

Monday, March 8
     10:00 a.m.      Headmasters' Meeting
     2:30 p.m.      Worship
     3:00 p.m.      Opening Session, the Council of the Clergy
     6:30 p.m.      Dinner for the ministers and their wives

Tuesday, March 9
     8:30 a.m.      General Church Translation Committee
     8:30 a.m.      General Church Publication Committee
     10:00 a.m.      Session II, the Council of the Clergy
     12:30 p.m.      Luncheon at the Cathedral
     1:15 p.m.      Elective Topics
     3:00 p.m.      Session III, the Council of the Clergy
     7:30 p.m.      Professional Development Workshop

Wednesday. March 10
     8:30 a.m.      General Church Sunday School Committee
     10:00 a.m.      Session IV, the Council of the Clergy
     12:30 p.m.      Luncheon at the Cathedral
     1:15 p.m.      Elective Topics
     3:00 p.m.      Session V, the Council of the Clergy
     6:30 p.m.      Social Supper for ministers

Thursday. March 11
     8:30 a.m.      Pastors' Meeting
     10:00 a.m.      Session VI, the Council of the Clergy
     12:30 p.m.      Luncheon at the Cathedral
     1:15 p.m.      Elective Topics
     3:00 p.m.      Session VII, the Council of the Clergy
     8:00 p.m.      Consistory

Friday. March 12
     8:00 a.m.      Traveling Ministers' Meeting
     10:00 a.m.      Session VIII, the Council of the Clergy
     12:30 p.m.      Glencairn Luncheon
     2:00 p.m.      Board of Directors of the General Church
     5:00 p.m.      General Church Corporation followed by an organization meeting of the Directors
     6:15 p.m.      Bryn Athyn Society Social
     7:00 p.m.      Friday Supper
     7:45 p.m.      General Church Evening

Saturday, March 13
     10:00 a.m.      Joint Council of the General Church
     12:30 p.m.      Glencairn Luncheon




Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania

     Public worship and doctrinal classes are provided either regularly or occasionally at the locations listed below. For details use the local phone number of the contact person mentioned or communicate with the Secretary of the General Church, Rev. L. R. Soneson, Cairncrest, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009, Phone (215) 9474660.


     SYDNEY, N.S.W.
Rev. Erik E. Sandstrom, 22 Dudley Street, Penshurst, N.S.W. 2222. Phone: 57-1589.


Rev. Andrew Heilman, Rua Ferreira de Sampaio 58. Apt. 101, Abolicao, Rio de Janeiro 20.000.


     British Columbia:

Rev. William Clifford. 1536 94th Ave., Dawson Creek, V1G 1H1. Phone: (604) 782-3997.

Mr. Douglas Crompton, 21-7055 Blake St., V5S 3V5. Phone: (604) 437-9136.


Rev. Christopher Smith, 16 Bannockburn Rd., R.R. 2, N2G 3W5. Phone: (519) 893-7460.

Mr. and Mrs. Donald McMaster, 726 Edison Avenue, Apt. 33, Ottawa, Ontario K2C 3P8. Phone: (613) 729-6452.

Rev. Geoffrey Childs, 2 Lorraine Gardens, Islington, Ontario M9B 424 Phone: (416) 231-4958.


Mr. Denis de Chazal, 17 Baliantyne Ave. So., Montreal West, Quebec H4X 281. Phone: (514) 489-9861.


Mr. Jorgen Hauptmann, Strandvejen 22, Jyllinge, 4000 Roskilde. Phone: 03-389968.


Rev. Patrick A. Rose, 43 Athelstan Rd., Colchester C03 3TW. England. Phone: Colchester 5644.

Mr. and Mrs. R. Evans, 111 Howard Drive, Letchworth, Herts. Phone: Letchworth 4751.

Rev. Robert McMaster, 135 Mantilla Rd., London SW17 8DX. Phone: 672-6239.

Mrs. Neil Rowcliffe, 135 Bury Old Road, Heywood, Lanes. Phone: Heywood 68189.

Mrs. R. Griffith, Wyngarth Wootton Fitzpaine, Bridport DT6 6NF.Phone: Charmouth 614.


Rev. Alain Nicolier, 21200 Beaune, France. Phone: (80) 22.47.88.


Mr. Daan Lupker, Wabserveen Straat 25, The Hague.


Mrs. Marion Mills, 8 Duders Ave., Devonport, Auckland 9. Phone: 453-043.


Mr. Eyvind Boyesen, Vetlandsveien 82A, Oslo 6. Phone: 26-1159.


Mr. and Mrs. N. Laidlaw, 35 Swanspring Ave., Edinburgh EH 10-6NA. Phone: 0 31-445- 2377.

Mrs. J. Clarkson, Hillview. Balmore, Nr. Torrance, Glasgow. Phone: Balmore 262.




Rev. Geoffrey Howard, 30 Perth Rd., Westville, Natal. 3630. Phone: 031-821 136.


Mr. D. S. Came, 110 8th St., Lindon 2195. Phone:011-462982.


Louisa Allais, 129 Anderson Road, Mandini, Zululand 4490.

     Mission in South Africa:
Superintendent-The Rev. Norman E. Riley, 42 Pitlochry Rd., Westville. Natal, 3630.


Rev. Bjorn Boyesen, Bruksater, Furusjo, 5-56600, Habo. Phone: 0392-20395.

Rev. Ragnar Boyesen, Aladdinsvagen 27, 161 38 Bromma. Phone: 48-99-22 and 26-79-85.



Dr. R. Shepard, 4537 Dolly Ridge Road, Birmingham, AL 35243. Phone:(205) 967-3442.


Mr. Hubert Rydstrom, 3640 E. Piccadilly Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85018. Phone: (602) 955-2290.

Rev. Roy Franson, 8416 East Kenyon Dr., Tucson, AZ 85710. Phone: (602) 296-1070.


Rev. Michael Gladish, 2959 Mount Curve, Altadena. CA 91001. Phone:(213) 797-5097.

Rev. Cedric King, 7911 Canary Way, San Diego, CA 92123. Phone: (714) 268-0379.

Rev. Wendel Barnett, 5351 Southbridge Pl., San Jose, CA 95118. Phone: (408) 267-7730.


Mr. James Andrews, 9722 Majestic Rd., Longmont, CO 80501. Phone: (303) 652-2073.



Rev. Glenn Alden, 47 Jerusalem Hill Rd., Trumbull, CT 06611. Phone:(203)877-1141.


Mrs. Justin Hyatt, 417 Delaware Ave., McDaniel Crest, Wilmington, DE 19803. Phone: (302) 478-4213.

     District of Columbia see Mitchellville. Maryland.


Rev. John Odhner, 413 Summit Ave., Lake Helen, FL 32744. Phone: (904) 228-2337.

Rev. Mark Alden, 253 S. Biscayne River Dr., Miami, FL 33169. Phone: (305) 687-1337.


Rev. Louis Synnestvedt, Rt. 3. Box 136. Americus, GA 31709. Phone: (912) 924-9221.

Rev. Christopher Bown, 3795 Montford Dr., Chamblee. GA 30341. Phone:(404)457-4726


(Idaho-Oregon border) Mr. Harold Rand, 1705 Whitley Dr., Fruitland, ID 83619. Phone: (208) 452-3181.

Rev. Brian Keith, 2712 Brassie Dr., Glenview, IL 60025. Phone: (312) 724-7829.

Mr. John Aymer, 380 Oak Lane, Decatur, IL 62562. Phone: (217) 875-3215.

Rev. Peter Buss, 73 Park Dr., Glenview, IL 60025. Phone: (312) 724-0120.

Contact Rev. Stephen Cole in Cincinnati, Ohio.


Mr. Henry Bruser, Jr., 1652 Ormandy Dr., Baton Rouge, LA 70808. Phone: (504) 921-3089.


Rev. David Simons, 13213 E. Greenbank Rd., Oliver Beach, MU 21220. Phone: (301) 335-6763.


Rev. Daniel Heinrichs, 3809 Enterprise Rd., Mitchellville, MD 20716. Phone: (301) 262-4565.


Mr. Douglas Peterson, 124 Chalmers, Springfield, MA 01118. Phone: (413) 783-2851.


Rev. Walter Orthwein, 132 Kirk La., Troy, MI 48084. Phone: (313) 689-6118.

Mr. Christopher Clark, 5853 Smithfield, East Lansing, MI 48823. Phone: (517) 351-2880.


Mrs. Tore Gram, 20185 Vine St., Excelsior, MN 55331. Phone: (612) 474-9574.


Mr. David Zeigler, 1616 B Norma Ct., Columbia, MO 65201. Phone: (314) 442-0569.

Mr. Glen Klippenstein, Glenkirk Farms, Maysville, MO 64469. Phone: (816) 449-2167.

     New Jersey-New York:

Mrs. Edsall Elliott, 26 Fieldstone Dr., Whippany, NJ 07981. Phone: (201) 887-0478.

     New Mexico:

Dr. Andrew Doering, 1298 Sagebrush Ct., Rio Rancho, NM 87124. Phone: (505) 897-3623.

     North Carolina:

Mr. Gordon Smith, 38 Newriver Trace, Clover, SC 29710. Phone: (803) 831-2355.


Rev. Stephen Cole, 6431 Mayflower Ave., Cincinnati, OH 45237. Phone: (513) 631-1210.

Mr. Alan Childs, 19680 Beachcliff Blvd., Rocky River, OH 44116. Phone: (216) 333-4413.

Mr. Hubert Heinrichs, 8372 Todd Street Rd., Sunbury. OH 43074. Phone: (614) 524-2738.


Mrs. Louise Tennis, 3546 S. Marion, Tulsa, OK 74135. Phone: (918) 742-8495.


Mrs. W. Andrews, 2655 S.W. Upper Drive Pl., Portland, OR 97201. Phone:(503) 227-4144.

     Oregon-Idaho Border.-See Idaho, Fruitland.


Rev. Kurt Asplundh, Box 277, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009. Phone: (215) 947-3665.

Mrs. Paul Murray, 5648 Zuck Rd., Erie, PA 16506. Phone: (814) 833-0962.

Rev. Arne Bau-Madsen, Box 527, Rt. 1, Lenhartsville. PA 19534. Phone: (215) 756-6139.

Rev. Kenneth Stroh, 7105 Reynolds St., Pittsburgh, PA 15208. Phone: (Church) (412)-731-7421.

     South Carolina:- see North Carolina.

     South Dakota:

Rev. Erik Sandstrom, RR 1, Box 101M, Hot Springs, SD 57747. Phone: (605) 745-6714


Mrs. Charles Hogan, 7513 Evelyn La., Ft. Worth, TX 76118. Phone: (817) 284-0502.

Mr. Bruce Coffin. 3560 Tamina Manor, Conroe, TX 77301. Phone: (713) 273-4989.


Rev. Kent Junge, 14323-123rd NE, #C, Kirkland. WA 98033. Phone: (206) 821-0157.


Mrs. Charles Howell, 3912 Plymouth Circle, Madison, WI 53705. Phone: (608) 233-0209.




Announces the Publication of
By Rev. W. Cairns Henderson
Definitions of 126 commonly used terms reprinted from a series in NEW CHURCH LIFE, January 1961-July 1966. This booklet is useful to newcomers as well as established members
of the church. $1.20 postpaid

     Also available
By Rev. W. Cairns Henderson
Editor, NEW CHURCH LIFE. 1950-1974

     A collection of 170 editorials selected from the wide variety of subjects that Mr. Henderson examined in the light of the Writings during his years as editor. These selected editorials have been gathered into a single hard-cover volume that will be treasured by students of the Writings at all levels. $3.40 postpaid

     GENERAL CHURCH                     HOURS: 8:30-12
BOOK CENTER                         Monday thru Friday
BRYN ATHYN                         Phone: (215) 947-3920



NOTES ON THIS ISSUE       Editor       1982

Vol. CII     March, 1982          No. 3


     They shall "renew their strength." They shall "mount up with wings." The stirring words from Isaiah are about renewal. There is an element of celebration in the sacraments. Is not the joy of baptism portrayed in "the desire of certain birds to plunge themselves into water . . . after which they return as warblers to their songs"? (See TCR 687.) The holy supper is a most holy act of worship. The address by Rev. Michael Gladish (now of Los Angeles) invites consideration of its joyful aspect. The verbs "renovate" and "innovate" describe ingredients of preparation for heaven and for the gateway, which is the holy supper.
     The merchantman finding one pearl of great price "went and sold all that he had and bought it." We have in this issue a careful and extensive study which can deepen understanding of just what is meant by that pearl of great price. The author, Rev. Andrew Heilman, is pastor of the society in Rio de Janeiro.
     As Mr. Gladish continues to share some of his findings in studying the life of William Benade he finds material relevant to the recent discussion of the word "conjugial."
     Our editorial this month has to do with a certain chapter in the Writings, the one that is rendered by Dr. David Gladish into modern English. In recent years there has been considerable discussion of ways of phrasing the Writings. This rendition should go a long way in helping to crystallize thought and discussion.
     Our Church News section includes two items from Africa. (Another from the Transvaal will appear next month.) We also have an attempt to summarize some of the news from various church publications. Finally, we note that the summer school in Canada is alive and well, and we have an enticing description of "Maple Leaf" (P. 129).


     In the February 1982 issue of NEW CHURCH LIFE ("The i in Conjugialis"), p. 69, second paragraph, there is a very poor piece of homework I would like to retract, wrongly relating the metrical shape of the words conjugialis and conjugalis to their stress features. My apologies to Dr. Chadwick. Consequently, Ovid's choice of conjugialis could have been made for poetic rather than semantic reasons.



RENEWAL       Rev. MICHAEL D. GLADISH       1982


     "They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles; they shall run and not be weary; and they shall walk, and not faint" (Isaiah 40:31).

     The two sacraments of the Christian church, baptism and the holy supper, are said to be like two universal gates to eternal life. "Baptism is the first gate, through which every Christian is admitted and introduced into what the church teaches from the Word concerning the future life; and all this teaching is the means whereby man may be prepared and led to heaven. The other gate is the holy supper, through which everyone who has permitted himself to be prepared and led by the Lord is admitted and introduced into heaven . . . . The first gate leads to a plain which he must traverse, and the second is the goal where is the reward to which he has directed his course" (TCR 721).
     Similarly, we are taught, "There are two states which a man must enter and pass through as he progresses from the natural to the spiritual. The first state is called reformation, and the other regeneration. In the first, a man looks from his natural state toward the spiritual and desires to attain it; in the second, he becomes a spiritual-natural man. The first state is formed by means of truths which will belong to faith, and by which he looks toward charity; the second is formed by means of the goods of charity, by which he enters into the truths of faith; or what is the same thing, the first is a state of thought from the understanding, the other is a state of love from the will . . . . A man who in the world has entered upon the first state can after death be introduced into the second; but he who has not entered upon the first state while in the world cannot be introduced into the second after death, and thus cannot be regenerated" (TCR 571).
     Through these teachings we are led to see that while baptism is a sacrament denoting reformation through the truths of faith, the holy supper is a sacrament celebrating regeneration, that is, a state of actual renewal through the acquisition of a new will from the Lord.


The first may be a state involving labor and sadness, as it invites and provokes many spiritual temptations; but the second is a state of rest and confidence, in effect man's reward for cooperating with the Lord through the former hardships. "They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength. . . ."
     The holy supper is not necessarily the culmination of reward, but it is the gate of entrance into it. Thus it may be viewed as a testimony of renewal. Now we note that the Heavenly Doctrines use two separate words for the concept of renewal: literally translated they are "renovate" and "innovate." The first implies return from a state of disorder to an original state of order; the other a completely new creation. Both are involved in the process of man's spiritual growth-even as both are involved in his natural growth-but it may be evident that the first (renovation) pertains more to the state of reformation, and the second (innovation) pertains more to the state of regeneration. The former may be likened to the process of dissolutions and repairs by means of which the body is kept in a state of health; but the latter may be likened to the infusion and development of entirely new faculties and powers in the man. And it is this latter that constitutes the state of regeneration celebrated in the holy supper. It is what Isaiah meant in his statement, "They that wait upon the Lord shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings like eagles; they shall run and not be weary; and they shall walk and not faint."
     "By regeneration a man is made wholly new as to his spirit" (CL 525:4). Thus, to be "renewed in strength" signifies to grow into a completely new state as to the willing of good (AC 3901:2), as also "to mount up with wings like eagles" signifies to grow into new understanding of the truth, thus as to the rational. Now whenever there is growth there is a casting off of former states; if not entirely, still in such a way as to make room for what is new. Think of the old leaves and the dead bark of a tree falling away as a new season begins. So in relation to a man we read that ". . . by death is also signified the extinction of the body's loves or the lusts of the flesh, after which there is renewal [a new beginning] of life"(AR 866). We also read that "this renewal cannot be accomplished except from time to time, in almost the same way as from seed a tree successively takes root, grows and is perfected" (CL 525:4).
     It is of course true that the renewal which is reformation must precede the establishment of new spiritual states by the Lord. There must be a raising up of what has fallen (AC 153), that is, a correction of both evils and falsities by means of the power of Divine truth, or the truth of faith.


We must come, as the Lord Himself said, to the fountain of living water, the knowledge of the doctrinal things of good and truth from the Word whereby the natural man is restored to order (AC 3768). But all this may still be likened to the state of winter before the rays of the bright sun actually warm the breast of the earth and fill her with the happy spirit of life. Or it may be likened to a brisk early morning when hard work keeps off the chill until mid-day when there will be rest and warmth all around.
     True, the holy supper is a sacrament of repentance, but it is that which "confirms the remission of sins with those who repent" (DP 122). Thus it is a feast of celebration and thanksgiving, not a symbol of the work that remains to be done-though there may be plenty of that.
     The holy supper is actually a feast-or at least the representation of a feast-and so it should be entered into with that spirit. The Writings testify without apology that the sacrament involves every essential element of the Jewish feasts and sacrifices. So it is not meant to be a somber ritual, however solemn it may be; it is not meant to be introspective, no matter how much self-examination should precede it; there ought not to be undue isolation of the individual in his thoughts from others, no matter how intensely he seeks communion with the Lord, for there is no love to the Lord without charity and regard for the neighbor. Rather ought there to be joyful sharing with those whose lives are dedicated to the same principles of the spiritual good and truth that are represented in the holy supper.
     And note how fully this representation is effected with this ritual. No other form of service could achieve the same thing or be as complete (think of whatever form of art or experience you may, film, song, drama, anything). In the supper all the physical senses are involved: sight as the elements are prepared, served and partaken; hearing as the familiar passages are read and even as the sound of the wine being poured and the bread being prepared breaks the silence of reflection; smell as the elements are offered and received; touch as we actually reach out and accept and feel the texture and quality of this food; and of course taste as we savor hopefully with delight a real refreshment prepared carefully with that end in view. The fact that our natural bodies then go on to assimilate the bread and wine very quickly and to use the nutrients for the building up of cells, tissues and organs confirms and completes the representation, for it illustrates the way in which our minds must assimilate and use the goods and truths of the Word, and not just store them up as inert bits of our environment.


The satisfaction, pleasure and delight of the sacrament should be a real and natural-as well as spiritual-thing inasmuch as it is the plane or basis into which the higher sensations flow and rest.
     And there should be no embarrassment or hesitation about partaking of the supper fully! After all, there is plenty to go around (just as there is plenty, and always more, of the Lord's love and wisdom to go around), and it IS GOOD, though perhaps rich for ordinary fare. To those of you who may be in the habit of partaking very sparingly-for whatever reasons, including modesty or humility, feelings of unworthiness-ask yourselves this question: Would you knowingly refuse a gift of life from the Lord? If He gave you a powerful gift of encouragement, inspiration and zeal for the things of heaven, would- you shrink back saying you are not worthy? Who is unworthy of encouragement in the path to heaven?
     So again, the appropriate state for the reception of the holy supper is not one of sadness or remorse; it should not be a time of spiritual labor or temptation. Rather, it is a moment of refreshment after labor, a time of rest, of peace, of thanks for what the Lord has provided. It is like the gate of entrance from winter into spring: we know there is work ahead, but we pause for a moment at the entry-way to acknowledge the blessings of our Heavenly Father. Much work has already been done more than we know, if we have made any effort to keep the Lord in our minds-for as the Writings say, He is more present than a man can believe, even in temptations of despair and seeming denial (DP 145, AC 1937).
     There will never be self-satisfaction in this sacrament, for the mind must be kept focussed entirely on the Lord. But surely there can be a joyful sharing of the benefits of His redemption, a celebration of both the concept and the very fact of spiritual renewal through His Word, "a feast of fat things, a feast of wines on the lees, of fat things full of marrow, of wines on the lees well refined" (Isa. 25:6). Amen.

     LESSONS: Isaiah 25:1-9 or Psalms 111, 113 (see also Exodus 16:1-18); John 6:26-58 NEW CIRCLE 1982

NEW CIRCLE              1982

     As of January 27, 1982, the group in Sacramento, California, has been recognized as the Sacramento circle of the General Church of the New Jerusalem.




     A STUDY
     The kingdom of heaven is like a merchantman, seeking goodly pearls, who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went and sold all that he had, and bought it (Matt. 13:45, 46).
     When we hear this parable we ask ourselves what this pearl is which is worth everything we have and more. What is so precious that the seeking and finding of it can be compared to the kingdom of heaven? Surely it is no natural object, for nothing of this world could be so valuable. This pearl of great price must represent something superior, something spiritual and heavenly. So to find this pearl we must look not in the things of this world, but in the things of heaven. And the only place to seek and find the things of heaven is in the Word of the Lord.
     The pearl is referred to several times in the Word, especially in the book of Revelation. Perhaps the best known reference to the pearl is the gates of the holy city New Jerusalem. About these we read:

And the city had a wall great and high and had twelve gates . . . and the twelve gates were twelve pearls, each gate was one pearl (Rev. 21:12, 21).

     The means by which we enter into the New Jerusalem, which is the New Church, is here represented by pearls. And if we consider the entrance to the Lord's kingdom on earth as a pearl, we can better understand the general meaning of the pearl of great price.
     The merchant seeking goodly pearls is the man who is searching for the goods and truths by which the life of heaven and the church may be attained (AE 1044). The pearl of great price is the principal means by which he can enter into this life (AR 916). And the merchant selling all that he had and buying the pearl is to give up the life of one's own evil will, to receive this means to eternal life (AC 5886:4). From this we can see why it is that the Lord likened the kingdom of heaven to the seeking and finding of a valuable pearl, for by the kingdom of heaven is here understood both heaven and the church (AE 1044).
     There are twelve gates to the New Jerusalem, that is, there are various ways by which all good men can come into the Lord's kingdom. Thus we are told that the twelve gates were twelve pearls. Nevertheless, it is also said that "each gate was one pearl." This one pearl is the pearl of great price (AR 916), the pearl by which we enter into the spiritual and heavenly life which comes from the Lord.


But what is this costly pearl? What is the one only means to enter into the kingdom of our Lord?
     The Heavenly Doctrines teach us that pearls in general correspond to the knowledges of good which come from the letter of the Word, by which a man is introduced into the church and heaven (see HH 307:2; AR 727, 899; AE 717:6, 1142). And as pearls in general correspond to knowledges of good, the pearl of great price signifies the knowledge of the Divine good, which is the knowledge about the Lord Jesus Christ and His divinity. This is the pearl of great price found by the merchant seeking goodly pearls. This is the pearl which is worth everything we have and more. This is the pearl by which we enter into the church and heaven. The knowledge that Jesus Christ is Divine, that He alone is God, is the knowledge which leads to all good. For this reason the Lord said, "I am the door. If any man enters in by Me, he shall be saved, and go in and out, and find pasture" (John 10:9).
     To enter in by the Lord we must recognize that nothing of good and truth comes from ourselves, but that all the good which we do and will, and all the truth which we speak and think, comes from the Lord Jesus Christ, because He is God. This is selling all that we have and buying the pearl, which is the entrance into the New Jerusalem. If we truly seek the way to heaven-the knowledges that teach us what we must do, which are the truths as the Lord presents them in His Word--we will be led to find the pearl of great price. We will learn that the Lord Jesus Christ is the true God, that He alone is the door to heaven and His church. No one else can let us into the Lord's church. Not by our own power, not by the power of our friends do we attain the life of heaven or the church. We must sell all that we have and put our trust in the Lord alone as he presents Himself to us in His Word, for this is the pearl beyond price.
     Now it is said in the literal sense of the Lord's parable that the man sold all that he had and bought the precious pearl. But we should not interpret this to mean that we can possess as our own the entrance into heaven, that we can say we are saved or that another is saved. It is for this reason that we must spiritually sell all that we have, which is to recognize that we can never possess as our own the things of the Lord, especially His salvation or knowledge of who is saved. We can indeed receive the spiritual life of the church and heaven, which is signified here by buying the pearl of great price. We can learn about the Lord and acknowledge Him as God. But we cannot know with absolute certainty that we have received Him, that we truly acknowledge Him.


Still less can we know whether someone else has received Him or acknowledges Him. The pearl of great price remains the possession of the Lord alone.
     That this pearl should never be claimed as our own is clear from the following teaching in Divine Providence:

One's own prudence persuades and confirms that every good and truth is from man and in man, because man's own prudence is his intellectual proprium flowing in from the love of self which is his voluntary proprium; and the proprium cannot do otherwise than make all things its own, for it cannot be raised above that. All who are led by the Lord's Divine Providence are raised above the proprium, and they then see that all good and truth are from the Lord; and they even see that what is in man from the Lord is perpetually the Lord's and never man's. He who believes otherwise is like one who has his master's goods under his care, and claims them for himself or appropriates them as his own. He is not a steward, but a thief. And as man's proprium is nothing but evil, he also immerses them in his evil, whereby they are destroyed like pearls being cast into dung or into acid (DP 316).

For we cannot judge whether we or another have what is needed to enter into the Lord's church or heaven. Thus it is that the words "cast not your pearls before swine" follow the teaching in the sermon on the mount, "judge not that ye be not judged" (Matt. 7:1-6).
     After the general teaching about not judging another man internally (Matt. 7:1, 2; CL 523; Verbo 15), the Lord gives a clear illustration of how we would judge a good man as evil, considering the mote in our brother's eye while there is a beam in our own eye (Matt. 7:3-5; AC 2360:5, 6; 9051:3; AE 629:14; 746:14-16). Then follows the Lord's warning, "Give not what is holy to the dogs, neither cast ye your pearls before swine, lest they trample them under their feet and turn again and rend you" (Matt. 7:6). At first these last words seem to be unrelated, if not somewhat contrary, to the teaching, "judge not that ye be not judged." They seem to tell us to withhold or conceal the holy things of the church from those who are internally dogs or swine. It seems we need to judge others before presenting the truths of the church. But let us consider these words more closely. The Lord does not say "withhold" or "conceal"; he says "give not" and "cast not." We are told here not to attribute holy things to him who is unholy, or impute good to him who is evil. And this we would do if we judged ourselves or others as worthy of heaven or interiorly good.
     That imputing the Lord's good to ourselves is like casting pearls before swine may be seen by the passage quoted earlier from Divine Providence where this is compared to pearls being cast into dung.


And that imputing the Lord's good to an evil man in general can be described by casting pearls before swine is clearly evident from the following teaching about imputation in the True Christian Religion.

It is said in the decrees of the councils, and the articles of the confessions to which the Reformed subscribe, that God justifies the wicked by the merit of Christ infused into them. Yet even the good of an angel cannot be communicated, still less conjoined, to a wicked man. It would be rejected, rebounded like a ball thrown against a wall, or swallowed up like a diamond thrown into a marsh. Indeed, if anything really good were to be pushed upon him, it would be like a pearl tied to a pig's snout. For who does not know that mercy cannot be infused into cruelty, innocence into revenge, love into hatred, or agreement into disagreement? This would be like mingling heaven and hell (TCR 642).

If we impute good to an evil man, push mercy upon a cruel man, or love upon him who hates, we are in effect tying a pearl to a pig's snout, or casting it before swine. By this imputation the holy things of the church would be profaned, because there would be a mingling of heaven and hell.
     This imputation is avoided by not taking it upon ourselves to judge a man as to his inner thoughts or intentions. For such interior judgment involves imputation, as can be seen from this explanation found in Conjugial Love:

The Lord says "Judge not, that ye be not condemned" (Matt. 7:1). This can in no way be understood as meaning judgment concerning a man's moral and civil life in the world, but as meaning judgment concerning his spiritual and celestial life . . . . What is not lawful is judgment as to the quality of the interior mind or soul within man, thus as to what his spiritual state is and hence his lot after death. This is known to the Lord only . . . . It is judgment of man's spiritual life or of the internal life of his soul that is meant by the imputation here treated of. What man knows who is a whoremonger at heart? or who is a consort at heart? Yet it is the thoughts of the heart, being purposes of the will, that judge every man (CL 523).

     There are many motives that drive us to making judgments on the interior state of others and ourselves, such as the love of domineering, blind compassion, revenge, or the desire to know with certainty that we are in the Lord's church and will be saved. All these motives are part of the life of our own evil will. And, as the merchant sold all that he had to receive the pearl of great price, so too we must shun such motives of our evil will to receive the genuine knowledge and acknowledgment of the Lord's divinity.


For if these evil loves are ruling in us, we will seek to enter heaven and the church by ourselves and by others and not by the Lord. And if we do not enter into the sheepfold by the Door, which is the Lord and the knowledge and acknowledgment of Him, we are then, as He says, thieves and robbers (John 10:1). For we then steal the precious pearls which pertain to the Lord alone for ourselves (DP 316).
     The old Christian church fell because they stole the goods and truths from the Lord, trying to dominate the gateway into heaven and the church. The Catholic church did this openly, claiming that the Pope has the power to absolve and excommunicate, and taking to themselves the glory and honor which should only be given to the Lord. They equated their own organization with the Lord's kingdom on earth, and made their external rituals necessary for salvation. This church and its dominion is described in the book of Revelation as "the woman arrayed in purple and scarlet, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls" (Rev. 17:4). Also, in describing the fall of the spiritual dominion of the Catholic church, it is said:

Alas, alas, that great city, which was clothed in fine linen, and purple and scarlet, and decked with gold and precious stones and pearls! For in one hour so great riches is come to nought (Rev. 18:16, 17).

The precious stones and pearls with which the woman or great city was adorned signify the knowledges of truth and good from the Word, which the Catholic church stole and perverted to take dominion over the souls of men.
     But in the Protestant church they stole from the Lord more secretly. For they declared that all of salvation is from the faith in Jesus Christ, saying that nothing of salvation comes from man or his feeble efforts. But this faith that they speak of is their own fabrication, an individual faith in a personal Savior, who died on the cross, making atonement for each man individually. Many of them speak of when they because true Christians, of the time when they were born again and entered into the Lord's church. Many Protestants will say that their salvation depends on their confidence that they have been saved. Thus, in reality they also attribute salvation to man and not to the Lord, saying that in being born again they received the merit of Christ. It is specifically this imputation of Christ's merit that is illustrated as tying a pearl to a pig's snout (TCR 642). Also, when a group of Protestant clergy showed Swedenborg an image of their faith, there appeared an image of a woman dressed in scarlet, with gold in her right hand and pearls in her left hand (AR 926:2).


     But the theft and destruction of the pearl of great price by the old Christian church is most clearly illustrated in this passage about the Divine Trinity:

     The Divine Trinity is like the pearl of great price; but when it is divided into persons, it is like the pearl being divided into three parts, which is thus completely and entirely destroyed (TCR 184).

The knowledge and acknowledgment of the Lord as the only God, in Whom is the Divine Trinity, was completely lost when the first Christian church divided God into three persons. For they made this doctrine of three Divine persons ecumenical, that is, the established doctrine for the whole Christian church. Men took it upon themselves to define the nature of the Lord's divinity, and then made this the ruling principle of the church. They sought to control the entrance into the Lord's kingdom on earth through their own doctrine. They were not willing to sell all that they had: their polytheistic ideas, their lust for dominion, their desire for knowing who is saved, and their materialistic thoughts about the Lord and His kingdom. They tried to possess the pearl of great price for themselves and they destroyed it.
     But now, with the second coming of the Lord and the descent of the New Jerusalem, the pearl of great price is restored. The Heavenly Doctrines clearly teach about the Lord's divinity and the Divine Trinity which is in Him. They show us how this doctrine is the essential message of the letter of the Word. Men can now enter again into the Lord's church through the gates of the one pearl.
     But how do we protect this pearl from being destroyed again? How do we protect the entrance into the Lord's kingdom on earth so that the holy things of the church are not profaned? We protect it in the only way possible-we let the Lord protect it. It was in part man's desire to protect the truth about the divinity of Jesus Christ that led to the formation of the destructive doctrine of three Divine persons. For this doctrine was formulated to defeat the Arian heresy-that Jesus was only a man. Men tried to explain from themselves the Lord's divinity and the Trinity more clearly than the Lord Himself did in His Word; and then they made their formulation superior to the Word, and the doorway into the church. This was the inevitable result of men trying to protect the gates into the Lord's kingdom.


     Nevertheless this does not mean that we open the gates of the New Jerusalem to all who might wish to enter. For just as we cannot close the gates, neither can we open them. The only One who can is "He who is holy, He who is true, He who hath the key of David, He who openeth and no man shutteth, and shutteth and no man openeth" (Rev. 3:7). We cannot formulate or interpret doctrine to protect the Lord's kingdom, nor can we change or weaken the truth to facilitate the entrance of others or ourselves. The Lord's truth as it is presented in His Word serves both as a protection for the church and as an entrance into it, both as the walls of the New Jerusalem and as its gates (AR 898, 899). All spiritual judgment comes from the Lord in His Word, for He alone knows whether a man is worthy to enter His kingdom or not.
     Now, although we cannot make spiritual judgments of ourselves or of others as to the interior states of the church, we can and should make judgments about moral and civil actions (see CL 523, AE 629:14). These judgments, to be just judgments (John 7:24), must be made from the truths of the Word, and accordingly we should associate ourselves with the goods which we find, and separate ourselves from the evils we encounter, whether in ourselves or in others. Such judgments must be made from that which appears before us, especially the things which present themselves in the life. And with ourselves, our exterior thoughts and delights will appear before us. But we cannot judge interior intentions, for these are hidden from us. Indeed an evil man can feign a good intention very skillfully, even when he is doing evil. As the Lord said in the sermon on the mount, "Beware of false prophets which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits" (Matt. 7:15, 16). Often the evil in others and in ourselves will appeal to us for mercy, claiming good intentions or ignorance. But to these words we must withstand the temptation to cast pearls before swine. We must remember the Lord's words, "Judge not, that ye be not judged." For although we can forgive the trespasses against us, who are we to forgive a sin against the Lord? We can neither condemn nor forgive, but only judge the action, not the intention. If any man, including ourselves, appeals to us for forgiveness and mercy, we must direct him to the Lord in His Word. For the Lord alone can judge genuine repentance and good intentions. If we take it upon ourselves to forgive a sin, to judge that a man is worthy to be in the Lord's kingdom, we steal the spiritual pearls from the Lord and cast them before the swine in ourselves and in others.


For in doing this we may impute good to an evil, and assume spiritual agreement where there may really be disagreement. When this is done the spiritual swine trample the pearls under their feet and turn again to rend, which signifies that the evils interiorly reject the goods imputed, and debase and abuse them (AE 1044:4).
     If we are to seek goodly pearls-the knowledges that teach us how to live the life that leads to the Lord's kingdom-then we must seek for them where they are to be found, in the Lord's Word. If we desire mercy and forgiveness because of past evils and sins, and the new life which leads to heaven, we need to approach the Lord alone, for only He can forgive us of our sins. And in helping our neighbors in their struggles toward this heavenly goal, we must not take it upon ourselves to forgive them or let them into the church; instead we should direct them to the Lord in His Word. In this way we remove the beam in our own eye, that great falsity of thinking we can save or condemn others, and then can see clearly to direct our brother to the Lord in His Word, Who alone can remove the falsities which cloud the understanding (AE 746:16).
     The Lord is present with His church in His Word, and by means of it He leads each of us to the gates of His kingdom, where we find the pearl of great price. And then to receive this pearl, to enter into the life of heaven and the church, we need to sell all that is our own; we need to put off the life of our evil loves, recognizing that the Lord alone is the source of all good and truth. In doing this we are able truly to receive the life of the Lord's kingdom, both in this world and in the next. "Blessed are they that do His commandments, that their authority may be in the tree of life, and they may enter in by the gates into the city" (Rev. 22:14).


     The following three men are members of the Board of Directors of the General Church, but their names do not appear on the list in last December's issue (page 629): Mr. W. Lee Horigan, Mr. Wynne S. Hyatt, Mr. Hyland R. Johns. Note further that Mr. Bruce Fuller is Controller but not a member of the Board of Directors.




     Translator's note: Essentially this is a translation from English to English. Some years ago I found I could "sight-read" the Standard Edition aloud, putting the sentences into up-to-date English, as we followed the daily readings. It seemed to make the material so much more accessible that I started doing the same thing on paper, but with the help of texts, grammars and dictionaries, both Latin and English, to check my accuracy. This and generous help from theologians and Latinists has resulted in things like the sample below from Conjugial Love.


     271. We have considered the reasons for coldness and separations, so the next topic in order is the reasons for a pretense of love, friendship and thoughtfulness in marriages. Everyone knows that married couples live together and have children these days even though coldness separates their minds. This would not happen unless there were an appearance of love that at times is like the warmth of genuine love, and imitates it. You will see that such appearances are necessary and useful and that homes, and therefore communities, could not hold together without them.
     Besides, a conscientious person might labor under the idea that if he and his mate disagree in their minds and get that alienated inwardly it is their own fault and something against them, and they could grieve in their hearts on account of it. Yet there really is nothing they can do about inner differences, and all they have to do is to quiet the troubles that arise from their consciences by keeping up an appearance of love and approval. This may even bring back a friendship with the love of marriage somewhere within it-for one partner if not the other.
     But this chapter takes up a lot of different subjects, so it comes in sections, like the last one. These are the sections:
     1) In the natural world nearly everyone can be united as to outward feelings, but not as to inner ones-if they are incompatible and it shows.
     2) In the spiritual world people join together according to inward affections, and not according to outward ones, unless the outward and inward affections are in harmony.


     3) In the world, the affections that lead to matrimony are ordinarily the ones on the surface.
     4) But without deeper feelings that join the minds together, the marriage ties loosen in the home.
     5) All the same, worldly marriages should last to the end of either partner's life.
     6) In the case of marriages where inward feelings do not unite the couple, there are outward ones which simulate inner ones and keep the couple together.
     7) These outward feelings create an appearance of love or of friendship and thoughtfulness between the married partners.
     8) These appearances are pretenses of marriage which are commendable because they are useful and necessary.
     9) These pretenses of marriage have the wisdom of justice and judgment when a spiritual person is joined together with a worldly person.
     10) They have the wisdom of expedience, for various reasons, in the case of worldly people.
     11) They allow improvement and make it easier to get along.
     12) They keep order in the home and allow the partners to help each other.
     13) They are for the care of infants and cooperation in the care of children.
     14) They keep peace in the home.
     15) They help preserve the reputation outside the home.
     16) They are for the sake of various favors expected from the married partner or the in-laws and for fear of losing these.     
     17) They help the partners excuse faults that might damage one's reputation.
     18) They help bring people back together.
     19) If the wife is still thoughtful to the man when he loses his potency, a friendship resembling the friendship of marriage may spring up as they grow old.
     20) The types of pretended love and friendship between married partners are many if one is dominated and must obey the other.
     21) There are hellish marriages in the world between married partners who inwardly are the bitterest enemies and outwardly are like the closest friends.
     The explanation of these subjects follows.
     272. 1) In the natural world nearly everyone can be united as to outward feelings, but not as to inner ones-if they are incompatible and it shows.


The reason is that in the world, a person has a material body full of selfish wants like the dregs that sink to the bottom as wine clarifies. The bodies of people in the world are made of such things. This is why inner feelings of the mind do not appear, and with many people hardly a trace of them shows through. Either the body absorbs them and enfolds them in its dregs, or, by pretenses learned from infancy, hides them deeply from the sight of others. So one person adopts the feelings he sees in another and attracts the other's feelings to himself, and in this way they join themselves together. They join together because every affection gives pleasure, and the pleasures bind their more worldly minds together.
     It would be different if you could see inner feelings in the face or gestures, like the outward ones, or hear them in a tone of voice, or if the nostrils could pick up the scent of their pleasure, as in the spiritual world. Then if the inner feelings were different enough to be out of tune, they would separate the people's minds from each other, and the couple would keep their distance according to how much they noticed their feelings clash.
     These thoughts show that nearly everyone in the natural world can be united as to outward feelings, but not as to inner ones if they disagree noticeably.
     273. 2) In the spiritual world they join together according to inward affections, and not according to outward ones unless the outward and in ward affections are in harmony. This is because the material body-which, I repeat, could receive all affections and express them in form-has been dropped off by then. Stripped of that body, the person is reduced to his inner feelings, which his body used to conceal, so people not only feel these similarities and differences, or sympathies and antipathies, but they show them in their faces, speech and gestures. Therefore, like joins like there, and people who are not alike separate. This is why the Lord arranges the entire heaven according to all the varieties of feelings that come from the love of good and truth, and hell just the other way around-according to all the varieties of feelings that come from the love of evil and falsity.
     Angels and spirits have inner and outer affections, just like people in the world, and outward feelings cannot hide inner ones there, so they show through and make themselves known. Therefore their outward and inward feelings unite and reflect each other, and then the outward feelings mirror the inner ones-on the people's faces, in the tones of their speech and also in their body language. Angels and spirits do have both mind and body, and this is why they have internal and external affections.


Feelings and thoughts have to do with the mind, while sensations and their pleasures have to do with the body.
     It often happens there that friends meet after death, remember their friendship in the former world and then believe they will be together in a life of friendship as before. But when an association that is only on the basis of outward affections becomes apparent in heaven, the people separate according to their inward affections, and from that encounter some are sent north, some west and each to a distance where they never see or know each other again. For wherever they settle, their faces change so as to image their inner affections. This shows that in the spiritual world all join together according to inward affections, and not according to outward ones unless the outward and inward affections are in harmony.
     274. 3) In the world, the affections that lead to matrimony are ordinarily the ones on the surface. This is because inner feelings rarely get considered, and if they do their pattern is not always clear in the woman, for she has a natural gift of withdrawing them into the inner recesses of her mind.
     Many superficial inclinations lead men into marriage. The primary one these days is to improve family matters with wealth in order to be rich and have plenty. Another is seeking status, either to have influence or to become more successful. Then there are various seductions and yearnings, too, which leave no room for looking into the harmony of inner dispositions. These few observations show that ordinarily marriages are made with superficial motives, in this world.
     275. 4) But without deeper feelings that join the minds together, the marriage ties loosen in the home. We say in the home because it is between them privately. It is because the fires kindled in courtship and blazing on the wedding day gradually cool down afterwards and finally turn cold on account of differences in the people's inner dispositions. Then, obviously, the superficial motives that led and lured them into marriage get divided and no longer keep the couple together.
     The chapter before this demonstrated that all the different causes of coldness-internal, external and incidental-well up from differences in inner dispositions. So it is clearly the truth: unless inward feelings within the surface ones join the minds together, the marriage ties in the home come untied.
     276. 5) All the same, worldly marriages should last to the end of either partner's life. We bring this up to make a necessity, a requirement and a truth more clear for the mind-that if a real love of marriage is not there, its likeness must be there, so there will seem to be a marriage.


It would be different if entering marriage were not a pact to the end of life but one that could be dissolved at will, as with the Israelitish nation. They took upon themselves the liberty to cast off wives for any reason, as these words in Matthew show:

The Pharisees came to Jesus, saying, "Is it lawful for a man to put away his wife for every cause?" And when Jesus answered, "It is not lawful to put away a wife and marry another except for whoredom," they replied, "Yet Moses commanded to give her a bill of divorcement and put her away." And the disciples said, "If the case of a man with a wife is like this, it is not expedient to marry" (19:3-10).

     So marriage is a covenant for life. Therefore, the appearances of love and friendship between married partners are a necessity.
     It comes from Divine law that a contracted marriage is to last till the end of life in the world, so it is also rational law and therefore civil law. Divine law provides that a man may not "put away" his wife and marry another except for whoredom, as above, and rational law is based on spiritual, for Divine law and rational law are one law. From rational law and Divine law-or rather, from Divine law through rational law--you can see the great many abnormalities and societal collapses and broken marriages that would come from husbands getting rid of wives at will, before death.
     The account (in n. 103-15) about people gathered from nine kingdoms discussing the origin of marriage love shows rather fully how society strays and falls apart, so there is no need to add more reasons. These reasons do not stand in the way of separations, though, when permitted for their own reasons (see n. 252-4), nor of keeping a mistress (see Part Two).
     277. 6) In the case of marriages where inward feelings do not unite the couple, there are outward ones which simulate inner ones and keep the couple together. Inner feelings mean inclinations which come from heaven and which both people share in their minds. The outward feelings are the ones in their minds that come from the world. They are just as much mental inclinations or feelings, of course, but they are on a lower plane of the mind, while the others are on a higher. You might believe that they are alike and agree, because they both are in the mind. But they are not alike. They can appear alike. For some they are ways to conform; for others, soothing pretenses.
     The two people have some common ground, implanted with the first marriage vows. Their minds may disagree, but the common ground remains in their shared possessions, and for many, shared occupations, and the different needs of the household.


This leads them to share thoughts and certain secrets. The bed they share and their love for infants bring them together, and so do other things which are also inscribed on the marriage commitment and therefore on their minds. This is where the outward affections that resemble inner ones come from, especially. However, the affections that do no more than imitate are partly from this source and partly from another. But more about both will come later.
     278. 7) These outward feelings create an appearance of love or of friendship and thoughtfulness between the married partners. The appearance of love, friendship and approval between married partners comes from the marriage covenant, which is binding to the end of life, with the shared responsibilities it inscribes on the partners. From these common responsibilities are born the superficial affections already mentioned, which resemble inner ones. There are also useful and necessary reasons which in part produce these affections, so that outward love comes to resemble inner love, and outward friendship comes to resemble inner friendship.
     279. 8) These appearances are pretenses of marriage which are commendable, because they are useful and necessary. We call them pretenses because they exist between people whose minds are not in agreement and who have an inner coldness for that reason. But if the people live a proper and decent life together on the surface, you might still say the fellowship of their life together is pretense-but a pretense of marriage. This is useful and therefore commendable, so it is entirely different from hypocritical pretenses. These pretenses provide all the good benefits spelled out below in sections 11 to 20. They are commendable because they are necessary, and they are necessary because doing without them would banish all the good things, when yet the couple have a duty to live together, imposed by their contract and the law.
     280. 9) These pretenses of marriage have the wisdom of justice and judgment when a spiritual person is joined together with a worldly person. This is because the spiritual person does what he does out of justice and judgment, so to him the pretenses are not alien to his inner feelings but are coupled with them. He acts in earnest and looks to improvement as a goal. If it fails to come, he concentrates on compromise for the sake of order in the home, mutual assistance, the care of infants, peace and quiet. Justice leads him to do this, and he brings it about with his judgment. This is how a spiritual person lives with a worldly person, because a spiritual person acts spiritually even with the worldly.


     281. 10) These pretenses of marriage have the wisdom of experience, for various reasons, in the case of worldly people. A spiritual person loves what is spiritual, so he gets wisdom from the Lord. A worldly person loves only what is worldly, so he has only his own wisdom. Between two partners, one spiritual and the other worldly, living together in marriage, the love of marriage is heat for the spiritual one and cold for the worldly. Clearly heat and cold cannot exist together, and the heat cannot warm the cold person up until the coldness goes away. Nor can the cold seep into the one with heat until the heat goes away. This is why inner love is not possible between one spiritual partner and one worldly. But the spiritual one can have something like inner love, as the section above points out.
     But between two worldly partners inner love is not possible, because both are cold. Any warmth they have comes from lewdness. But even they can live together at home with their separate minds and put on a face of love and friendship between themselves in spite of their different minds. Their outward feelings, which mostly have to do with wealth, possessions, honor and status, can seem ardent. This ardor makes them afraid to lose these things, so the pretenses are necessary for them-principally the necessary ones mentioned in sections 15 to 17 below. Some of their motives might have something in common with the motives of the spiritual person (see n. 280), but only if the worldly man's prudence has a touch of intelligence.
     282. 11) These pretenses allow improvement and make it easier to get along. The reason why the pretenses of marriage which seem like love and friendship between married partners of different minds improve the situation is that a spiritual person joined to a worldly one by marriage covenant just wants to make their mutual life better. This is done by sensitive and refined conversation and by doing things the other person likes, and if it falls on deaf ears and set ways, the person makes allowances to keep order in household matters, and for the sake of working together, and for the infants and children-this kind of thing. For what a spiritual person says and does is flavored by justice and judgment (as above, n. 280).
     But when neither partner is spiritual but both are mundane, it can work the same way, though for other purposes-whether to improve matters and make it easier to get along, or because one wants to make the other act his way, or to dominate the other, or to have the other serve his purposes, or for peace in the house, or for their reputation, or to gain benefits from the partner or the in-laws, and other reasons.


     But some do these things from the prudence of their good sense, some from native civility, some for fear of doing without comforts they have always enjoyed, and for many other reasons they more or less pretend thoughtfulness as if it came from a love of marriage.
     Outside the home there are also things people do for each other as if from love (while neglecting them at home) for the purpose of their reputation, or if not that, just for amusement.
     283. 12) Pretenses do keep order in the home and allow the partners to help each other. Every household with children, their tutors, and other servants, is a society like society at large, which indeed emerges from this like a whole from its parts. And the welfare of this small society depends on order just as the welfare of the large one does. So, just as it is up to the leaders in a complex society to discern and foresee how to have order and keep it, it is up to married partners to do it in their unit. But you cannot have this order if the husband and wife are of different minds, because it draws their discussions and help for each other in different directions, divided like their minds, which tears the form of the small society apart. Therefore, to keep order and watch out for themselves and their household at the same time(or their household and themselves), so it does not go to ruin and rush into disaster, the two in charge have to agree to work as a unit. If they cannot do this by being of one mind, at least they should do it by putting on a show of marital friendship. This is fitting and proper. It makes things go well. It brings households into agreement for practical necessities, as everyone knows.
     284. 13) Pretenses are for the dare of infants and cooperation in the care of children. It is a well-known fact that for the sake of infants and children married partners make what looks like a marriage by acts of love and friendship like the ones in a true marriage. They both love the children, and it makes each partner appear kind and thoughtful toward the other. A mother's and father's love of their infants and children joins them together, like the heart and lungs in your chest. The mother's love for them is like the heart, and the father's is like the lungs. The reason for the comparison is that the heart corresponds to love and the lungs to discernment. A mother's love is spontaneous and a father's is calculated. With spiritual people a marriage bond comes through this love, from conviction and compassion-from compassion because the mother carried the children in her womb, bore them in pain and then, with untiring care, nurses, feeds, cleans and clothes them and brings them up.


     285. 14) Pretenses keep peace in the home. Most of the outward simulations of marriage or friendship to keep peace and quiet at home are the man's, because men have a natural inclination to do what they do by intellect-which involves thinking. Intellect gets involved in many things that upset, distract and disturb the mind, so if the home were unpeaceful their vital spirit would slacken and their inner life half die, which would destroy their health, both physical and mental. Men's minds get obsessed with fear of these perils and many others unless there is shelter at home with their wives for sedation of the intellectual turmoil. Also, peace and quiet puts their minds at rest to gratefully accept the thoughtful things their wives do-wives who do everything possible to sweep away the mental clouds that they are keenly aware of in their husbands. And besides, peace and quiet add charm to the presence of wives.
     So when people make a show of real married love for the peace and quiet of the house, clearly it is useful and necessary. In addition, wives do not pretend the way men do, and even if they seem to, it comes from real love, because they are born to love the discernment in a man. So in their hearts, if not vocally, they gratefully accept the thoughtful things that husbands do for them.
     286. 15) Pretenses help preserve the reputation outside the home. Men's success depends for the most part on their reputations as being law-abiding, sincere and upright, and furthermore, their reputations depend on their wives, who know the men's private lives. So if the disunion of their minds broke out in open unfriendliness, quarrels and hateful threats, and if the wife and her friends and servants told everybody, it could easily turn to reproach which would give the man a bad name. All the men can do to avoid this is to pretend they care for their wives, or else be separated from the house.
     287. 16) Pretenses are for the sake of various favors expected from the married partner or the in-laws and for the fear of losing these. This happens particularly in marriages of mixed class and condition (see n. 250, above); for example, when a man marries a wealthy wife and she hides her money away or lends her wealth out for interest; or worse, if she boldly insists that her husband owes it to her to support the household from his own property and income. Everyone knows that this necessitates imitations of married love. It is also common knowledge that the same thing happens when a man marries a woman whose parents, relatives and friends are in high office, lucrative business or commercial work and can set him up in better conditions. The man makes a pretense of marital love.


In both cases, the pretenses are clearly for the fear of losing the advantages.
     288. 17) The pretenses help the partners excuse faults that might damage one's reputation. Married partners fear a bad reputation for various faults, some serious and some not. There are flaws of the mind and of the body that are less serious than the ones itemized in an earlier chapter (n. 252, 253) as the causes of separation. Here we mean flaws that the other married partner bears in silence to avoid disgrace. Besides these, some have done crimes that would be punishable by law if everyone knew. Not to mention lack of potency, which men ordinarily take pride in. No need to explain that people pretend love and friendship with a married partner in order to be excused of flaws like these and to avoid disgrace.
     289. 18) Pretenses help bring people back together. The world knows that married partners who for various reasons do not think alike alternately disagree, then confide, are alienated and then back together, even quarrel, then come to terms and make up, so that the appearances of friendship reconcile them. After separations there is also reconciliation, which is not alternate nor temporary.
     290. 19) If a wife is still thoughtful to the man when he loses his potency, a friendship resembling the friendship of marriage may spring up as they grow old. One of the main reasons why the minds of married partners drift apart is that the wife's favorable attitude toward the man fades away as his potency wanes, and love decreases, because coldness is reciprocal just as warmth is. Without love, they both lose their friendship and even their consideration for each other, unless they are afraid of the danger to their family life. This is clear from reason and experience. Then, if the man quietly takes the responsibility and the wife stays chastely considerate of him, a friendship can emerge from it which will closely resemble married love, because it exists between married partners. Experience shows that this kind of friendship can come to an aged couple from the peace, security, good nature and great kindness of their close relationship, communion and companionship.
     291. 20) The types of pretended love and friendship between married partners are many if one is dominated and must obey the other. One of the things we know in this world today is that rivalries over rights and authority spring up between married partners, once their newly-married state has passed. They vie for their rights, as the conditions of their contract make them equal and give them equal dignity in the performance of their roles. They vie for authority, as men insist on being the leaders in domestic affairs because they are men and think women inferior because they are women.


     These familiar rivalries of our day come from only one source-failure to appreciate real love for marriage and lack of sensibly perceiving its blessings. Without these, you do not have love of marriage, but a counterfeit of it-lust. From this lust, without genuine love, comes strife over power. Some get this from their pleasure in the love of ruling, some have been introduced to it by designing women before marriage, and others do not know it. Men who have this ambition and get the upper hand after the struggles of rivalry reduce their wives either to the level of rightful possessions or to obedience under their will, or to bondage. It depends on the amount and kind of ambition each particular man has inborn and latent in himself. If wives with this ambition get the upper hand after the give-and-take of rivalry, they reduce their husbands either to equal rights with themselves or to obedience under their will or to bondage. But after wives win the staff of authority, they still retain a lust which makes a counterfeit love of marriage, so they lead a companionable life with their husbands, the lust being restrained by law and the fear of justified separation in case they extend their authority past acceptable limits.
     It would take many words to describe the kind of love and friendship there is between a dominating wife and a cringing husband or a dominating husband and cringing wife. In fact, there would not be enough pages to list the varieties of it under headings and discuss them, for they are varied and different. They vary according to the kinds of ambition that men have, and the kinds wives have, and men's ambitions are different from women's. Men like that have no friendship of love except a foolish one, and wives like that have the friendship of a false love from [selfishness?] greed. But the next section tells how wives gain power over men.
     292. 21) There are hellish marriages in the world between married partners who inwardly are the bitterest enemies and outwardly are like the closest friends. Actually wives like that, in the spiritual world, forbid me to put these marriages under public light. They are afraid I would divulge their art of gaining power over men, and they are very eager to keep it hidden. But men in that world urge me to tell why they have a gut hatred for their wives and a fury stirred up in their hearts, so to speak, on account of their secret arts, so all I will say is this: men have said that they unconsciously contracted a terrible fear of their wives, and it made them totally obedient to their wives' will, more submissive to their nod than the lowest slaves, so they were practically worthless.


And wives did this not just to men with no position in the world, but also to men of high standing; in fact, even valiant and renowned generals. And they said that once they came down with this terror they could not risk speaking to their wives except in a friendly way, nor do anything to them except what pleased them, though they nursed a murderous hate for their wives in their hearts. Yet their wives talked and acted courteously with them and paid obedient attention to some of their requests
     Now the men really wondered where such negative inner feelings and such outward sympathy could arise from, so they asked women who knew the secret art what the reasons were. Thee men said they had it from the women's own lips that deep within themselves women conceal knowledge of how to put men under the yoke of their authority if they want to. Coarse wives do it by alternate scolding and kindness, and others by continual hard and unpleasant looks, and others do it in other ways. Refined wives do it by obstinately pushing their requests without letup, and by doggedly opposing their husbands if the husbands are hard on them, and insisting on their equal rights under the law. They make themselves so stubborn this way that even if they get run out of the house they will come back whenever they please and take the same stand. They know that by nature there is no way men can hold out against pressure from their wives and that once the husbands concede the authority, they are submissive. Then the wives act polite and soft for the husbands under their power.
     The real reason why wives dominate through this craft is that a man acts from discernment and a woman from will, and will can be persistent but discernment cannot. I learned that the worst of this kind, who are inwardly baited with ambition to rule, can doggedly hold onto their stubborn ways even in a struggle to the death. I have also heard the women's excuses for going into the practice of this art. They said they would not have gone into it if they had not foreseen the extreme contempt, future rejection and their ruin in the end if their husbands got the upper hand over them, so this made them take up arms. They added a warning to men to let their wives have their rights and not consider them lower than slaves during their periods of coldness. They also said that many of their sex are not in a position to exercise these arts because of their inborn timidity, but I added, "because of inborn modesty."
     From all this it is clear now what marriages we mean by infernal marriages in this world between partners who are inwardly the bitterest enemies and outwardly like the most intimate friends.


Editorial Pages 1982

Editorial Pages       Editor       1982


     Why is it that some people think that the book Conjugial Love is so idealistic and other-worldly that it offers little help in facing the real problems of married life? Anyone really familiar with the book knows that this is not so, and yet the impression, somehow, is there. One explanation is that the occasions when people hear this book quoted are wedding services and speeches at wedding receptions. For such occasions speakers are going to choose from the uplifting and beautiful passages. We are so familiar with those lovely phrases "holy, pure and clean," "innocence, peace, tranquility, inmost friendship." Hearing the passages from certain chapters a person starts to wonder how this book could have a bearing on the hard realities of life.
     But if any book is about realities this one is. The beautiful things said about the love that exists between angel partners are realities of one kind, so important for us to know about. But there are other realities. The hard truth is that there are marriages that look quite charming on the outside when the cold facts include "deadly hatred." Some seemingly friendly partners are "bitter enemies" (n. 292). On the other hand a wife can be looking daggers at her husband, speaking to him sharply and quarreling with him, while the reality in her heart is "a soothing and tender love for him" (n. 294).
     If asked to name the most practical chapter of the book, ministers usually mention the one entitled "Apparent Love, Friendship and Favor in Marriage." For example Bishop Elmo Acton pointed out in this journal in 1971 that there are practical and "readily applicable" teachings especially in this chapter. We will quote from his class on the chapter in a moment.
     Rev. Robert Junge based a sermon on this chapter. The sermon, entitled "Apparent Love in a Covenant for Life," was printed in this magazine in 1966. Here are some excerpts:


     Ours is not to sit in judgment over others unjustly, nor is it to cast stones at those whom we consider to be found in adultery. The implications we must draw . . . are not so much for others as for ourselves.
     The law of the Lord seems harsh. It seems to leave nothing but a martyr's role for those who find deep incompatibility or states of disillusionment in their marriages. Yet it is not so.
     . . . there is always the hope of amendment or reconciliation. This is fostered by feigned love and affection. Even if this hope of amendment seems, at times, beyond our grasp, we have the promise of Divine revelation that not only are we doing what is just and right, but we will be given affections and delights which simulate true marriage loves, or, perhaps, that love itself.
     This feigning of love may seem artificial for a time; but with the good it is but a particular application of the law of self-compulsion, a form of genuine charity.
     How do we speak to those we love? Truth alone is harsh and unyielding, but true and full communication is always qualified by gentleness and mercy. Do we speak to our partners from use, with the stabilizing effect of confidence in our hearts; or do we speak from a desire to judge and hurt from a shifting love of dominion upon which nothing can be built?
     It is so easy to become impatient, and to forget that the struggle for conjugial love is indeed a struggle to overcome ourselves.

     In an editorial last month we asserted that a need of the church is the presentation of the direct teachings of the Writings about marriage. As our title page states, this magazine is devoted to the teachings revealed through Swedenborg. We are publishing in this issue a rendering of a chapter of the Writings. The hope is that this will heighten understanding and interest. We think it will be welcomed by pastors giving classes on this chapter. In closing, here are two paragraphs from such a class by Bishop Elmo Acton.

     All of this chapter is very practical. It enjoins upon married partners to seek common affections in which they can be conjoined and in which they can find mutual sympathy and mutual delight. In most of these affections is the common concern for the children, and also, the Writings stress, an appreciation of the contribution that each has made to the good of the other. It even presents the idea of the husband thankful to the wife for the bearing of children, bringing them forth with pain, suckling them, and caring for them. See how practical it is. The chapter enjoins upon us to seek out things we can appreciate in the partner and to show gratitude for them and be mutually conjoined in them because gratitude and appreciation effect that conjunction.


     The whole burden of this chapter under consideration, as I understand it, is the preservation of the marriage in a state of comparative peace and happiness so that in time internal and external warmth may be restored. If marriages are to continue during the life in the world, even though conjugial love is not present in them, they are not to exist in a continual state of antagonism and turmoil. By the application of the doctrine of apparent love, friendship and favor, they are to continue in a state of external peace and delight. One of the arguments is that if there is continual bickering between the partners, it is better for them to separate. Now this chapter gives, to my mind, the answer to this. They are to restore that state of external peace and delight by apparent love, friendship, and favor in marriage. [NEW CHURCH LIFE 1971, p. 276]


Dear Editor,
     I was interested in "The Plowman Overtaking the Reaper" in the January issue. I think we all have to make a careful distinction between doctrine and tradition in the church. We read in Matt. 15:6, "Thus have you made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." And in verse 9 of the same chapter we read of "teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."
     Surely we should not be swayed by trends in the world that go contrary to the heart and spirit of all doctrine. We tend to march along a few steps behind the opinion makers. For example, one trend of thought has been that it is better for women to go out and get jobs than to care for their children. But if we were true to ourselves we would find that trends merely swing one way and then another. Not long ago the popular view was that there is no difference between the sexes. That view seems to be changing lately.
     We shouldn't make our traditions sacred. We should always be looking for more successful ways to do things.
          Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania




Dear Mr. Rose:
     Without meaning to be critical of anyone in particular, I cannot let the December article on the glorification of Jesus Christ pass without comment. The article seemed to indicate that the Lord's material body was not really resurrected, and inferred that the Writings are not clear on the subject.
     The fact is that the Writings are very clear here. This is quite indisputable on the basis of the evidence. That so many New Church men have persisted in challenging the idea of the Lord's body somehow rising is a mystery to me, yet they have, and apparently are going to continue to do so.
     So, what is the truth? Let us all confess that none of us can really know for sure what happened to the Lord's body in the sepulcher. We cannot subject the event itself to our examination, and so, therefore, we cannot really know.
     But we can know what the Writings say about the resurrection of the body. We can know by examining all those statements in the Writings which speak directly to the question. And there are a number of such statements, remarkably similar to one another. Here is my list:

     AC 1729:2      In the Lord, all is Jehovah, not only His inward and inmost humanity, but also His outmost humanity, and the very body, wherefore He is the only one to have risen into heaven even in respect to the body, as is quite apparent in the gospels where they treat of His resurrection.

     AC 2083:2      The Lord, from His own power, made everything that was human in Him Divine, thus not only His rational humanity but also His sensual humanity, inwardly and outwardly, thus the very body . . . . thus the whole body . . . . And this everyone can see from the fact that He alone rose from the dead with respect to the body. . . .

     AC 5078:2      The Lord made even the physical element in Himself Divine, both its sensual components and the receiving organs. Consequently He also rose from the sepulcher in respect to the body.

     AC 5078:6      These things have been said in order that it may be known that no man rises again with the body which clothed him in the world, but that only the Lord did so, and this because He glorified His body or made it Divine in the world.


AC 10125:4 That the Lord glorified His very body, even to the outmosts of it which are the bones and flesh, the Lord also showed His disciples. . . .

     AC 10252:7 It is known that the Lord rose with the whole body that He had in the world, differently from other men, for He left nothing in the sepulcher.

     AC 10738:5 Because there was such a union or such a unity in the Lord, therefore He rose not

     EU 159 only in respect to the soul but also in respect to the body which He glorified in the world, differently from any man

     AC 10825 It is known in the church . . . also that He rose with the whole body, for He left

     HD 286 nothing in the sepulcher . . . . The case is different with every man, for a person rises again only with respect to his spirit and not with respect to his body. . . .

     HH 86:8 The Lord made all His humanity Divine, both inwardly and outwardly (AC 1603, HD 3051815, 1902, 1926, 2093, 2883). Therefore He rose with respect to the whole body, differently from any man (AC 1729, 2083, 5078, 10825).

     HH 316 The reason the Lord rose not only with respect to His spirit but also with respect to the body is that He glorified His entire humanity when He was in the world, that is, made it Divine. For the soul, which He had from the Father, was, of itself, the Divine itself, and the body became a likeness of the soul, that is, a likeness of the Father, so that it, too, was Divine. This is why He rose again with respect to both, differently from any man.

     HD 292 Those who suppose the Lord's humanity to be like the humanity of another man do not think about His conception from the Divine itself. Nor do they consider that everyone's body is an image of his soul. Nor do they think about the Lord's rising again with the whole body. . . .

     Lord 35:9 Inasmuch as the Lord's humanity was glorified, that is, made Divine, therefore after death, on the third day, He rose again with the whole body-something that does not occur in the case of any man, for man only rises again in respect to his spirit, and not in respect to his body.


That mankind might know, and no one doubt, that the Lord rose with His whole body, He not only said so through the angels who were in the sepulcher, but He also showed Himself in His human body to His disciples. . . .

     See also DLW 221, TCR 109, 170. But it should not be necessary to go on. These statements are taken from works personally published by Swedenborg as containing the doctrines of the New Church. To these can be added also statements containing the same teaching from other works, published subsequently to Swedenborg's death: see SD 4845, 5063, 5244; AE 41, 66:3, 513: 19, 581:12, 619:15, 1087:4, 1112:4; D. Love IV; Ath. p. 526 in SF standard ed.; LJ post 87, 129:2; Inv. 56. (Cf. also AC 10044:10, and Lord 29:2, 35:10.)
     All these works are recognized as works of the Writings in the General Church. I cannot help but quote the plainest one of these latter statements:

     LJ Post 87      . . . I had said that the Lord was conceived from Jehovah . . . and that therefore He was able to glorify the whole body, so that in respect to that part of the body which is cast off and putrefies in the case of those who are born of human parents, this in the Lord's case was glorified and made Divine from the Divinity in Him, and He rose with this, leaving nothing in the sepulcher, differently from what happens in the case of every man.

     What could be plainer? The Writings clearly teach-again and again-that the Lord rose with His body, His natural body, which He took on in the world, and this differently from what happens with anyone else. It clearly is what Swedenborg himself thought. Nor is there one statement anywhere in the Writings to contradict it.
     It has been supposed by some that the idea is contradicted by the following:

     Lord 35:1      That the Lord had a Divinity and a humanity . . . is known. It is because of this that He was God and Man, and thus that He had a Divine essence and a human nature . . . . and therefore He was equal to the Father in respect to His Divinity, but less than the Father in respect to His humanity. It is also known that He did not transmute [or convert] this human nature from the mother into the Divine essence, nor commingle it therewith . . . .


For human nature cannot be transmuted [or converted] into Divine essence, nor can it be commingled therewith.

     This statement does not, however, contradict the teachings regarding the Lord's body. Human nature is a quality, not a substance; even as Divine essence is a quality, not a substance. It is true: a quality that is merely human cannot be at the same time Divine, nor can a quality that is human be somehow transformed so as to be accepted as Divine. Yet a quality can be gotten rid of, and another quality substituted in its place. A human nature can be put off, and a Divine nature put on instead. But put on what? Why, put on, imposed, induced on the underlying substance of which the quality is or can be predicated. In this case, the human nature was put off from the humanity taken on from the mother, and the Divine essence substituted, induced on that same humanity instead, so that the humanity from being merely natural, became Divine natural. And eventually the body, from being merely material, became likewise Divine substantial-the same substance, but now with a new and different form.
     Is this dreaming? Look at the number just quoted-Lord 35:1. Look further on down the number, to 35:9 (already quoted earlier above). The latter is among those that say the Lord rose with the body!
     Another statement that has been often advanced as contradicting what otherwise would be the plainest of doctrines in the Writings is the following:

     Ath. 161 That the Lord put off everything maternal in the sepulcher. . . .

     Ath. 162 That the Lord in the sepulcher . . . rejected all the humanity from the mother and dissipated it (which is why He underwent temptations and the suffering of the cross, and because this could not be conjoined with the Divine itself), and thus He took on a humanity from the Father, thus that the Lord rose, properly and clearly glorified, with His humanity. . . .

     In the first place this manuscript does not come to us in Swedenborg's own hand, nor was it ever intended for publication by him. Nevertheless, see what it says. What it says is that the maternal humanity was gotten rid of, and another humanity substituted, from the Father, and thus "the Lord rose . . . with His humanity." Note that the body is not mentioned.


And note as well that this very number speaks of the Lord rising with something. With what did He rise? If it was all dissipated, He could not have risen with it. If it was all the Divine Itself in the first place, then again He could not have risen with it, because it was the same thing as risen already. No. We are left again with the clear idea that the human quality from the mother was expelled, that a Divine quality-a Divine humanity-was superinduced from within, and that the Lord then rose with this humanity, a humanity that was natural as to substance but Divine as to quality-a Divine-natural humanity. And again the idea easily follows that eventually the body, too, from being merely material, became likewise Divine-substantial-the same substance, but now with a new and different nature, with a new and different form.
     Now, to those who wish to insist, still, that somehow the Lord's physical body was not resurrected, I say, peace. All things are possible. Since I cannot examine the event itself directly, who am I to say know for sure?
     But let us get straight what the Writings teach. Every statement in the Writings to mention the Lord's body in connection with the resurrection says that He rose with this body.
     This much we can know.
     If there are those who wish to disagree, let them disagree. Such disagreement may well be allowable within the context described in SS 54. Certainly my students know the liberties I have sometimes allowed myself.
     So, in fact, I do not now write to correct anyone's understanding of what happened to the Lord's resurrection body.
     But I do write to clear up any mistaken impression about what the Writings say happened.
          Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania
MERCY 1982

MERCY       PATRICK A. ROSE       1982

     Congratulations to Patricia K. Rose for her fine article in the January issue of NCL. There are many, I am certain, who share her concern about the cruel effects of unseasonable and misguided clemency. What the natural man fails to realize is that true mercy is not, as it might appear to those in disorder, wielded in a condemnatory spirit, but proceeds from a genuine concern for the welfare of society as a whole.
     When individuals spurn their marriage vows and, in direct defiance of Divine laws, "remarry" without proper cause (i.e., commit adultery), the feelings of revulsion, despair and disgust aroused in decent, kind and caring people bear testimony to the Divine teaching that such legalized adultery is a sin against God and a terrible crime against society.


     No person on earth can know whether or not the criminal who breaks the marriage vows will eventually go to heaven or hell. We cannot, and must not, wish the eternal misery of hell upon any of the Lord's children, whether that child of the Lord is a criminal or not. However, unless society-any society has the courage to take a stand against those who hurt the common good, it will come to ruin sooner or later.
     The challenge facing the church is partially attributable to the fact that the criminal law of most countries in the western world no longer recognizes the commission of adultery to be an offence against society, and the divorce courts even give legal sanction to adulterous remarriage. There can be little doubt that in a more orderly civil state the libertines mentioned in CL 307 would be bound by fear of serious penalties to honour the sacred vows of marriage. Given the choice between a jail sentence, for example, and honoring, externally, a sacred vow, most would surely choose the latter, and then there would at least be that semblance of order insisted upon in the Writings.
     The danger facing us is that where the civil law is abolished or no longer enforced, men are tempted to take the law into their own hands. Judgment and condemnation rests solely in the hands of individuals, which only encourages the spirit of personal condemnation. As the Rev. Dandridge Pendleton so clearly explains in a sermon published in NCL 1959, p. 491 (the reference to this in the January editorial incorrectly dated this 1979), we are all prone to commit the terrible sin of condemning spiritually other individuals. Not only must a healthy society firmly discourage the terrible crime of adultery but it must also discourage individuals from acting from a spirit of interior condemnation. Hatred is no answer to adultery.
     It is perhaps worth noting that Israelitish society was vengeful in nature. The Divine law at that time had the effect, on the external plane, of merely limiting the hateful revenge one man could take upon another. The civil justice of the present day, in which such revenge is denied to the individual, and in which punishment is meted out only under the rule of impartial law, is a great improvement upon the primitive lex talionis (law of retaliation), in which justice often consisted in individual stone-throwing (see John 8:7).


     If the church is to find some answer to the disheartening situation facing it at the present, then it must, I submit, take a stand in favor of the common good of its members, and so be seen clearly to uphold Divine law. Just how this is to be done is not an easy matter-it would be naive to suggest otherwise! Surely, though, it must be through the administration of impartial policies and laws. There can surely be no doubt, from what is said in HD 311ff, that the church, as well as the civil state, has a responsibility to maintain external order, and it cannot shirk this responsibility. Indeed, the trinal order of the priesthood has, as a main purpose, the prevention of a state of affairs in which "evils which are contrary to order" are permitted (HD 313).
     The solution is not clear, but one key to an answer must surely be the concept of law. Apart from law there is no other way of maintaining, in practice, the link between order and mercy. Certainly a spiritual man will distinguish between the condemnation of an evil act and the condemnation, spiritually, of an evil person. On the external plane, though, it is folly to consistently separate a man wholly from the consequences of his actions. You cannot, for example, throw theft into jail whilst allowing liberty to the thief: On the other hand, if this thief be imprisoned by a competent court of justice, instead of being subjected to mob justice, fewer passions will have been aroused, and after he has paid for his crime, his subsequent reacceptance by a tolerant society will have been facilitated. In this way, both the criminal and the general public can receive mercy.
     The church is not a civil state, but certain principles are universal:
     1) Misguided clemency must not cause harm to the general good of society.
     2) Individual hatred and personal condemnatory judgments are to be discouraged.
     Finally, one other principle must never be forgotten. The innocent person must be protected from false condemnation. The hallmark of a just administration of law is that it provides safeguards against wrongful conviction. In the church it is most important that those who divorce a partner and remarry for the cause sanctioned by the Lord Himself (CL 468) are not confused with libertines and adulterers. The innocent casualty of a broken marriage needs our love, our understanding, our comfort and our support, not our disapproval and condemnation.
          Colchester, England




     When the Rev. William H. Benade wrote an anonymous review of a George MacDonald novel for the New Church Magazine of December, 1872, he made some very interesting observations about marriage and the relations of the sexes. In the process of a six-page article he wrote the word "conjugial" twice, but it didn't come out in print that way. Thereby hangs a little tale which is presently a footnote in the Benade manuscript on which I am working. Since the question of the use of the distinctive New Church word "conjugial" has recently been aired in these columns, it seemed like a good idea to send this along. By the way, three modern unabridged dictionaries consulted do not give the word conjugial, a sad omission. I thought that we had won that little skirmish.
     As printed in the magazine, the word is "conjugal," but Benade had written "conjugial." If, as C. Th. Odhner asserts, Benade was indeed a genius-and genius has been defined as "an infinite capacity for taking pains"-one characteristic of that genius was his persistence in rectifying errors, great and small. He writes to his friend and confidant, Horace P. Chandler, then on the magazine's staff, "Please don't forget to rectify in the monthly that conjugial matter. Never mind the dictionaries. They don't know anything about the matter. It is a purely N. C. word." [W. H. Benade to H. P. Chandler, Jan. 25, 1873.]
     Some fairly modern dictionaries have included the word "conjugial" with its New Church meaning, which is well explained in another Benade letter-this time to a Mr. Drew of the magazine's staff, who apparently had defended his alteration of Benade's manuscript. Benade begins, "In reply to Mr. Drew's letter . . . I have this to say: I not only desire, but insist on the correction, late as it is . . . . I desire this correction because . . . it is the only word that can be used to express the idea which I intended to express. Conjugal and conjugial are not synonymous. 'Not by no means.' All marriages are conjugal unions; but very few marriages at this day are conjugial unions. If Mr. Drew had ever studied the subject of marriage thoroughly, he would know the difference, and would not talk about being 'odd,' as, if he understood the real relation of Swedenborg to the New Church and how his works were written, he would be far from suggesting poetry or mere sound as a reason for Swed'g's using conjugial in place of conjugal. Conjugal relates to external, conjugial to internal unions, and the difference between their meanings is the difference of external and internal, of natural and spiritual love." [This was written in an added sheet in W. H. Benade to H. P. Chandler, April 1, 1873.]


Church News 1982

Church News       Various       1982


     During the visit of Bishop and Mrs. King and Mr. and Mrs. L. E. Gyllenhaal to South Africa, three new African churches were dedicated.
     In the foothills of the Drakensberg (meaning Dragons Mountain) the dedication of the Enkumba church took place. Several white people were present, including Mr. John Frost, the architect, and his wife.
     On the chancel were Rev. A. Mbatha, presiding pastor of the Natal Province; the resident minister, Rev. B. I. Nzimande; the superintendent of the mission, Rev. N. E. Riley, and of course Bishop King.
     To a large congregation, mainly of children and young people from a nearby school, the bishop unfolded the meaning of the materials used in the building of Solomon's temple. "We too," he said, "must have the gold of the Lord's love, the wood of love of others and the stones of truth, if our minds are to become a dwelling place for the Lord."
     The children afterwards sang songs in honor of the occasion.
     The following day the new building at Clermont was dedicated. Clermont is only three kilometers from the Westville society, but many years away in time. Most of the roads are mud, and although the people, because of their proximity to the city, take advantage of the 'western culture,' nevertheless their roots are mainly in a different soil. The visitors enjoyed the spectacle of scouts and guides blowing bugles and banging drums as the bishop and his wife were driven into the township by the superintendent. The bishop had arrived! And everyone in Clermont knew it, unless they were deaf.
     Several friends from the Westville society were able to be present at the service, including Rev. G. H. Howard.
     In his sermon the bishop stressed the need for us to build our lives on the sure and firm rock of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ as the one God, whom we worship and serve.
     On the 23rd of August, an eight-hour drive away from Westville, yet another dedication took place, this time in Diepkloof, Soweto. Over this weekend the weather was terrible, the sky dull, and the temperature down to some unmentionable figure which all good South Africans declare every year to be 'most unusual.' However, there was no rain on the Sunday and everyone had a very happy time celebrating the dedication of this very fine new house of worship.
     An ox was bought for the occasion, and after Rev. Riley had been inveigled into inspecting it and declaring it a fit beast; it was finally delivered up in a different form, to the honored guests at the Sunday lunch.
     The service at Diepkloof was conducted by the Rev. N. E. Riley; prayers were led by the Rev. P. Nkabinde, resident pastor of the society and presiding pastor of the Transvaal Province; Rev. A. Mbatha read the lessons. The bishop based his sermon on the words, "I will come into Thy house in the multitude of Thy mercies, in Thy fear will I worship toward Thy Holy Temple.' "The dedication of this church house as a place where we can meet and worship the Lord and receive instruction from His Word should also serve to remind us of the need to dedicate the whole of our life to the Lord, as our acknowledgment of Him in His Divine Human, His Holy Temple."


     After the service there were many speeches of welcome and songs were sung, and gifts were presented to the guests.
     At each place, a ceremonial key was presented to the bishop during the service.
     The untiring work of the ladies who worked behind the scenes in the production of such fine meals in Enkumba, Clermont and Diepkloof cannot be underestimated, although in the case of the Diepkloof ladies the 'slaving over a hot stove' must have been not so much a chore as a compensation.
     All three buildings were designed by Mr. John Frost, with slight variations inexplicably effected by the builders! The people in the mission churches were delighted to welcome our four visitors into their midst. Please come back soon. Maureen Riley


     In far off Kwa Zulu in South Africa is a small chapel. It is built of stone with a thatched roof-a simple structure brought to its present state by the help of many members of the Kent Manor group. Internally it retains its simplicity: grass matting on the floor, simple woodwork for the Holy Supper rail and lecterns, and a large rock serves as the altar. On each side is a wrought iron candlestick (a gift from the Rev. and Mrs. Riley), while behind is a stained glass window (in memory of Fred Parker) which depicts the Word with the alpha and omega signs on the open pages.
     Sunday, August 9th, 1981, dawned calm and sunny, a beautiful day for a very special occasion. This was the day the chapel was to be dedicated by our bishop, the Rt. Rev. Louis B. King. He was accompanied from the U.S.A. by his wife Freya and Mr. and Mrs. Leonard Gyllenhaal, most welcome guests.
     This was a great day too for our visiting pastor, the Rev. Norman Riley, and his wife Maureen. Their enthusiasm and encouragement helped in no small way in getting our group in the position it is today.
     The dedication was a moving ceremony. During the service Mr. Barrie Parker came forward and presented a symbolic key, mounted on a wood plaque, to the bishop, after which the bishop placed a copy of the open Word (a gift from himself and Mrs. King) on the altar and spoke the words of dedication.
     After the service our pastor opened the proceedings by mentioning messages of good wishes from a number of friends, and read two letters, one from the Durban society and the other from our dear friends Peter and Lisa Buss. He then said that "this day had seen, in part, the fulfillment of the vision of one who, though not with us in this world, no doubt was very much with us in spirit-Mr. Fred Parker. For it had been his wish that one day there would be a chapel where all the communities of the New Church in the area would be able to gather and worship together." Mrs. Lois Parker, in expressing a welcome to our guests, presented gifts to them to show our appreciation of their being present with us.
     The 9th of August will long be remembered by those who were present-almost fifty persons-who all had the opportunity of speaking with Bishop and Mrs. King, both during lunch and in the social hour which followed.
     This day I am sure strengthened our purpose to live our lives according to the Lord's Word as revealed through His servant, Emanuel Swedenborg.
     Barrie Parker



FROM CHURCH NEWSLETTERS       Various       1982

     We are grateful to have the following, gathered from local church publications.-Ed.

     Among the activities in our church centers which will interest all who look for the spread of the doctrines, a series of lectures in Missouri is of unusual interest. An enthusiastic team of priests and lay workers is presenting three well-organized and highly-publicized public lectures beginning on Swedenborg's birthday in St. Louis, then in Springfield and Columbia. Rev. J. Clark Echols is also presenting a February 7th program in the Glenview Swedenborg Center.
     California and the West Coast report several exceptional undertakings. They are eagerly preparing for the June, 1982, California District Assembly, of course, but as if that were not enough, the Los Angeles society is working on a new sign and landscaping for the church and the new book room, and hopes to harvest responses from an ambitious 13-week radio lecture series undertaken by a devoted New Church professional at his own expense, Mr. Van Hearn. That area will also hear the Rev. Michael Gladish's "The Man Who Saw God in His Kingdom" to describe Swedenborg's inspiration. In Los Angeles a drive has been started to increase its activities and the new book room is making progress. The group in the Sacramento area has expressed its optimism by seeking recognition as a General Church circle, and the Bay Area activities include Pastor Wendel Barnett's participation in a forum on the subject of life after death.
     Our neighbors in Canada have much to report. In Caryndale there is excitement over the addition of 380 acres of new land, and the prospects of hosting the Educational Council meetings of the General Church next summer as well as plans for a Canadian Assembly in 1983.
     The Mitchellville society in our nation's capital is undertaking four special visitors' services in January, May, September and November, and will be hosting the General Church treasurers' meetings in April.
     The "Heartlands" of the Western District is preparing for an assembly and has arranged for lectures in Houston by Rev. Peter Buss as well as showings of the Johnny Appleseed film.
     A new quarterly newsletter has been represented in its first issue by the editor, Rev. Robert McMaster in London, serving the Great Britain New Church, and in South Africa the Transvaal circle is happily undertaking the building of a new church.
     In addition to such major activities and undertakings, a heartening number of worthwhile programs are underway around the church. Of these, the series of visits by Rev. Douglas Taylor, chairman of the General Church Extension Committee, has initiated increased interest in "Talking to people about the Church" as well as actual training in that important skill in places including Washington and Los Angeles. The major effort in Toronto headed by Rev. Al Nicholson has proved its effectiveness, and Mr. Nicholson carried his challenge through a 6000-mile tour late last year.
     These brief references are derived from the many church center newsletters, which also include delightful local activities and personal notes, but especially do we note the great many New Church people visiting from one area to another. Unquestionably, the individuals, couples and families that drop in to visit a church group while they are traveling bring a delightful feeling of church unity that is to be encouraged.



     Maple Leaf Academy has been growing and changing since its inception in 1969. Over seventy of the most competent leaders of the General Church have participated as camp counselors, some of whom include Bishop L. B. King; the Rev. Messrs. F. S. Rose, D. L. Rose, B. D. Holm, T. L. Kline, M. R. Carlson, P. A. Rose, B. Burke, A. Acton, C. R. J. Smith, and many of their wives; D. Kuhl, G. Hyatt, C. and T. Clark, D. and P. Show, P. and R. Rhodes, Joanne Lockhart, D. and T. Grubb and B. Schnarr.
     Along with these priests and laymen many others have contributed their time and expertise to make Maple an important service of the General Church to those who have finished grades nine through twelve. The present camp directors, Rev. Mark R. Carlson (over six hundred hours' training in counseling) and Denis Kuhl (eleven years' experience at Maple) promise to continue recruiting quality staffs for this unique New Church summer camp.
     Maple Leaf Academy is unique in its goals, its setting and its program. The goal of Maple Leaf is to increase the campers' awareness of religion in their lives. The focus of the camp is the Lord, and becoming aware of His presence through the Word, through the world around us and through one another. By focusing on the Lord, Maple not only teaches but also shows the campers that "all religion is of life and the life of religion is to do good."
     Because of this unique goal the camp is held each year at the end of June in the beautiful woods and lakes of Muskoka, two hours north of Toronto, Ontario, Canada. There at Caribou Lodge, named after the caribou that are sometimes seen, the camp is removed from the distractions of the world, TVs, radios, cars and schedules.
     This setting, in the beautiful scenery of nature, provides the perfect atmosphere for achieving the unique goals of Maple. Because of the goals and the setting, the means for achieving these goals through worship, instruction and supervised social life are also unique. The success of these unique means can be seen in the many Maple graduates now actively involved in our societies and schools. The various forms of worship, instruction and social life are all accommodated to the uniqueness of the camp.
     In addition to a sunrise service and campfire service, there is worship each morning following breakfast, and each evening before lights-out. Special evening services (shaloms) are provided as often as practicable. Varieties of prayers are said or sung before each meal, but just as genuine worship does not merely consist in the externals of worship but enters into all areas of life, so also does the sphere of worship prevail in the social life, instruction and recreation of the camp.
     Two or three "lectures" are given each morning. These "lectures" are not of the normal variety. The campers fully participate in the development and the discussion of the subject, becoming active in the discovery process. When the campers understand and experience the power of religion in their lives, it is almost inevitable that the lectures are carried out in the recreation hall into the social life of the camp, including the recreational aspects.
     In addition to the recreational activities already mentioned, following the quiet hour after lunch the campers enjoy hiking through the trails to the water slide, creating skits for gala night, playing tennis, volley ball, and other sports activities, competing in the water Olympics, reading and talking. During the afternoons courses on creative arts are provided if possible.


     One very clear manifestation of the carry-over of worship into life is the work teams the campers are divided into, called families. Each family is responsible for at least one day of K. P. duty and other responsibilities around the camp, policing the yard, cleaning the rec. hall or collecting, worship planning and other useful jobs that are essential to the program of the camp. Other family functions include organizing skits for talent night, providing music for worship services, bonfires, games activities, water slide picnic, and sports teams in the Olympics.
     Supervised closely by at least one counselor, each family team is to help individual campers feel comfortable and integrated into the camp and to help them feel that they are an important part of it. Another use of the family team structure is to provide peaceful and relaxed time for the campers to assimilate their experiences through discussions and reflections. An hour to an hour-and-a half is spent each evening in the family organizing uses and reviewing the last twenty-four hours' experiences with the group of campers. Led by at least exercises designed to increase their self-awareness in the camp. Another function of the family is to show the campers charity in action. Many campers have said that they first became aware of the relationship of their religion tot heir life at Maple Leaf Academy.
     In 1982 Maple Leaf Academy will be held near the end of June. Applications and further information are available from Rev. Mark R. Carlson, 16 Stafford Lane, RR 2, Kitchener, Ontario, Canada N2G 3W5 or through John Wyncoll in Toronto, Local pastors will have application forms in April.
     Terry Schnarr,




     by the Rev. Erik Sandstrom

This pamphlet treats of the proper relationship and procedure to be followed by a couple approaching marriage. Attention is given to the importance of the betrothal ceremony as a confirmation of consent and a marriage of the minds.          Postpaid 75 cents


     by the Rev. N. Bruce Rogers

A beautiful pamphlet that states the ideals in marriage and then discusses the realities and possible disappointments of marriage, with guidance concerning the action to be taken if marriages falter.                                   Postpaid 90 cents


     by the Rev. N. Bruce Rogers

This pamphlet presents a view of the Divine law as regards marriages that seem no longer viable, with the hope that it will make clear what is Divinely permissible and what is not. The end result is to provide some sort of balance to the attitudes with which we are surrounded in the world.                              Postpaid 90 cents

Hours: 9 to 12, Monday thru Friday
Phone (215) 947-3920


Notes on This Issue 1982

Notes on This Issue       Editor       1982

Vol. CII     April, 1982     No. 4


     We have quoted in full the lesson from the Writings after Rev. Taylor's sermon on the joy of seeing the Lord. Try looking quickly at the headings in this sermon. This will probably inspire you to read the whole sermon when you have more time.
     As two items in this issue relate to birth control we call attention yet again to Selected Editorials by Rev. Cairns Henderson. (See the advertisement in the February issue.) Under the title "The Church and Birth Control" (pages 130-134) Mr. Henderson pointed out "that there are no direct teachings on birth control," and he emphasized that is not the function of priests in counseling "to tell married couples that they should or should not practice birth control." But he supplied considerable food for careful thought. In this issue you will find further thoughts on this subject together with facts that may be new to you.
     Mr. Henderson often said that there should be more variety in the contents of this magazine. Well, this month an article presents computer comparisons of translations. We have readers who are very much at home in the world of the computer. These will be especially grateful for the careful way the article presents the exact nature of the tests. Other readers may be a little bewildered or impatient for the answer. Let them at least read the sections headed Discussion and Conclusions on pages 163 and 164.
     Some passages in the Writings portray us standing midway between the devil and the Lord, free to turn either way. (See Doctrine of Life 19 and TCR 476.) This portrayal of man's choice gives rise to the Easter editorial (p. 165).
     Mr. Van Hearn's radio program: A clarification has been supplied relating to "From Church Newsletters" (March issue, p. 128). Mr. J. Van Hearn's weekly program in Los Angeles was titled "The Man Who Saw God and His Kingdom." Discontinued in Los Angeles, it will be heard instead from both San Diego and Sacramento. Rev. Michael Gladish had nothing to do with this, but he has been in close contact with "Van" and looks to increasing cooperation. Mr. Van Hearn is to be a guest speaker at the California District Assembly which will be held in San Diego (June 17th-20th). For information contact Rev. Cedric King. (See the January issue page 39.)

     Note on ministerial changes: See page 183.

     Academy Summer Camp: See page 174.





     "Then did the disciples rejoice when they saw the Lord" (John 20:20).

     Quite understandably, the disciples did rejoice when they saw the risen Lord. They were not merely "glad," as the King James translation has it. The original says that they "rejoiced."
     In the Writings it is pointed out that throughout the Word there is a precise distinction to be observed between the words "joy" and "gladness," joy referring to good, the will, the heart; while gladness refers to truth and the understanding.


     We can easily imagine how great their joy must have been, if only we stop to consider how they must have felt on this occasion. It was evening time on the resurrection day. The disciples were gathered together with the doors shut for fear of the Jews. They were both frightened and dismayed; utterly desolated. They were frightened because they expected to have to undergo similar punishment to that endured by the Lord Himself. This they had understood by the Lord's own words at the Last Supper. He had said to them, "If ye were of the world, the world would love his own. But because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you. Remember the word that I said unto you, The servant is not greater than his lord. If they have persecuted Me, they will also persecute you" (John 15:19, 20).
     Now, leaderless and forlorn, they expected that it would only be a matter of time before their persecution and suffering would begin. They were utterly desolated because all that they had striven for seemed to have vanished away. The Lord, the very center of their life, had been taken away from them. The acuteness of their disappointment can be gauged from the poignant remark of one of the disciples on the walk to Emmaus-"We trusted that it had been He which would have redeemed Israel" (Luke 24:21). Notwithstanding the Lord's frequent references to His death and resurrection, they had not really believed that these things would happen.


The human mind has an unlimited capacity for ignoring what it does not wish to see or hear. Consequently, the disciples heard these things and yet heard them not. In their wishful thinking they felt sure that such a disaster could never happen.
     But now it had happened. The Lord had been taken without a struggle; He had not said a word in His own defense; He had meekly submitted to the abuse, insults and torture of evil and weak men. Although He had frequently exhibited His Divine power, even His ability to raise the dead and restore them to life, He had not raised a finger to save Himself from death.
     No doubt the disciples recalled from their memories the exultant cries of the multitude a few days before when the Lord had entered in triumph into Jerusalem in the manner of a king about to be crowned, seated upon an ass's colt. They had felt sure that the day of deliverance for Israel had come. The Messiah, the Anointed One, the King, would now deliver them from the Roman yoke and so redeem Israel. But all their natural ambitions were dashed to pieces when the body of the Lord upon the cross ceased to be a receptacle of life, when He gave up the spirit and expired. The wonderful hope of a glorious future had been turned into heavy gloom.
     So it was that in the evening of the resurrection day, they were gathered together with the doors locked for fear of the Jews. They had indeed heard that morning from the women who went to the sepulcher that the body of the Lord was no longer there, and that an angel at the sepulcher had told the women that the Lord was risen. But as we read in the gospel of Luke, when the women told the disciples of these things, their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they believed them not (Luke 24:11). But now, suddenly, He appeared in the midst of them. One moment He was not there, and the next He stood in the midst of them.
     In Luke's gospel it is reported that despite the Lord's greeting, "Peace be unto you," they were terrified and affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a spirit. Seeking to calm them down, the Lord said: "Behold My hands and My feet that it is I Myself. Handle Me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have. And when He had thus spoken, He showed them His hands and His feet" (Luke 24:39 and 40).
     In John's gospel, from which our text is taken, it is said that He showed them "His hands and His side. Then did the disciples rejoice when they saw the Lord" (John 20:20).
     Luke's gospel amplifies this, saying, "They believed not for joy and wondered" (Luke 24:4 1). It was too good to be true.


It was all so unexpected, despite what the Lord had repeatedly said. He had indeed risen from the dead.
     What a consolation this must have been to them. Hope had returned. The Lord was with them and would continue to be with them. They remembered and understood His words, even when He had said that He would raise the temple in three days. They understood now that it applied to His resurrection.
     In a certain sense they saw Him for the first time, because now they saw Him as He really is, as He is in heaven. This was the inmost cause of their rejoicing. Of course, they had seen the Lord's physical form many times before; they had seen it with their own physical eyes; they had heard His voice. Was it then that physical body that they now saw? Or, was it something else? Were they seeing Him with their physical eyes or their spiritual eyes?


     The disciples saw the Lord with their spiritual eyes, not their physical eyes. This is very definitely taught in the Writings; for example, in this passage from the Apocalypse Explained: "While man is in the body he does not see such things as are in heaven unless the sight of his spirit is opened. When this is opened, then he does see . . . . In this way angels were seen in ancient times, and the Lord was seen by His disciples after His resurrection. This sight is the sight of the spiritual man . . . . He who knows nothing about this sight believes that angels when seen by men have taken on a human form, and that when they vanished from sight they laid it aside. But this is not so; angels then appeared in their own form, which is the human form, not before the sight of men's bodily eyes but before the sight of their spirit, which sight was then opened. This is evident from the Lord's being seen by the disciples (after His resurrection) when He Himself showed to them that He was a man in a complete human form (Luke 24:39; John 20:20-28); and yet He became invisible. When they saw Him, the eyes of their spirit were opened, but when He became invisible those eyes were closed" (AE 53:2).
     Now, that passage explains many things about the Lord's post-resurrection appearances-how He appeared suddenly in the midst of them, even though the doors were closed, and how He disappeared instantly, as happened on each occasion.


     We might suppose (from the fact that the disciples saw Him with their spiritual eyes) that what they saw was a spirit. After all, there is a very clearly stated law in the work Heaven and Hell that when "what is spiritual sees and touches what is spiritual it is the same as when what is natural sees and touches what is natural" (HH 461).


But the Lord very definitely says that He is not a spirit and warns the disciples against thinking that He is. He shows them His arms and legs, presumably bearing signs of His recent punishment, and says, "A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have" (Luke 24:39).
     Are we to think then that this was His physical, material body resurrected? That is the official teaching of the Christian Church; that is how they understand that the Lord rose from the dead.
     But in the New Church we can see that this interpretation cannot be so. If the disciples saw the Lord with their spiritual eyes, as we are assured they did, then it could not have been physical, material substance that they beheld. It could not have been the Lord's material body. What then was it that they saw?


     The basic teaching is that there are three kinds of substance. There is physical, material substance of which our bodies are made, and with which we are quite familiar. This is finite, having both a beginning and an ending. As we know, it eventually disintegrates. Then there is spiritual substance of which our minds are made. This, too, is finite although it has no ending. It is everlasting, but it does have a beginning. It is therefore not an Infinite, Divine substance. But beyond physical and spiritual substance there is the Divine Substance, the Substance of substances, the underlying reality. This is what the Heavenly Doctrine calls the Divine Substantial. It is Infinite Substance having neither beginning nor end.
     Now, the Lord's resurrection body was neither of material physical substance nor of spiritual substance. It was Divine Substantial. It was the Divine Human. The Divine had come down to the natural plane. This is what was involved in one of the first things said in the gospel of John, something which we should keep in our thought throughout our reading of the whole gospel: "the Word [which in the beginning was with God, and was God] was made flesh and dwelt among us. And we beheld His glory, the glory as of the Only-Begotten of the Father, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). The Lord's Human was now the Offspring of God, no longer the offspring of Mary.
     For this reason He seemed to those who knew Him to be different. Mary Magdalene mistook Him for the gardener. Two of the disciples walking to Emmaus took a considerable time to recognize Him. And on those other occasions when He had first appeared to the disciples, He was not immediately recognized by them.


     He appeared different because He was different. Everything taken on thro ugh Mary had been completely cast off; in fact, blotted out and dissipated. Hence we are explicitly taught: "With man evils are separated but still are retained because they cannot be altogether blotted out; but with the Lord, who made the natural in Himself Divine, evils and falsities were altogether ejected and blotted out" (AC 5134). And in another passage: "Man is made altogether new when he is being regenerated because then each and all things with him are so disposed as to receive heavenly loves. Nevertheless, with man the former forms are not destroyed but only removed; but with the Lord the former forms, which were from the maternal, were completely destroyed and dissipated, and Divine forms were received in their place. For the Divine love does not agree with any but a Divine form; all other forms it absolutely casts out. Hence it is that the Lord when glorified was no longer the son of Mary" (AC 6872:4).
     Yet He was not so different as to be completely unrecognizable. They did recognize Him eventually. In His early appearances the Lord was able to show the disciples His wounds and His scars in order to convince them that it was He Himself. This agrees with the Divine principle that the Lord appears to man according to man's state of belief (AC 1838; 3605:4).
     From all this then we conclude that the disciples saw the Divine Substantial-Divine Substance-and they saw it with their spiritual eyes, not with their natural, physical eyes. They saw the Divine in the Human. As the Lord had earlier said, "He that seeth Me seeth Him that sent Me" (John 12:45). They were not beholding material substance, because this had all been cast out. Besides, they were seeing with their spiritual eyes. Nor were they beholding finite, spiritual substance-because the Lord explicitly denied that He was a spirit. A spirit does have flesh and bones of a spiritual kind in the spiritual world, but the Lord had Divine flesh and bones when He appeared in His Divine Substantial Form.
     It is no wonder that the disciples rejoiced when they saw the Lord. They saw Him in His glory. Peter, James and John had been privileged to have a preview of this at the transfiguration of the Lord on the mountain. They saw the Divine Being in His Own Divine Human Form. They had been mystified earlier when He had said just prior to the Last Supper, "Ye now have sorrow: but I will see you again. And your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you" (John 16:22). But now they understood, and their hearts were indeed full of joy.



     This heartfelt joy is something that appeals to every true disciple. We see the Lord and rejoice whenever He is resurrected in our minds, when we "behold His glory, full of grace and truth" (John 1:14). We see it when we see the Lord in the Word-in the Old Testament, the New Testament, and the Heavenly Doctrine. At such a time the Lord comes to us individually with great power and glory.
     But we have an even more interior sight of the Lord when we really see the Divine in His Own Human Form, especially when we ac knowledge that all the good of love and charity and all the truth of faith come from the Lord Jesus Christ in His glorified Divine Human. When we see that, we see the Lord, and like the disciples of old, we rejoice from a full heart.
     But this personal resurrection of the Lord in our minds, this time of consolation and revival of hope, is preceded by a kind of crucifixion of the Lord in our minds, when the Lord seems to have been taken away from us by our evils and falsities. For He seems to have disappointed us and not granted us our prayers, especially our wishes with regard to our worldly ambitions, when He has acted differently from the way we expected Him to act, when He does not seem to be there to lean on. It is as if He had been crucified in our minds. It is a time of dark and gloomy temptation. All our hope has vanished; bewilderment and dismay prevail. It is certainly an evening state in our spiritual life. The darkness of night seems imminent.
     We do not know what to do-except to shut the doors against the influx of evils and falsities, which are the cause of the Lord's crucifixion. Evil desires, with self and the world at their center, together with the false ideas and reasonings that go with them, are what crucify the Lord in us. They cause Him to be taken away from us. They are the cause of our gloom and desolation. But it is important to realize that these things, these spiritual enemies, are really outside of us; they flow in from hell only if we leave the door open. They flow in and attack those good qualities that we have received from the Lord and that are true disciples of the Lord. If we would have the Lord come and stand in the midst of our minds, it is quite necessary for us to take the precaution of shutting the door against the influx from hell, closing the mind firmly and securely against it, regarding with a holy fear the thought that the Lord's enemies might come in, even as the disciples closed the doors for fear of the Jews.


     Of course, in the literal sense the closing of the doors was a simple act, done once and for all. But in the spiritual sense the door has to be repeatedly closed on many, many occasions. Only in this way can it be kept permanently closed and sealed. To the extent that the door is kept securely closed, to that extent and no more, can the Lord appear in the midst and offer proof of His resurrection, so that we see Him as He really is.
     He greets us with the gift of peace to calm our troubled minds. Peace means unity, the opposite of division and strife. That is why in all the sacred languages the word for peace means unity, oneness, conjunction. Peace comes from the union of the Divine and the Human in the Lord. It is in the Lord and from the Lord.
     Peace in heaven is also from the Lord, springing from His conjunction with the angels there, but in particular, from the conjunction of good and truth in each angel. This heavenly peace, originating in the Divine peace within the Lord, is also possible in men and women on earth, according to the conjunction of good and truth (or love and wisdom) in the individual's mind. The mind that has something of this conjunction of the will and the understanding receives something of peace from the Lord. The mind in which this blessed conjunction is well advanced receives much more of peace, which is felt as a sense of rest in the mind, tranquility in the natural mind and joy therefrom.
     Then we recognize His hands and His side, His Divine power and His Divine love, and we see that it is He Himself, the One Whom we had read about, but whose Word we had not really understood. But now we see 'Him as He really is-the Divine Human, and our heart rejoices. "Then did the disciples rejoice when they saw the Lord" (John 20:20). Amen.

     LESSONS: Luke 24:25-48; John 20: 18-31; Doctrine of the Lord 35:1, 2, 9, 10, 11Doctrine of the Lord 35.

     (1) By successive steps the Lord put off the human taken from the mother, and put on a Human from the Divine within Him, which is the Divine Human, and is the Son of God. That in the Lord were the Divine and the human, the Divine from Jehovah the Father, and the human from the virgin Mary, is known. Hence He was God and Man, having a Divine essence and a human nature; a Divine essence from the Father, and a human nature from the another; and therefore was equal to the Father as to the Divine, and less than the Father as to the human. It is also known that this human nature from the mother was not transmuted into the Divine essence, nor commingled with it, for this is taught in the Doctrine of Faith which is called the Athanasian Creed.


For a human nature cannot be transmuted into the Divine essence, nor can it be commingled therewith. (2) In accordance with the same creed is also our doctrine that the Divine assumed the Human, that is, united itself to it, as a soul to its body, so that they were not two, but one Person. From this it follows that the Lord put off the human from the mother, which in itself was like that of another man, and thus material, and put on a Human from the Father, which in itself was like His Divine, and thus substantial, so that the Human too became Divine. This is why in the Word of the Prophets the Lord even as to the Human is called Jehovah, and God; and in the Word of the Evangelists, Lord, God, Messiah or Christ, and the Son of God in whom we must believe, and by whom we are to be saved.
     (9) As the Lord's Human was glorified, that is, made Divine, He rose again after death on the third day with His whole body, which does not take place with any man; for a man rises again solely as to the spirit, and not as to the body. In order that men may know, and no one doubt, that the Lord rose again with His whole body, He not only said so through the angels in the sepulcher, but also showed Himself to His disciples in His human body, saying to them when they believed that they saw a spirit:

See My hands and My feet, that it is I Myself; handle Me and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have; and when He had thus spoken, He showed them His hands and His feet (Luke 24:39, 40; John 20:20).
And He said to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold My hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into My side; and be not faithless but believing; then said Thomas, My Lord and my God (John 20:27. 28).
(10) In order to evince still further that He was not a spirit but a Man, the Lord said to His disciples,
Have ye here any meat? And they gave Him a piece of a broiled fish, and of a honey-comb; and He took it and did eat before them (Luke 24:41-48).

As His body was no longer material, but Divine substantial, He came in to His disciples when the doors were shut (John 20:19, 26); and after He had been seen He became invisible (Luke 24: 31). Being such, the Lord was then taken up, and sat at the right hand of God, as we read:


It came to pass that while Jesus blessed His disciples. He was parted from them, and carried up into heaven (Luke 24:51).
After He had spoken unto them, He was carried up into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God (Mark 16: 19).

To "sit at the right hand of God" signifies Divine omnipotence.
     (11) As the Lord ascended into heaven, and sat at the right hand of God (by which is signified Divine omnipotence) with the Divine and the Human united into a one, it follows that His human substance or essence is just as is His Divine substance or essence. To think otherwise would be like thinking that His Divine was taken up into heaven and sat at the right hand of God, but not His Human together with it, which is contrary to Scripture, and also to the Christian Doctrine, which is that in Christ God and Man are like soul and body, and to separate these is contrary to sound reason. This unition of the Father with the Son, or of the Divine with the Human, is meant also in the following:

I came forth from the Father, and am come into the world, again I leave the world, and go to the Father (John 16:28).
I go away, and come to Him that sent Me (John 7:33; 16:5, 16; 17:11, 13; 20:17).
If then ye shall see the Son of Man ascending where He was before (John 6:62).
No one hath ascended into heaven but He that came down from heaven (John 3:13).

Every man who is saved ascends into heaven, but not of himself. He ascends by the Lord's aid. The Lord alone ascended of Himself.

NEW ZEALAND CENTENARY              1982

Dear Sir.
     I would like to bring to your readers' notice an important event in the New Church. The New Church in New Zealand is planning an international gathering to celebrate its centenary. It will be held in January 1984. We hope there will be many people from the world-wide New Church attending.
     A full program for the ten-day camp is being planned. There will be a mixture of lectures, discussions, worship and recreational activities. All age groups will be catered for.
     If anyone would like to receive more information about this event please would they write to: Mr. and Mrs. W. Huttley, 19 Duncan Avenue, Te Atatu South, Auckland, New Zealand.




     There are two points of view from which we may regard all things: from the viewpoint of life in this world alone, or from the viewpoint of eternal, spiritual life. As New Church people, there should be no question as to what our point of view should be, for we know for a certainty that we live after death to eternity. We have clear teachings concerning the reality, nature and quality of the spiritual world, and, hopefully, we have a firm belief in those teachings.
     The importance of regarding all things of this life in relation to eternal life is repeatedly emphasized in the Word. We have the clear teaching that "the Lord's Divine providence has as its end a heaven from the human race" (DP 27-emphasis mine). In Mark we read: "What shall it profit a man if he shall gain the whole world, and lose his soul?" (8:36) In His sermon on the mount the Lord said: "I say unto you: take no thought for your life, what ye shall eat, or for your body, what ye shall put on. Is not the life more than food and the body than raiment? . . . . But seek ye first the kingdom of God, and His justice; and all these things shall be added unto you" (Matt. 6:25, 33-emphasis mine). In the Arcana Coelestia we read: "What should a man have more at heart than his life to eternity? If in the life of the body he destroys his soul, does he not destroy it to eternity?" (AC 794) And again we read: "That which is eternal is . . . because it has being from the Divine, which is infinite; and the infinite as to time is the eternal. But that which is temporal relatively is not, because when it is ended it is no more" (AC 8939-Emphasis mine).
     If we believe that we are thinking from a spiritual perspective when we think about spiritual things we are deceived. We have a spiritual point of view when we think not about but from the truths of spiritual life. In other words, we are thinking spiritually when we regard all things of this world in relation to the spiritual world when we try to see the spiritual causes of the events, situations and problems which affect us, and try to discern the spiritual ends to which they look.
     Our natural inclination is to think in terms of life in this world alone. We think of our physical health as an end in itself rather than as means to the full performance of our uses. We seek the pleasures of the body without realizing that pleasures were given for the sake of use. We ponder over our prospects for advancement with a view to honor, wealth or prestige, rather than as a means to the fuller performance of use.


We seek to improve our financial position for the sake of the comforts and pleasures we can enjoy rather than as a means of being of greater service to our neighbor, our community, and our church.
     The same is true of marriage. Our natural inclination is to look upon it as a state of life in which we can enjoy the love of our partners and share our love with them-as a state in which we can share mutual delights and pleasant companionship. But how often do we think of its spiritual uses; the conjunction of minds through mutually looking to the Lord and shunning evils as sins; the procreation of offspring and raising them to become angels of heaven?
     It is true that when we are reminded that we ought to think of natural things from spiritual principles we acknowledge this. But frequently this acknowledgment is only temporary. When we return to the activities of our daily life, we have a tendency to lapse back into worldly thought. But it should not be so, especially with New Church people, for we have a wealth of teaching concerning spiritual life and its relation to natural life-the relation of the temporal to the eternal. And it must not be so if we would live wise, good and useful lives both here and hereafter.
     Let us now apply this principle to a specific subject-one which affects every husband and wife, and should concern everyone looking to and preparing for marriage. What is the spiritual viewpoint in regard to the procreation and care of offspring, and what teaching is given on this subject in the Lord's Word?
     It should be observed that the Lord does not give specific instruction in the Word as to how many children a couple should have, or what size a family should be. Nor does He teach that there is no other purpose in bodily conjunction of husband and wife than the procreation of children. In fact, the Word teaches that there is a spiritual use in cohabitation between husband and wife-the procreation of spiritual offspring, which are new states of good and truth with them which enrich and enhance their marriage. It should be noted that for this use to be fulfilled, the seed of the husband must be received and retained by the wife, for there is an off-shoot of the husband's soul in his seed. In the absence of such specific instruction we conclude that it is up to each couple to decide these issues for themselves. But in reaching such a decision or decisions, how should they approach the issue and what should be their attitude?
     The Lord does give us instruction in regard to these questions, and it is my purpose here to present that teaching, leaving the application of it to individual couples according to their consciences.


     We are told in the Writings that love of infants is perpetually conjoined with conjugial love because they both proceed from the same source (CL 385, 387). There are three loves which pervade everything of the celestial or inmost heaven. They are conjugial love, love for infants and love for society, or mutual love. Conjugial love is said to be the principal love of all-why? Because its use is the greatest of all, namely, the propagation of the human race and thence of the angelic heaven. Love of infants follows this because derived from it (AC 2039). We are told also that the delights of conjugial love exceed all other delights because its use-the propagation of the human race-exceeds all other uses in importance and excellence (AC 5053).
     The inseparability of these three loves-conjugial love, the love of offspring, and love of the neighbor or mutual love-is beautifully expressed in the following passage: "With those who live in conjugial love, the interiors of their minds are open through heaven even to the Lord; for this love flows in from the Lord through a man's inmost. From this they have the Lord's kingdom in themselves, and from this they have genuine love toward little children for the sake of the Lord's kingdom; and from this they are receptive of heavenly loves above others, and are in mutual love more than others; for this comes from that source as a stream from its fountain" (AC 2737).
     Notice that it is said that those who have a genuine love of offspring love them for the sake of the Lord's kingdom. They desire that there may be born those who will become angels and serve the Lord by performing heavenly uses and that thus the angelic heaven may be enlarged and perfected. This is the attitude of those who are in true conjugial love and from that love have a spiritual love of offspring. How different from this is the attitude of most people today!
     The attitude of many married couples is that children are a bit of a nuisance, that they inhibit and restrict the parents from fully enjoying their married life. Many regard having children as a duty to society and when they've had two, they consider they have done their duty-they've replaced themselves. Still others have children because they wish to perpetuate the family name. When they feel assured of this they stop having children. There are others who desire children for the pleasure the children give them. They continue to have them as long as they feel they would enjoy more, but as soon as it seems that another would be an encumbrance, they cease. Then, of course, there are those who do not want children at all because it will cramp their style. In these attitudes, it will be observed, there is no thought of use, no thought of the Lord's purpose, no thought of spiritual ends.


The thought is purely from self and the world for the sake of self and the world. And we may be sure that with those who have these attitudes there is no true conjugial love, for, as we read above, the love of offspring for the sake of the Lord's kingdom flows forth from conjugial love like waters from a fountain.
     Now it is understandable that many in the world should have such attitudes, for they know nothing of love truly conjugial. Nor do they know that the Lord's purpose in creation, and hence also in marriage, is that there may be a heaven from the human race. They do not know that the delights of marriage exceed all other delights because of the importance and excellence of its spiritual and eternal use above all others. They do not know that it is wrong and perverse to seek to enjoy the delights of marriage while seeking to obstruct the fulfillment of one of its principal uses.
     While it is understandable that these attitudes should be prevalent in the world it should be known that if such attitudes were to become prevalent in the New Church they would seriously threaten the continued existence of the church; and to the extent that they do exist, the church's life and integrity are threatened. Not only do such attitudes endanger the church but they separate those who have them from heaven for as long as these attitudes prevail with them. We are told that there are many, both men and women, especially in Christendom, who contract the perverse disposition to seek bodily conjunction without any desire for offspring. They thus utterly exclude from themselves that which is the center and inmost end and principle of marriage. Such desire for conjunction being damnable, because devoid of love truly conjugial, they are so long separated from heaven as they cherish this desire; and in case they thus live and die, they are after death grievously punished until they put away the profane cupidity of desiring conjunction merely for the lusts' sake without any desire for offspring (SD 1202, 1203).
     The Writings teach that there is a distinct difference between spiritual thought and natural thought. The spiritual think from purposes and causes about effects. They think from spiritual goods and truths about natural problems. This type of thought is said to be in order. But the natural think from self and the world about spiritual purposes and causes. This thought is from the lower sensual region of the mind wherein are many appearances and fallacies from the bodily senses. Such thought, we are told, serves only to confirm one in falsities and in the lusts of evil, "and after confirmation to see and believe them to be the truths of wisdom and goodnesses of its love.


So it is with the love of infants and children with the spiritual and the natural." The spiritual love them from spiritual principles, thus according to order, but the natural love them from self and the world, thus contrary to order (CL 408).
     While the Lord allows us the freedom to think as we please about all things, yet it is important that we recognize that there is only one right way of thinking, and that is to think from spiritual truths revealed in the Word-to think from a spiritual perspective. Insofar as we sincerely strive to think this way, even if we sometimes err, we place ourselves under the Lord's guidance. But if we close our minds to this kind of thought, rejecting it as impractical, or because it is contrary to our natural loves, let us not deceive ourselves that we are living a spiritual life. We are not. We are separating ourselves from heaven by putting natural ends before spiritual ends, and by thinking about spiritual things from natural appearances.
     This same principle applies to the care of one's children. The spiritual love them in one way, and the natural in another (CL 405). The spiritual love them more tenderly because their love is more interior. The innocence of their children penetrates and meets the innocence within themselves, which they have because they are spiritual, and thus they are more deeply affected.
     As said before, those who love their children from what is spiritual love them for the sake of heaven. Because they love them for this end they seek to instill in them those qualities which will prepare them for heavenly life. From earliest infancy they instill in their children love to the Lord and strive to cultivate in them a delight in the Word and an affection for its truths. They love their children for their spiritual intelligence, and uprightness of life; for their virtues of honesty, integrity, industry, and faithfulness in performing uses, and for their morality. These are the things they love in their children, and it is principally on account of these things that they provide for them. When their children grow to youth and young adulthood they love them to the extent that they see these things in their children, and to the extent that they do not, they alienate themselves from them, and do nothing for them except what duty requires (CL 405).
     It is otherwise with those who love their children from natural love. They love them for their looks, their personality, charm and wit; for their physical grace and prowess, and for their natural accomplishments. They close their eyes to the faults of their children excusing them and even favoring them. As far as they are concerned their children can do no wrong, and they are unable to accept criticism of their children from others, however just and well intentioned it is.


They love their children without regard to their spiritual and moral qualities. The love of their children with them is also the love of themselves (ibid).
     We are told in the Writings that the people of the planet Jupiter are among the best in our solar system. We are told further that they desire nothing more than to have children, and that the care and education of their children is their greatest concern, and that they love them most tenderly. Other delights they indeed call delights, but relatively external (SD 546; EU 48, 84). Here, among the inhabitants of Jupiter, we see exemplified the truly spiritual attitude toward the procreation and care of children. This is the attitude that is revealed by the Lord for the New Church-an attitude which should be nurtured and cherished by all who would be of the New Church.


     Visitors to Bryn Athyn, Detroit, Glenview, Kitchener, London, Pittsburgh, San Diego or Toronto. who are in need of hospitality accommodations are cordially urged to contact in advance the appropriate Hospitality Committee head listed below:

Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania          London, England
Mrs. James L. Pendleton               Mrs. Geoffrey P. Dawson
815 Fettersmill Rd.               28 Parklands Rd.
Bryn Athyn, PA 19009               Streatham, London. SW 16
Phone: (215)947-1810               Phone: 01-769-7922

Detroit, Michigan                    Pittsburgh, Penna.
Mrs. Garry Childs                    Mrs. Paul M. Schoenberger
2140 East Square Lake Rd.          7433 Ben Hur St.
Troy, MI 48098                    Pittsburgh, PA 15208
Phone: (313) 879-9914               Phone: (412) 171-3056

Glenview, Illinois               San Diego, California
Mrs. Philip Horigan               Mrs. Helen L. Brown
50 Park Dr.                         2810 Wilbee Court
Glenview, IL 60025               San Diego, CA 92123
Phone: (312) 729-5644           

Kitchener, Ont., Canada               Toronto, Ont., Canada
Mrs. Maurice Schnarr               Mrs. Sydney Parker
98 Evenstone Ave., R. R. 2          30 Royaleigh Ave.
Kitchener, Ont. N2G 3W5               Weston, Ont. M9P 2J5
                              Phone: (416) 241-3704

     Kindly call at least two weeks in advance if possible.




     In the ongoing discussion in these pages of the question of birth control and the "seventh principle" of the Academy, it would seem useful to add a point or two of clarification. The first matter that could use such clarification would seem to be what W. F. Pendleton actually thought about this question.
     As Rev. Geoffrey Childs noted in his thoughtful review of the birth control issue,1 Bishop Pendleton gave two talks at men's meetings in the early part of this century in which he, in effect, qualified the apparent stark harshness of the seventh principle. It turns out that there are two other documents in the Academy archives as well, an undated set of notes and undated but circa 1920 letter on the love of offspring question2 as well as a related article in the LIFE in 1908. A few excerpts from these documents serve to give a fuller picture of the thoughts that Bishop Pendleton had in mind. (The prose will appear rough in places due to most of these being only notes.):

     Because I had favored freedom in this matter [in the 1908 LIFE article], had said some things that looked to freedom and free choice, the impression went out that I had modified the position taken in my address to the General Assembly at Berlin [now Kitchener] in 1899, wherein I had said that any interference with the law of offspring in marriage is an abomination; and this being modified, that I had receded from the early teaching of the Academy on this subject.
     I wished to show that there has been no essential, no real modification of the early position of the Academy, or of that position as formulated in the address referred to.
     Circumstances in which the address was written[,] 2 objects:
     [1] Necessary to show to Convention that we had not departed an iota from principles of the Academy.
     [2] It was necessary to state this truth in a hard form and send it forth as an arrow into the outside world a state that had invaded the New Church itself.
     A state of interfering with the law of offspring from the love of the world.
     It is then an abomination-and this is what is really meant.
     The formulation of this truth in the address at the time the formulated form of it looked at upon the surface did not take into consideration that the law of offspring might be temporarily suspended where there is a desire for children, where there is a love of the principles set forth in the address. It cannot be said that such an interference is an abomination when not from the love of the world. . . .


     It goes without saying that there must be good reasons for that suspension.
     But the nature of those reasons, and the decision to act under them, must be made by the man himself, not by others for him, not by the church for him, but in full freedom and judgment in the light given him by the Lord.
     And the church must sustain him in this freedom. . . .
     The angels when asked, What am I to do in this case? answer Do as you please. This is to be the attitude of the church to the individual.
     We have said that the sphere of the Lord is not only a sphere of freedom, but it is at the same time a sphere of mercy. We are told that mercy is the Divine Love applied and looking to the miseries of mankind.
     We do not know the private miseries of the individual, or of married couples.
     We cannot know their temptations, their griefs, their distresses, their misery, their temptation.
     Let us judge mercifully, justly, and not according to the appearance.
In the New Church there is to be no compulsion to the things of religion, except the compulsion the man places upon himself, and the church must look to it that there be no such compulsion. . . .3


     The universal domination of the love of the world in modern life.
     Its destructive and deadly influence when it enters the New Church.
     It is a continually threatening danger, and the church will be destroyed whenever it is allowed to enter and take possession.
     It is what is signified by Mammon.
     The destructive effect of the endeavor to serve God and the world at the same time.
     There are numerous ways of entering the church by this love, as by roads and gates into a city, which ways are appearances of truth.
     Some of these ways are directly aimed at that citadel of the church's life, love truly conjugial.
     It follows therefore that not only is conjugial love fundamental to the life of the church-fundamental because of its origins in the spiritual affection of truth-but also other loves, which go with it and proceed from it, the love of conception, the love of the infant in the womb, and the love of the infant born.
     *It also follows that the habitual prevention of conception from the love of the world is an abomination and will destroy the church, because it will destroy the conjugial.


     *For the continual stoppage of the activity of any love in its proper field will eventually cause the death of that love.
     In the address on the Principles of the Academy (Berlin [Kitchener] 1899) it was said that "any interference on the part of man with the law of offspring in marriage is an abomination." It was also said that it is "an abomination that is to be removed from the church for its safety and preservation."
     The language I have just used is as follows: (read above *)
     It seems necessary to make this additional or fuller statement in order to prevent a rigid and absolute application of what was said in 1899.
     Any truth made hard, rigid and absolute, without relation with other truths, tends to persuasive faith, tends to restrict freedom of choice, tends to cultivation of a spirit of accusation; where a lapse or apparent lapse is observed in others, tends to make an external rule of an internal principle of life.
     This truth as to the importance and use of conception and birth is one that we should live and take delight in, from which there should be absent any desire to enforce a rigid obedience in others.
     Freedom of choice must always be present even to the extent of the permission of evil. This [is] the reason evil is permitted-to preserve freedom of choice.4


     "By race suicide is commonly understood an insidious sapping of the national strength through voluntary limiting of births" (Newspaper extract, Bulletin, Phila. Sept. 3, 1920).
     The fact is, that race suicide is the ultimate and final result of what is meant by the dragon standing before the woman to destroy her child as soon as it is born. See AR and AE, also SD 6070.
     As all things have a spiritual cause and origin, the limiting and decline of natural births is because of the diminution of spiritual births among men in the world, or regeneration. . . .
     The main contention of this paper is that the love of offspring, and the desire of offspring, should be continually cultivated and universally prevail in the church, as being the field and plane of conjugial love.
     Thus it grows out of, and is involved in, the very idea of what we call New Church education. For this comes forth from love of offspring, spiritual and natural, in the church. . . .
     And since we have seen and adopted this field as the chief and most productive source of increase for the church [sentence unfinished].
     But the desire for offspring should take form in an intelligent and rational faith, and not be a mere blind persuasion.5



My Dear Friend,
     You say that it is reported that I have modified my view on the subject of the prevention of offspring. I have not modified my view on the main question, which I have considered from the beginning of the Academy, and do yet consider, as fundamental to the life of the church. . . .
     Whatever apparent modification may come in must not be modification of the end itself, but possibly of the means by which the end is to be accomplished, and by which it may be more fully accomplished. And if what I have to say does not really minister to the end, it is to be put aside as something not to be considered, much less acted upon. . . .6

     As is apparent from these excerpts, what emerges here is not a simplistic position, but an attempt to draw a careful balance between the ideals of both marriage and New Church education and the permissions of life, ranging from the "private miseries" of couples to the question of "race suicide" (which was apparently a burning issue at the time, as a glance at NEW CHURCH LIFE Index for the early part of the century shows) and "politics" vis a vis Convention. In sum, it seems that even the author of the seventh principle didn't intend it to be applied judgmentally or apart from individual freedom and rationality. As Dr. Hugo Odhner has pointed out in his review of this question, "A dominant characteristic of the General Church from the beginning, and of its leader, Bishop W. F. Pendleton, was a love of preserving freedom. . . ."7
     A second question that would appear to need clarification is that of just how deep into permissions in this area our civilization is. How many children could or should a couple ideally have, living as we now do? interestingly enough, Bishop Pendleton also set the stage for this consideration in his letter:

     Now twenty-five years will about cover the child-bearing period; and the point I wish to present to you is that it is simply impossible for a woman to bear a child every year for twenty-five years. She will in all probability either become barren or die; or at any rate she may be expected to become a wreck in both her physical and nervous systems.8

     For an eloquent summary of the drains on parents raising even a routinely (i.e. not maximally) large family in our day, the reader is referred to a recent article in Theta Alpha Journal.9 It appears that, in our civilization, to have as many children as the physiology of the human organic makes possible is to fly directly in the face of both the building of conjugial love between married partners and the full "protecting what has been procreated" (CL 386ff.) of the children involved.


Has there been some lapse, some oversight in the guidance of Providence in this matter?
     The fact is, of course, that the problem lies with us, not Providence. Even from such superficial indicators as statistics on disease or obesity we can see that in our civilization most of us are probably not, at this day, living in the order of our lives (see TCR 54). It seems reasonable to expect that this lack of order spills over into the function of our reproductive systems. Apparent confirmation for such a theory is found in a variety of research results. For instance, one of the variables affecting how many children a woman will have is the age at which she is first capable of reproduction. One sign of having reached this age is menarche, the onset of menstruation. In our "developed" civilization this age has been dropping steadily over the last hundred years,10 apparently due to the way we live.
     Factors influencing menarche appear to include nutrition, with more fully (and perhaps actually over-) fed girls having earlier menarche, while girls from larger families, girls in more demanding physical occupations, and rural rather than urban living areas all tend to have later menarche.11 There is evidence of earlier menarche in societies with a high score on a scale measuring degree of separation of infant from mother,12 and some reason to think that even increased use of artificial light causes earlier menarche!13 Almost surely, some or all of these variables interact, and some may not turn out with further study to be causative factors. But there is at least a provisional basis here for suggesting that the way modern "civilized" women have chosen to live may be exerting a significant influence on at least this aspect of natural "providential" birth control. That is, they eat an excessive diet, have smaller families, get far less physical exercise than their predecessors, live in urban (or suburban) rather than rural areas, have much less mother-child contact than some cultures and spend much of their life under artificial light-all factors tending to lower the age of menarche. At the other end of the age scale, just as children from larger families have later menarche, so there is evidence that mothers of several children experience menopause (the cessation of menstruation) at an earlier age than mothers having only one child.14 This again suggests operation of a providential family size-limiting mechanism, and one not operating in our two-child-per-family culture.
     Bringing this whole matter of Providence's ability to control reproduction into clear focus are findings about a remarkable tribe of African bushmen, the !Kung, who live on the edge of the Kalahiri desert in Botswana and Namibia.


They have received considerable research attention in the last decade due to their fertility statistics. The !Kung hold particular interest for the New Church since they live in the region of Africa that appears to correspond to the location specified in the Writings as the home of the "best and wisest" of the Africans.15"
     Menarche in !Kung women occurs at 16.5 years of age (as opposed to our under-13), with first conception not till 19.5 years though they marry at puberty.16 Conception occurs thereafter only at 3-4 year intervals, apparently due (as in Biblical and earlier times17) to nursing-related hormone function, though such function prevents conception for two years at most in our culture, and far from dependably even at shorter intervals. Menopause among the !Kung occurs shortly after age 40, as opposed to 50 (or later) in our culture. The end result for the ! Kung is a typical family size of five children-utilizing only "providential" birth control. (In contrast, in Hutterite communities, that live what appears to be a more externally healthy and orderly version but still our culture's lifestyle, and where marriage does not occur until women are in their early 20's, families typically have 11 children using only the "providential" birth control of nursing.) Interestingly enough, the !Kung fit all the criteria noted above for providential control of menarche, including a minimal diet, physically strenuous life in a very "rural" setting, extended close contact between mother and infant-and no artificial light! And to add a final emphasis to the convincing nature of the !Kung findings, it has been reported that in one segment of the tribe that abandoned the traditional nomadic lifestyle for a more sedentary "developed" village existence, the age of menarche dropped and the interval between babies was reduced by an average of 30%.
     While the !Kung are unusual in the world of today, it seems clear that they are only a lingering sample of what was once a universal pattern in man's early history of stationary, providentially controlled population size.18 Since the start of the present population "explosion" is generally dated from the 1750's,19 the time of the new influx following the Last Judgment (see LJ 45), it seems possible that the change from that ancient pattern of providential birth limitation is part of the preparation for the New Church going literally from the few to the many (see AE 732). The end point will presumably be a population held stationary by providential means at a new, higher density, similar to what occurs on Jupiter (see AC 8851)-when we are once more in the order of our lives.


     In the meantime, it seems clear that the church needs to devote more thought to two questions: One is what further steps might be taken to provide pertinent support for the use of having large families. For instance, recitation of homilies-even if based on spiritual truth-is an inadequate form of charity for a tired mother! If we really believe in large families, are there not more effective ways we might arrange our patterns of thinking and living in the church in support of them?
     The second question we seem to need to address is what forms of birth control are most orderly, when child spacing or limitation is seen from freedom and rationality to be needed. For the older couple wishing to bring an end to their child-bearing years, ligation (or, more recently, banding) of the Fallopian tubes of the wife would appear to provide a simple and orderly substitute for the menopause that would in more ideal circumstances spontaneously occur then. But what should the younger couple desiring temporary birth control use? Abstinence? Interestingly, Bishop Pendleton could see even in his era that this option too was too simplistic: "I am in doubt whether the total cessation of the conjugial relation is the best means of providing [birth control], and also whether this is the best means of preserving the conjugial between man and wife."20
     What is the most appropriate method? A thicket of complexities confront the concerned couple. For instance, some of the newer methods of birth control, such as the IUD and, to some degree, the pill, work in effect by causing a very early abortion.21 How serious a disorder is this, when compared to drawbacks (e.g. interference with "playfulness"-AE 996:2) of other methods? Some spadework has been done toward laying foundations for an answer22 but the church still awaits a really thorough doctrinal study on all of this. The question would seem not simply worthwhile but urgent-and a good answer may have even evangelization potential in a world where many people are troubled by that question.


1 G. Childs, "Let's Apply," Theta Alpha Journal, Spring 1978, p. 11
2 Dean Eldric Klein originally located this material in the Academy archives
3 W. F. Pendleton, Notes for Men's meeting, Toronto, Jan. 1, 1908; also Men's meeting, General Assembly, Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, June 18, 1910
4 W. F. Pendleton, "Conception and the Evil Results Following Its Prevention," a speech read at Men's meeting, General Assembly, Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, June 16, 1910; also Denver at Men's meeting, May 7, 1911


5 W. F. Pendleton, "Love of Offspring," Undated notes, circa 1920
6 W. F. Pendleton, Undated letter
7 H. Lj. Odhner, "'The Preservation of the Conjugial Through the Love of Offspring," NEW CHURCH LIFE, NOV. 1966, p. 534
8 W. F. Pendleton, reference cited in footnote 6
9 A New Church Wife and Mother-of-eight, "Re: Planned or Unplanned Parenthood," Theta Alpha Journal, Fall 1981, p. 23
10 R. M. May, "Human Reproduction Reconsidered," Nature 272:491 (1978). May cites an interesting footnote to this matter: "In developing countries, with a late age at puberty, the acquisition of fertility and intellectual maturity are almost coincident events which complement each other. In developed countries, on the other hand, it seems that we now acquire our sexuality well in advance of the intellectual maturity that enables us to cope with it. Early teenage pregnancies are something quite new in our evolutionary experience, since hitherto they were a biological impossibility."
11 R. E. Frisch, "Population, Food Intake and Fertility," Science 199:22 (1978); F. E. Johnston, "Control of Age at Menarche," Human Biology 46:159 (1974); T. Laska-Mierzejewska, "Effect of Ecological and Socioeconomic Factors on the Age at Menarche, Body Height and Weight of Rural Girls in Poland," Human Biology 38:289 (1970); D. F. Roberts and T. C. Dann, "Influences on Menarcheal Age in Girls in a Welsh College," British Journal of preventative and Social Medicine 21:170 (1970); R. Rona and G. Pereira, "Factors That Influence Age of Menarche in Girls in Santiago, Chile," Human Biology 46:33 (1974); H. D. Singh, "Family Size and Age at Menarche," American Journal of Obstetrics and Gynecology 11 4:837 (1972)
12 J. M. Whiting, in F. A. Beach (ed.), Sex and Behavior (New York. Wiley 1965), p. 221
13 N. A. Jafarey, M. Y. Khan and S. N. Jafarey, "Role of Artificial Lighting in Decreasing Age of Menarche," Lancet, Aug. 29, 1970, p. 471; G. M. Skutsch, Letter, Lancet, Sept. 12, 1970, p. 571; N. A. Jafarey, M. Y. Khan and S. N. Jafarey, Letter, ibid., p. 707
14 G. Wyshak, "Menopause in Mothers of Multiple Births and Mothers of Singletons Only," Social Biology 25:52 (1978)
15 J. D. Odhner, "Reflection on Africa," The New Philosophy July-Sept. 1978, p. 255; K. Simons, Letter, The New Philosophy, Jan.-March 1979, p. 339
16 For reviews and bibliography on the !Kung, see R. M. May, op. cit., K. Simons, op. cit., and M. Konner and C. Worthman, "Nursing Frequency, Gonadal Function, and Birth Spacing Among !Kung Hunter-gatherers," Science 207:788 (1980)
17 Childs, op. cit.
18 R. M. May, op. cit.
19 A. J. Coale, "'The History of Human Population," Scientific American (1974, No. 3):48


20 W. F. Pendleton, reference cited in footnote 6
21 J. A. Pritchard and P. C. MacDonald, Williams Obstetrics 16th edition (New York: Appleton-Century-Crofts 1980), pp. 1012, 1021
22 G. de Charms, "The Primitive of Man," NEW CHURCH LIFE. NOV. 1975, p. 475; M. Pryke, "Vasectomy," NEW CHURCH LIFE. July 1974, p. 319; A. Acton, "Human Development," The New Philosophy, Jan.-March 1976, p. 339; F. Schnarr, "The Seed of Man," NEW CHURCH LIFE. May 1979, p. 199 NEWS FROM BENADE BY RICHARD R. GLADISH 1982


     Toward the end of his lengthy stay in Italy in 1878, Bishop Benade light-heartedly reports on a conversation with a Catholic priest, adding a comment on Italian attitudes toward religion:

      Today, on visiting the church of Santa Maria in Trastavere, one of the oldest and finest in Rome, I had quite an amusing conversation with the priest, who opened the door for me. After taking me about and pointing out the beauties of the place, he asked me whether I was a Frenchman. No. "An Englishman?" No-I am an American. Oh, an American from New York? No-from Philadelphia. Oh-Philadelphia is a small place, is it not? "Rather large" I replied. "But there are few Catholics there?" "No, a good many." "Are you a Catholic?" "No." "A Protestant'!" No. "Oh, then," said he laughing, "you are rien." "No," said I"I am neither Catholic, nor Protestant, nor rien." "What then are you?" "A Swedenborgian, as people call us-a New Churchman."
     You should have seen his look, not of horror, or disgust, but of amazed ignorance. "Have you never heard of Swedenborg?" I asked him.
     "Never; but what do you believe?"
     "We believe the Lord Jesus Christ to be the only God of heaven and earth."
     "But do you read the Bible?"
     "Assuredly; we believe the Bible to contain the Word of God--the Divine Truth itself." This last seemed to puzzle the poor fellow more than the rest; so I said to him, "When you get to the Vatican library, ask for the writings of Swedenborg and read them." He smiled and thanked me, and on my leaving did not refuse a small "baksheesh." I don't believe that he will ask for the books, but at any rate, the doctrine that the Lord Jesus Christ is the only God has been preached in the old Catholic church in Trastavere and a priest has been the audience.
     The Italians are very amiable as a general thing, and the priests wear their religion loosely, as they do their clothes. [W. H. Benade to Dr. F. E. Boericke. Rome, Dec. 4, 1878.]




     A Scientific Approach

     Dr. David Gladish posed the question, "Why is it hard to read Swedenborg?" (NCL, Feb. 1981, p. 79). He presented a rewritten version of DP 19 to demonstrate that it is Possible to phrase the ideas of the Writings more simply. Until new translations of the Writings become available, he suggests, we might work on rewriting the translations we now have into simpler English. A longer selection of Dr. Gladish's work appeared in the March 1982 issue (NCL p. 103). New translations in more modern English have, of course, been done for the Old and New Testaments as well. The King James Version is now supplemented by such works as the Good News Bible, which purports to be a simpler and more modern Biblical paraphrase.1 Are these older works difficult to read? Do newer versions actually make them easier? People who study English usage have developed several measures of readability which allow us to compare the difficulty of text samples quantitatively. We here present the results of a study which compares the difficulty of these older translations of the Word and the Writings with some more modern versions.
     To quantify the differences in readability in these versions, we used the Fog Index, a simple estimate of how many years of schooling are needed to understand a sample of text. A Fog Index from 1 to 12 indicates the approximate grade level in the first twelve school grades. A Fog Index over 12 indicates college level material. As the Fog Index rises into the upper teens and twenties it is better viewed as strictly a relative measure of readability. Like any index, it over-simplifies the concept it measures. Many aspects of writing style affect readability, including syntax, sentence structure, and the familiarity of the words used to express ideas. The Fog Index omits these. It omits other, less quantifiable aspects of readability as well: vivid imagery and emotional content are difficult to count. Our comparisons between texts should be regarded as minimal differences in readability.
     Methods. We compared the King James Version of the Old and New Testaments (as published by the Academy Book Room) with the Good News Bible.


In using the Good News Bible we do not wish to imply that it is a satisfactory version of the Word. We are using it simply as an example of a simplified version of a text some people find hard to understand. We also compared the Swedenborg Foundation translation of the chapter in Conjugial Love "Of the Causes of Apparent Love, Friendship and Favor in Marriages" with a version of that chapter written by Dr. David Gladish (published last month in the LIFE), and used with his permission. To compare the old and new versions of the two works, we first selected at random ten passages of at least 100 words each from the Good News Bible and the Gladish chapter.2 The passages began at the start of a sentence and ended at the end of a sentence nearest to 100 words beyond the start. We then matched these text samples with the corresponding passages in the King James Version and the Swedenborg Foundation translation. Again, only complete sentences were used, even if the matching passages were of slightly different lengths.
     The Fog Index for each text sample was then determined. To do this, we used a set of computer programs written for an Apple II Plus microcomputer, based on a Fog Index program published by R. B. Nottingham.3 The programs are available on request from the authors. To calculate the Fog Index, the program first determines the number of sentences in a text sample and the total number of words in the sample. It then determines the average sentence length, or number of words per sentence. It then counts the number of long words in the sample. Long words are defined as those with three or more syllables. Proper names are all counted as being one syllable, no matter how many syllables they have. To calculate the index, the average sentence length is added to the percentage of long words, and the sum is multiplied by 0.40.
     Since there is variation in the readability of passages even within one work, we had to compare the average or mean Fog Index for the two matched sets of text samples. To compare the means, we used a statistical test known as the paired t-test, which lets us infer the characteristics of the original works from those of our sets of samples. The t-test gives us the probability that the Fog Indices of the two works from which the samples are drawn are, for all practical purposes, the same. We will view two averages as being different if there is a five percent chance or less that they are the same: such differences are called "significant." Of the averages that were significantly different in this study, even the most similar had only a 4.3 percent chance of being the same.


If the chance that the two averages are the same is greater than five percent, we will consider them as being the same, or not significantly different.
     Results. Table 1 shows the results of this study. The Fog Index program gives the values for number of sentences, number of words, average sentence length and number of long words as well as the Fog Index itself. Looking at each of these values separately gives us some idea of how the authors of the new and purportedly simpler versions might have gone about making their writing more readable than the original versions.
     We will thus compare each of the values individually. The table shows the average value for the older versions at the top of each set of numbers. Below that is the average value of the new version, and below that average is the probability that the two are the same. An asterisk indicates that the two values are significantly different, and NS shows that they are not significantly different.
     The average number of sentences in the text samples of the Good News Bible is significantly different from that of the King James Version, but the average number of sentences does not differ in the Gladish version and the Swedenborg Foundation translation of Conjugial Love. The Good News Bible apparently breaks up sentences that are run together in the King James Version, but the Gladish version leaves the sentencing more or less the same as the Swedenborg Foundation version.
     Both sets of text samples differ significantly in the average number of words per sample, or the average length of the sample passages. The older versions used more words to express the same ideas as the newer versions. In both cases the difference was about 20 words per sample.
     Both sets of text samples also differ significantly as to average sentence length. This was probably achieved both by breaking up ideas into shorter sentences and phrasing that used fewer words in the Good News Bible. The Gladish version, since it had about the same number of sentences as the Swedenborg Foundation translation, probably shortened sentence length by using more direct phrasing.
     The average number of long words per text sample does not differ significantly in the King James Version and the Good News Bible. In fact, since the King James Version had more words per text sample than the Good News Bible, long words actually occur less frequently in that translation than in the more modern one. Of course, the problem with the choice of words in the King James Version is not that its words are long, but that so many of them are archaic.


In contrast, the number of long words per text sample in the Gladish version does differ significantly from the number in the Swedenborg Foundation translation. This is partly a consequence of replacing lengthy Latinate words with shorter English ones.
     Finally, the Fog Index differs significantly for both sets of matched samples. Although the writers of the new versions used somewhat different tactics to achieve simpler style, both did succeed. The Good News Bible is just above high school level, and the others are all well into the college level. The Swedenborg Foundation translation is highest of all: the Writings are, objectively, hard to read. The Gladish version is at about the same level of difficulty as the King James Version. It thus represents a substantial improvement, but may still pose barriers for some readers. By way of comparison, we point out that a recent Reader's Digest condensed book had a Fog index of 9, or about ninth grade level.4 The Fog Index of some letters to Dear Abby ranged from 10 to 16. The Fog Index of Abby's replies was 15.5 This paper's Fog Index averages 15.5.
     A comparison of some of the actual text samples used makes the difference in readability clearer. We here present selections from a sample of the Swedenborg Foundation translation with a Fog Index of nearly 22, and the corresponding parts of a Gladish version sample, which has a Fog Index of about 1 1.5. The samples are from a series of numbers which describe the topic to be covered in the paragraphs which follow. The subject is "conjugial simulations."

     That they are for the sake of having blemishes excused, and thus for avoidance of disrepute. That if on the part of the wife favor does not cease when faculty ceases with the man there may spring up a friendship emulating conjugial friendship as they grow old. That there are different kinds of apparent love and friendship between married partners, one of whom is subjugated, and is therefore subject to the other. That there are infernal marriages in the world between married partners who inwardly are the bitterest enemies and outwardly like the most intimate friends. That in the natural world almost all can be conjoined as to external affections, but not as to internal affections if these disagree and appear. (Swedenborg Foundation)

     They make it possible to excuse faults that might damage one's reputation. If the wife is still thoughtful to the man when he loses his potency, a friendship like the friendship of marriage may spring up as they grow old. The appearances of love and friendship between married partners are different if one is dominated and must obey the other. There are hellish marriages in the world between married partners who inwardly are the bitterest enemies and outwardly are like the most intimate friends.


Almost everyone in the natural world has outward feelings that can be united, without the inner ones being united if they noticeably disagree. (Gladish version)

     Discussion. As Norman Heldon points out, the style of the older translations of the Writings is not always a barrier to those who wish to hear its message (NCL, Nov. 1981, p. 595). Undoubtedly inertia and unwillingness to hear what contradicts one's will contribute to some people's lack of interest in reading the Writings. But if the General Church is serious about doubling in size by 1990, we should probably be concerned with removing as many natural barriers to the acceptance of the Writings as we can. Many of the people who most need the Lord's message are probably among those least willing to struggle with our current translations. Very bright teenagers who have grown up in General Church families also find the Writings hard to understand, even when the topics they study relate directly to their lives. And adults who have grown up in the church sometimes find a vivid new relevance and reality to the teachings of the Writings when they are presented in simpler English.
     We will all eagerly await the re-translation of the Writings into more modern English, but they will be a long time in preparation. We feel works such as Dr. Gladish's will be useful in the interim: they can be significantly more readable than the older translations. They have uses other than strictly temporary ones, however. The new translations will have to be well above the elementary school level of reading difficulty. But there are many adults in the English-speaking population whose reading is at that level, including reading mentally retarded adults and people for whom English is a second language. The freedom of one who re-writes an English text in contrast to one who re-translates a Latin text might allow at least some passages of the Writings to be prepared for the elementary level. We feel it would be most appropriate to have materials that are actual versions of the Lord's words for people who have severe problems reading English, and perhaps for our own young children as well. Our small daughter understands a gospel song that proclaims that "Jesus is King," but would have a hard time remembering that "The Lord God Jesus Christ doth reign." We can surely tell those of her age that "The Lord God Jesus Christ is King."
     Conclusions. We see a future role as well as a present one for simplified versions of the Writings. It is important to begin issuing carefully re-written chapters and books of the Writings as long as it is made clear that they are not actual new translations.


These would enliven people's initial contacts with the church, as well as inspire many of us who have been in the church our entire adult lives. It will remain important in the future to work on collections of short passages which ran easily be re-written at the most elementary of reading levels. The Writings are here for all of us to understand, and we in the General Church are in a good position to help bring "news fresh from heaven" to people of all conditions.


1 American Bible Society, 1976, Good News Bible, Thomas Nelson Publishers, Nashville, Tennessee
2 Samples from the Good News Bible were Hos. 2:20-23; Lev. 21:13-21; Dan. 4:34-36; I Sam. 6: 19-21; Luke 6:37-40; II Kings 23:20-24; Luke 23:29-33; Num. 15:25-29; Is. 42:21-24, and Ezek. 7:15-19. Passages from Conjugial Love included parts of numbers 271, 272, 274, 275, 278, 279,
282, 290, 291 and 292.
3 Nottingham, R. B., 198 1, "Fog Index," Creative Computing 7(4): 152-154
4 Anderson, W. C., 198 1, "Call Sign: 'Bat-21 , " Reader's Digest 119 (712, August, 1981): 197-229
5 Tusaloosa News, Dec. 7, 1981, p. 6

     Table 1. Comparison of Fog Index and associated parameters of the King James Version (KJV) with the Good News Bible (GNB), and the Swedenborg Foundation translation of Conjugial Love (CLS) with the Gladish version (CLG). All data are averages of 10 text samples from each work; each sample is at least 100 words long. Under each comparison, "P" indicates the probability that the two averages are from the same population. An asterisk shows a significant difference; NS shows a non-significant difference. The number of words is rounded to the nearest number divisible by ten. More detailed data are available from the authors.

          Number           Number      Average      Number
          of                of           Sentence      of Long      Fog
          Sentences      Words      Length           Words           Index
KJV           4           140           36           15                19
GNB           7      120           19           16                13
P                *           *                *           NS                *
CLS           5           130           31           28                21
CLG           5      110           24           23                18
P                NS           *                *           *                *


Editorial Pages 1982

Editorial Pages       Editor       1982


     The events which followed Palm Sunday show the underlying reality of that day when it seemed that all Jerusalem was welcoming the coming of the Lord. While on the streets men were hailing the Lord's triumphal entry, there was lying in prison a man named Barabbas. He was out of sight and for the moment out of the minds of the crowds in Jerusalem, but even then did he not in reality hold the preferred place in their hearts?

And there was one named Barabbas, which lay bound with them that had made insurrection with him, who had committed murder . . . (Mark 15:7)

     Who would have dreamed that a choice was coming? The shouts of the multitude were pious enough. The Writings say that if a man speaks pious things but does not shun evils as sins, "the pious things are not pious" (Life 25).
     No one sensed an impending choice in Jerusalem, and no one would have imagined that weeks later Simon Peter would preach on the same streets about the terrible choice that had been made.
     Ye men of Israel . . . Ye denied the Holy One and the Just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you; and killed the Prince of life . . . (Acts 3:12-15)

     The fact that we do make choices in life needs to be brought to our attention. We could easily fail to see the choices and could even deny that we have ever made them.
     The teaching is completely baffling to some. The Lord casts no one into hell. If that is true, then those who go to hell go by their own choice. And would it not be absurd to choose hell?
     We say that one who chooses a life of evil is making his choice of hell. This is not hard to understand in the case of one who chooses a life of crime. But what law-abiding citizen chooses evil? What church-going person chooses evil? Surely, no human being gets up in the morning and says, "Today I choose to do evil."
     Although we could argue that no evil choices are being made, we cannot argue that we have a world devoid of crime or devoid of painful conflicts between human beings.


Wherever human beings associate we become aware of the effects of selfishness and cruelty. None of us would admit to the actual choice of an evil like "hatred," but we may be said to choose the offspring of hatred, and we will mention in this connection the intriguing meaning of the name Barabbas.
     True Christianity places a real choice into human lives. Christianity itself may be defined as shunning evils as sins (DP 265). One who knows this and does not shun evils, therefore, is making a choice. He does not rise in the morning and say, "Today I choose evil." He simply rises in the morning intending to have his own way. If his self-interest is not opposed, he has no quarrel with anyone. He walks through his day apparently intending no evil, but his dear companions are the love of self and the love of the world. (It is interesting in this connection that while one gospel calls Barabbas a murderer, another calls him a robber.)
     Does not the natural man seem to welcome the entrance of a King? The Writings indicate that the people of Jerusalem longed for a Messiah who would exalt them above all other people, catering both to their love of possessing and their love of dominating. And every person, having the loves of self and the world, looks to a religious life, scarcely conscious that religion will bring inner conflict and inner choice. The natural man even thinks that a religious life will further his own ambitions rather than conflict with them. He is sure that he can serve God and Mammon.
     What happened between Palm Sunday and the day of explicit choosing? On that day when Pilate said to them, "Whether of the twain will ye that I release unto you'! They said, Barabbas" (Matt. 27:21).
     Among the things that happened before that choice was the unmasking of evils that had been hidden under a veneer of piety. "Ye are like unto whited sepulchers, which indeed appear beautiful outward but are within full of . . . all uncleanness" (Matt. 23:27). When they welcomed the Man who rode into Jerusalem, did they hope He would lead a violent revolution and get them their way? The violent revolutionary lay in prison. The Man Jesus was not going to serve their aims, and so when given the choice they all cried out, "Not this Man, but Barabbas" (Matt. 27:40).
      The name Barabbas, curiously, means "son of father." One is reminded that when men had denied that they were intending to kill the Lord, He said to them, "Ye are of your father the devil, and the lusts of your father ye will do.


He was a murderer from the beginning, and abode not in the truth, because there is no truth in him. When he speaketh a lie, he speaketh of his own: for he is a liar, and the father of it" (John 8:43. 44).
     "The lusts of your father ye will do." The selfish lusts and inclinations that we have are not obviously cruel or obviously in direct opposition to the Lord. But we are invited to shun them as sins against the Lord Himself.
     Do we want free rein for our selfish inclinations? Do we want free rein for our self-centered ambitions? Do we want to be as those who "cried out all at once, saying, Away with this Man, and release unto us Barabbas"? (Luke 23:19) Although something in us inclines to seek such a release, when it is put this way we are horrified at the thought. And that is the power of the story of the crucifixion. It can stir in us a horror of evil, not just horror at evil someone else did or does. It makes us aware of an issue of choice in our own lives, that we may resolve to shun evils, yes, to shun them as sins against the Lord Himself.
MERCY 1982

MERCY       ERIC M. CARSWELL       1982

Dear Editor,

     Patricia Rose's article, "Mercy," (NCL, Jan. '82) brings us the vitally important reminder that we ought to consider if we are acting with true mercy toward disorders related to marriage. I would like to comment on two ideas in the article that disagree with my understanding of doctrine and I believe lead toward counterproductive ways of thinking and acting.
     Firstly, after a series of passages on the Lord's mercy, the article reads, "To summarize these passages: The Lord's mercy is bestowed only on those who shun evils and live according to order; . . ." Actually the passages indicated that the Lord's mercy is bestowed on all. The Lord's merciful presence is always with everyone, even those who do not choose to receive its benefits. The first states of repentance would be utterly desolate without a knowledge of this presence.


The article also refers to the "important teaching of the Writings that it is repentance that earns forgiveness . . . ." There is no such teaching except in the sense of forgiveness meaning purification from evil loves and false ideas (See AC 9938. 10042:5). This meaning of forgiveness is not the way we use the word in reference to our own actions toward an offender. We should use it to mean excusing someone in the sense of not holding ill will toward the person who has done something wrong. Our idea of forgiveness and mercy can be formed from passages such as, "They who are in the faith of charity observe goods, and if they see evils and falsities, they excuse them: and if they can, they try to amend it in him . . . ." (AC 1079- see all the number). All who love their neighbor are merciful to him (AC 5132). This means they will well to him, and this good will is expressed by the image in the Word of tending to the hungry, thirsty, naked, sick, and imprisoned states of mind in those around us and trying as far as it is useful to lead and bend them toward heaven.
     However, as the article indicates, contrary to Webster, mercy does not mean always withholding punishment. Although the Lord never desires anyone's misery, He does not step in to avert all the consequences evil brings on itself until active repentance invites His aid, and even then the results are not instantaneous. We should beware of trying to make someone feel all right when it is perfectly appropriate for him to feel as though his life is a mess. But while the Lord does not step in to avert all the consequences of evil, neither is He the cause of these consequences. I had some sense that the article was suggesting that we should actively bring about consequences that are not inherent in the evil itself. Would these consequences look like good will in the eyes of the angels? In some cases I'm sure it would not.
     Although we clearly have some responsibility to maintain order, I wonder if it is primarily up to us to punish evil acts such as divorce for unjust causes. The order of the Lord's creation means that evil deeds always lead to internal misery, not merely misery in the life after death but also in the present. The presence of the Lord's mercy also does not mean that everything is automatically all better the moment the person's gaze returns to the Lord. Repentance is required for evil loves and false ideas to be cleaned from the mind by the Lord. But even before there is repentance the Lord and all people in true charity from Him do not hold ill will toward the offender. This is the true idea of mercy and forgiveness.
     The second idea I would disagree with is that actions cannot and should not be separated from the people who do them (p. 11).


The possibility of some type of separation is important for our perspective and sense of freedom. We read,

. . . if a man would only believe as the case really is, namely that all good and true things are from the Lord, and all evil and false things are from hell, he then could not become guilty of any fault nor could any evil be imputed to him; but because he believes that it is from himself, he appropriates the evil to himself . . . and in this way evil adheres and cannot be separated from him (AC 6324).

     When someone accepts evil loves as his own in his thoughts and actions, then he does own them and is responsible for them. If he could see the evil affections underlying his thoughts and acts as proceeding from hell, then he could repent, shunning any manifestation of the evil. Shunning evil is impossible if one views it as inextricably connected to oneself. Adults can come to think of themselves as evil and beyond hope rather than as free individuals who have allowed their minds to dwell on evil thoughts and expressed them in evil acts. I think this tends to happen when we equate the person with his deed. If actions are separated from people, the actions (e. g. unjust divorce) can be firmly and absolutely denounced; anyone who has committed the evil either will feel himself to be denounced, or he will recognize his need for repentance.
          Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania


Dear Editor,

     It is a wonderful thing to see our New Church publications addressing some of the real problems we face in applying our unique doctrines to daily living. I applaud the recent efforts of New CHURCH LIFE in this regard, particularly in terms of the current discussion of "divorce in the church" (January 1982 issue).
     A few issues, or perhaps "attitudes," have already come up in the discussion, however, which cause me some concern from my own special perspective, that of a divorced and remarried member of the General Church who hopes to be continuing in the life of religion in my own imperfect way.
     1. I experience a certain pain when I read of an apparently prevalent belief that young New Church couples are "entering lightly" into divorce.


Whatever feelings lead a couple to this drastic action, they are not taken "lightly." The specter of divorce is one of horror to anyone who has stood at the altar and earnestly pledged a lifetime of love and fidelity, not only before one's beloved and one's family and friends, but before the Lord Himself. Be assured that the grave step of divorce is one agonized, wept and prayed over, whether we may judge it as a completely misguided choice, or the only just choice in a situation seemingly lacking any really good ones.
     2. I think it is legitimate to suggest from doctrine that if a marriage fails (and adultery is not involved) the two individuals should merely separate and not remarry. This would seem to be the ideal; and yet, we must bear in mind that we are dealing in such a situation with individuals who probably are not very mature emotionally or terribly far along in their spiritual development. (If they were these things, would the situation have arisen?) Isn't it expecting a lot of these individuals to think they will be able, on principle, to sacrifice for the rest oft heir earthly lives any possibility of experiencing the blessedness-as well as the inherent order and opportunity for spiritual growth that are the effects of a good marriage and a healthy and loving family sphere?
     I believe that the question of the church sanctioning such remarriages is one that can be answered only by our ministers (and hopefully they will reach some consensus), from their own understanding of the role which they have in representing the Lord on earth. I would have no argument with the ministry declaring from principle that they cannot sanction what Mrs. Rose ("Mercy," p. 7) terms "unjustified remarriages." What does concern me is the idea of the church, through its members, rejecting wrongdoers, or "punishing" them by social ostracism. From the secular angle, social relationships play an important role in the very early stages of regeneration, in the forming of a conscience and in learning to discriminate what is good and of order, not to mention the distinctive truths that are available in discussion and in living example only among individuals of the New Church. Even a subtle rejection by members of the church tends to become mutual and sometimes lifelong, and cuts off the wrongdoer from an important source of instruction and support which we all need-adults as well as children to stay "on the right path." From a clerical angle, although we know that the church specific must disassociate itself from those living in flagrant disorder, determining this condition is a very serious matter and for that reason (thank goodness!) it is not left up to the general membership of the church, but to those imbued with a much greater degree of wisdom and human experience.


As for the rest of us, in determining our role in "making public judgments," I think it is best to keep two ideas in mind. One is that it is not we who must or can forgive the sinner, but the Lord alone. The other is the image we are to have of the church as our mother. It evokes a beautiful picture to think of the church as a mother reaching out her arms to enfold, protect and nourish her children. Let us guard against the danger of believing that we, and not others, are her children.
     3. Finally, are we in danger of attacking the symptom, rather than the disease itself? Is the problem divorce itself, or is the increasing divorce rate within the church symptomatic of something more fundamentally wrong in the way we are instructing or supporting our young people? The study offered by Paul and Polly Schoenberger of helpful hints on keeping a marriage together (p. 26) should prove to be useful and is very much welcomed by all of us; but couldn't it possibly include another set of questions-how we can keep our young people from "making a mistake" (that much over-used, but still telling, phrase)? In determining why divorce is increasing within the church, it is imperative that we do look at individual cases, not separate our reasoning from them, as Mrs. Rose suggests (p. 11). If we really want to understand this problem, how can we do so if we do not deign to ask those involved? Especially as concerns the younger marriages in our church which end in divorce, let us address the following areas, among others: overly idealistic expectations of the marriage relationship on earth (how are these affected by current methods of teaching Conjugial Love in our schools and by education in the home?); similarly unrealistic illusions regarding members of the opposite sex and one's partner in particular (how might these be affected by the separation of sexes and structures for socializing in our high schools?); emotional immaturity, with varying degrees of insecurity, lack of identity/values development, lack of ability to sustain a mature relationship (how is this affected by the youthful ages of those being sent to the Academy in high school; and how might the Academy make up for a non-supportive or even destructive home environment?); mis-identification of sexual/romantic feelings as spiritual ones which can lead to conjugial love (see Sons Bulletin, Fall '81, p. 20); social pressure to marry and start a family early, as the only socially sanctioned New Church option. Many of these questions have come up individually in various contexts in the pages of the Theta Alpha Journal and Sons Bulletin recently, but I feel that a study which would integrate these questions and do some actual research on them is definitely called for if we are to seriously delve into this problem of great significance to all of us.
          Sacramento, California




Dear Editor,

     I would like to thank Rt. Rev. George de Charms for the incredibly fine paper on this subject. Perhaps the time was just ripe for me to understand. This is the most important subject we can learn about.
     Thank you, Bishop de Charms.
               Stavanger, Norway


Dear Editor,

     De gustibus non disputandum! The new cover reminds me of nothing so much as a Hallowe'en poster that's been left out in the rain and faded by the weather-a good cover for the distribution of falsity perhaps but surely not what we hope to find within the NEW CHURCH LIFE. My personal choice would be a beautiful jewel color for each month of the year to help in discerning in which magazine we had favorite articles, but more importantly to represent the beautiful variety of truth and ideas found in the Writings. I'd love to see the Writings themselves in such colorful bindings.
     And speaking of favorite articles, my most favorite is in October 1978-a re-print of Bishop W. F. Pendleton's "Notes on the Government of the Church." Would that that could be printed separately and sent to every member. It seems to me to be the one sure guarantee of maintaining the Lord's, and not man's, leadership of the church as well as the certain guarantee of individual freedom within the church.


     I was much disturbed by Patricia Rose's article on mercy in the January '82 issue of the LIFE. Read in the light of W. F. Pendleton's article the main reason for my disturbance became evident. To quote Pendleton, "No external bond should be placed upon any member or official or part of the church . . . . It is better to run the hazard, yea, to suffer many evils, than to establish and confirm so great an evil as the voluntary suppression of the freedom of the church, by introducing the principle and practice of external compulsion into its workings." Further, as a woman with no small intellectual interest in the tremendous philosophical aspects of the Writings I am also very much aware of the numerous warnings the Writings give against women preaching-both as to the effect on our own minds and souls and the resulting heresies our preachings may produce in the church. Laying constrictions on how our ministers must interpret the Heavenly Doctrines seems to me to be verging on pretty dangerous territory.
          Mitchellville, Maryland

GENERAL CHURCH PUBLICATION COMMITTEE       Lorentz R. Soneson       1982

     The General Church Publication Committee works with the Publication Committee of the Academy and the Extension Committee of the General Church to ensure publication of material for the church at large. The categories covered by the General Church Publication Committee are listed below:

All editions of the Writings and the Old and New Testaments, published for the church at large.
All books of worship, including worship in schools and homes, i.e., liturgy, hymnal, etc.
All books developed in the sphere of general pastoral instruction including those arising out of society doctrinal classes.

All texts designed for use in the General Church elementary schools (in consultation with the Educational Council).
All children's literature.
All New Church literary efforts (novels, etc.).
Reprints of those works published by the General Church Publication Committee.


     This committee wishes to remind the members of the church from time to time about categories #5 and #6. The committee welcomes submitted manuscripts from both priests and laymen, professional or amateur writers. These can be submitted to the chairman of the committee. P.O. Box 278, Bryn Athyn. PA 19009.
     Lorentz R. Soneson,

ACADEMY PUBLICATION COMMITTEE       Alfred Acton       1982

     The Academy Publication Committee works with the Publication Committee of the General Church of the New Jerusalem and the Extension Committee of the General Church to ensure publication of material for the church at large.
     Our mission is fivefold. We publish:

All Latin editions of the Writings and all the pre-Arcana works and studies of Swedenborg (except those within the scope of Swedenborg Scientific Association).
Indices and concordances (except those particularly accommodated to the general public).
Biographies of Swedenborg (excluding those more appropriately printed by the Extension Committee).
All works developed in the sphere of academic research to include:
     doctrinal works developed by the Academy schools or addressed to Academy uses.
          tracts, texts, etc., developed out of Academy courses. For example, research including curricular, philosophic, secular and religious studies.
Reprints of all those works published by the Academy.

     This notice is to invite all New Church authors who have material of a scholarly, doctrinal nature as outlined in #4 above to submit their manuscripts to us for consideration.
     Manuscripts should be submitted to the chairman of the committee, care of the Academy of the New Church, P.O. Box 278, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009.
     Alfred Acton,

ACADEMY SUMMER CAMP 1982              1982

     You are reminded of the special camp (June 26-July 3) announced in the January issue (p. 39). It is for students presently in the 8th and 9th grades. For information write to the ANC Development Office.


Church News 1982

Church News       Various       1982


     The Transvaal circle appeared enmasse to welcome Bishop and Mrs. King and Mr. and Mrs. Gyllenhaal during their August visit. Not only was the reception warm-hearted but our enlarged membership was most impressive!

     "Oh, to be a society
     When next the bishop's here."

     At a delightful reception held at the Irene Country Club the bishop conducted his attentive listeners through an explorative overview of the Writings. In its breadth and scope it was a tour de force; in its affirmative love and enthusiasm it was an inspiration.
     We thought that nothing could eclipse this spiritual exhilaration, but in his sermon, "The Lord shall wage war for you and ye shall keep silent" (Exodus 14:14), the bishop spoke with the lucid clarity that always instructs his listeners. He traced the course of regeneration, the avoidance of the faith alone' trap, the confidence in the Lord's New Word and His never-failing guidance as vital to our spiritual course. After service Mr. Gyllenhaal outlined the proposed plans for the future of the circle-a most exciting and hopeful prospect. We long for our church and pastor. After this mini-assembly we feel perhaps the prospect of both may materialize sooner than we and our dear Rev. Riley thought possible.
     Come again soon, Kings and Gyllenhaals. You are America's best ambassadors.
     Verna Brown


     In our report of a year ago we mentioned our worries over a proposed cloverleaf highway interchange, which would have severely affected the church and Acton Park properties. That issue was resolved in our favor, so we are no longer threatened, and we hope that is the end of that.
     Early in '81 we enjoyed a visit from Bishop King. This is always a special occasion, but it was extra special this time, as he came in connection with the ordination of our assistant to the pastor, Lawson Smith, into the pastoral degree of the priesthood. Later in the spring Lawson was called by the society to the position of assistant pastor, and since then he has taken on an increasing number of responsibilities, thereby giving some relief to our pastor, Rev. Dan Heinrichs, in the many activities of the society and school.
     Our school now has 21 students in grades 1-10, although there is no 6th grade this year. The smallest grades contain one student each, and the largest has four. This kind of distribution does present some problems in the teaching schedule, but they are solved by combining classes and sometimes creating special programs, and our students receive a fine education.
     Some special school events included the 10th grade graduates' banquet last June, at which each of the five graduates gave an excellent talk on the nature of the spiritual world; the school closing program, which was highlighted by a musical pageant called "The Bold and the Brave"; and, more recently, a delightful Christmas program of songs and poems and of selections played by our remarkable little school band.


     Our evangelization efforts received a "shot in the arm" by a visit, in the fall. by Rev. Douglas Taylor, who gave us many useful pointers on how to talk to people about the church. A program of invitations, special services, "Good News" mailings with a message from the Writings, and newspaper ads is now under way, and although the response has been minimal so far, our church is certainly becoming better known in the area. A handsome new sign is also helping to let our neighbors know who we are, and that they are welcome.
     Our society, because of its central location and proximity to Bryn Athyn, has the opportunity to welcome a great many visitors. During the past year, in addition to those already mentioned, we were happy to see Mr. Don Fitzpatrick, who visited the school in April; the senior boys' and girls' classes from ANC, on their annual spring visits to the nation's capital; Rev. Willard Heinrichs, who addressed us at our New Church Day banquet; and candidate Michael Cowley, who spent the month of August here as part of his training for the ministry. We enjoyed all these visitors and many others all through the year, and look forward to more visits as spring approaches.
     Happily, our society gained several people this year. Rick Horan brought back his new wife Laurie (McQueen), who is now helping out in our school, teaching Feminine Arts and P. E. Sharon Lee from Bryn Athyn and Emily Barry from West Virginia also joined our ranks. On top of that we welcomed to our group six new babies in 1981, always an especially delightful kind of addition.
     Our pastor and his wife, Dan and Mim, observed their 25th wedding anniversary in September, Many in the society took part in a surprise celebration, and presented to them a gift of money for a long desired trip to Williamsburg.
     Our regular weekly activities are carried on: Sunday worship, with three different Sunday school groups for the children; after-church coffee; Friday suppers and classes; meetings and school activities. Now and then problems come up, as in every society, and the furnace is replaced, the roof is repaired and painted, and the crises pass. Special occasions and holidays spice society life, the most recent one of course being Christmas.
     Our Christmas activities included a special supper and class; the school program; tableaux, this year ably directed by Chris and Carolyn Glenn, followed by a society sing in the beautifully decorated multi-purpose room; carollers making rounds and singing to nearby families, and the lovely candlelight Christmas Eve service as well.
     At this writing we are beginning the activities of the new year, enjoying (?) a great snowfall, and looking forward to the wedding of Mary Mitchell and Randy Balderson in our church. We trust 1982 will again hold many opportunities for cheerfully carrying on the uses of the church in the Washington society.


     It was an eventful year, 198 1, for the Hurstville society. In January there was that notable event, the Convocation, to celebrate one hundred years of the New Church in Australia. Organized by the Association of the New Church in Australia it was supported well by General Church members from interstate and overseas. Then came the announcement of a change of pastors for the society.
     The Rev. Michael Gladish had served the society well for seven years and the news of the change did not diminish his enthusiasm for the work of the church here.


Looking back we can see tangible results of his efforts. He provided the initial drive and enthusiasm to get the long-planned alterations to the church porch under way. What a great improvement that has been! The fine pews we now have are there because of his enterprise and initiative. Also he was always responsive to the needs of people. This year he gave classes on the Arcana, a first for the society, and these will be continued by Rev. Sandstrom
     The Sunday school children showed great enthusiasm for the instruction in Hebrew, and their singing of a Hebrew Psalm at the Harvest Festival was very delightful to listen to. The angels, I'm sure, would agree. The Sunday school has been carried on for years by a few devoted teachers. Mr. Sandstrom is trying a new plan, more teachers to take fewer classes over the year. Playgroup for the pre-schoolers is held fortnightly now and seems to be a very useful activity.
     The 19th June celebration was one of the most pleasant and rewarding held in Hurstville. Three of the four speakers were able to talk about the church from the point of view of outsiders looking in. Fortunately they liked what they saw and two gave very interesting reasons why they joined the church. Mr. John Hicks said, for instance, that his ideal had been to continually search for truth; once you thought you had found it you began to stagnate. But he was happy now in accepting the truth of the New Church. Mrs. Michael (Kerry) Lockhart said that she had been at first apprehensive about the "weird" religion of Michael. However, she was delighted to find the great congregation at the Bryn Athyn cathedral consisting of quite "normal" people. She said also that the impact of the teachings became greater when their first child, Scott, was born.
     On the 24th August the change of pastors became a reality. We gathered in our Richard Morse Room to farewell the Gladishes and welcome the Sandstroms. Happiness was ringed with sadness and this was reflected in the speeches and songs. The Gladishes showed delight in the distinctively Australian gifts they received to remind them of their useful and happy stay, gifts which included a bark picture, the artist being Mrs. Lin (Beryl) Heldon, the bark being taken from trees growing on the church property.
     The Rev. Sandstrom has begun his work here quietly and impressively. His clear doctrinal instruction is most appreciated. He is discovering what a vast pastorate he has in his care. The family seems to like Australia and Australians, and I'm sure the feeling will be mutual.
     This year saw the transition into the spiritual world of two New Church stalwarts. Mrs. Mora Fletcher and Mr. C. Douglas Brock. Mrs. Fletcher's long and faithful service to the Hurstville society helped greatly in its sure and steady growth. She is remembered with affection by all who knew her. Mr. Brock, a retired minister of the New Church, said that he re-discovered the church in recent years, and his delight from that was very apparent. We are happy that both will have new and greater opportunities for use. Just before Mrs. Fletcher's passing, the Lord called to Him little Michael Norman Heldon. fourteen-week-old son of Murray and Lori (Gladish) Heldon. The sadness at his loss is tempered by our knowing that there will be another angel in heaven.
          Hurstville, Australia

     More news on page 179.



GLENVIEW       SUSAN S. HOLM       1982


     The Immanuel Church is provided with good care for our minds and for our surroundings. The organizations within the society help us to be aware of the needs, and to work with others to do the chosen uses. Our pastor, Rev. Peter Buss, in the annual report tells some of the programs and goals.
     "Our adult education program had more than a hundred people enrolled in the fall. This year saw the beginning of a young mothers' meeting, which may prove to be one of the most useful of our activities. Another development has been the second Oak Leaf summer weekend, which had an attendance of thirty-one adults and fourteen children.
     "Our schools keep rolling! With Brian Keith in the Midwestern Academy, and Gordon McClarren in the Immanuel Church School, and with really fine teachers supporting them, we have excellent schools. That's not to say we don't do things wrong sometimes; but the signs of a vital school are its ability to face mistakes, and take steps to Improve what we have to offer.
     "The dream of New Church education is to feed the growing mind with the knowledges, and the affection for knowledge, which are proper to each state. It is a grand dream, because we are just beginning to understand what the New Word tells us about the growing mind; but it is surely a privilege to be pursuing it."
     The Friday classes present this year a general view of True Christian Religion, and a series on the seven churches of Asia is being given in the Guild and Theta Alpha meetings.
     The Midwestern and Central western District Assembly was held in Glenview in October. Bishop King's address on the spirit of truth stressed the need for charity to be present in making judgments. Rev. Brian Keith in the second session asked, "Do you know if you are going to heaven?" After luncheon was served in Pendleton Hall, small groups discussed "Judging ourselves and others," and "Self-examination" to recognize the quality of our delights.
     Mr. Roger Murdoch, as toastmaster of the banquet, introduced three lay speakers, Mr. Kent Fuller, Mr. Scot Pitcairn, and Mrs. Tore Gram, each telling "Something the Writings mean to me." Singing was led by Mrs. Neil Caldwell, and the closing remarks were made by Rev. Walter Orthwein. Bishop King's sermon on the Two Great Commandments ended the assembly weekend.


     The schedule for the assembly, prepared by Mr. Ben McQueen and a fine committee, was not greatly hindered by the paving preparations under way in Park Drive, and the guests made their ways across the rugged roadbed to enjoy the open houses awaiting them after the evening meetings. Representatives from seven states, from Michigan to Louisiana, made the assembly memorable for us. Park Drive is passable now, and will be completed in the spring. Thanks to the village of Glenview for a generous share of the cost. We wish the Drive might have been finished sooner, but are glad the assembly was held anyway.
     Another useful weekend held this fall was sponsored by the Extension Committee, and directed by Rev. Douglas Taylor. A program of study and of role-taking helped those attending to prepare to meet the needs of those who inquire about the church.
     After the Sunday service and a luncheon for the weekend guests, the movie "Johnny Appleseed and the Frontier Within," a Swedenborg Foundation film, was enjoyed by all.
     One of the Extension activities carried on here has been the production of pamphlets appealing to newcomers, "What Is Charity?", "The Laws of Providence," "The New Church" and others. General interest in extension work was increased by Mr. Taylor's visit.
     Rev. and Mrs. Mark Alden have moved from here to fill another assignment, and Rev. and Mrs. Grant Odhner have been here since September. The outgoing and the incoming ministers have been assisting the pastor. Mr. Buss attended the dedication of the San Diego school, giving us a first-hand report. The local school directory in the December 1981 LIFE and its complete list was interesting, both for showing encouraging growth and as a means to evaluate our own school system.
     Care of church property by capable and willing members has included the heating system, roofing, plumbing, and general repairs by carpentry, giving much needed help.
     We were lucky to have the Park Players present "You Can't Take It with You" by Moss Hart and George Kaufman. This whimsical play was directed by Mrs. Ralph Synnestvedt Jr. A fine lot of workers behind the scenes and on stage provided the audiences with happy memories.
     The ten or more weddings have brought us in touch with new people and new places. Most of the new families have found their homes nearby. It has been a special pleasure to meet the guests who have come to share in the wedding celebrations.
     The Social Club put on a program for Independence Day, a square dance in the fall, and the New Year's dance featured what the Park would be like in 2081.
     Preparation for the Christmas season in the time-honored way-with greens, music, tableaux and children's gifts was hushed this year by the death, most unexpected, of Mrs. Winton Brewer (Yone Acton), a young grandmother. Something of the deeper meaning of Christmas surrounded us, and a feeling of how far beyond our understanding are the ways of the Lord's Providence.
     The dream of feeding the growing mind with the knowledges and the affections for knowledge proper to each state might continue with the thought that the maturing mind needs exercise as well as feeding. Exercise of that affection for knowledge, and the help of a good conscience might have a part in bringing the dream of New Church education into waking life.




Bryn Athyn. Pennsylvania
Public worship and doctrinal classes are provided either regularly or occasionally at the locations listed below. For details use the local phone number of the contact person mentioned or communicate with the Secretary of the General Church, Rev. L. R. Soneson, Cairncrest, Bryn Athyn. PA 19009, Phone (215) 947-4660.


     SYDNEY. N.S.W
Rev. Erik E. Sandstrom. 22 Dudley Street, Penshurst. N.S.W. 2222. Phone: 57-1589.


Rev. Andrew Heilman, Rua Ferreira de Sampaio 58. Apt. 101. Abolicao, Rio de Janeiro 20.000.


     British Columbia:

Rev. William Clifford. 1536 94th Ave., Dawson Creek, V1G 1H1. Phone: (604) 782-3997.

Mr. Douglas Crompton. 21-7055 Blake St., V5S 3V5. Phone: (604) 437-9136.


Rev. Christopher Smith, 16 Bannockburn Rd., R.R. 2. N2G 3W5. Phone: (519) 893-7460.

Mr. and Mrs. Donald McMaster. 726 Edison Avenue, Apt, 33, Ottawa, Ontario K2C 3P8. Phone: (613) 729-6452.

Rev. Geoffrey Childs, 2 Lorraine Gardens. Islington, Ontario M9B 424. Phone: (416) 231-4958.


Mr. Denis de Chazal, 17 Ballantyne Ave. So., Montreal West, Quebec H4X 2B1. Phone: (514) 489-9861.


Mr. Jorgen Hauptmann. Strandvejen 22, Jyllinge, 4000 Roskilde. Phone: 03-389968.


Rev. Patrick A. Rose. 2 Christchurch Court, Colchester C03 3AU.

Mr. and Mrs. R. Evans, Ill., Howard Drive, Letchworth. Herrs. Phone: Letchworth 4751.

Rev. Robert McMaster. 135 Mantilla Rd., London SW17 8DX. Phone: 672-6239.

Mrs. Neil Rowcliffe. 135 Bury Old Road, Heywood, Lancs. Phone: Heywood 68189.

Mrs. R. Griffith, Wyngarth Wootton Fitzpaine. Bridport DT6 6NF. Phone: Charmouth 614.


Rev. Alain Nicolier, 21200 Beaune, France. Phone: (80) 22.47.88.


Mr. Daan Lupker. Wabserveen Straat 25. The Hague.


Mrs. Marion Mills, 8 Duders Ave., Devonport. Auckland 9. Phone: 453-043.


Mr. Eyvind Boyesen. Vetlandsveien 82A, Oslo 6. Phone: 26-1159.


Mr. and Mrs. N. Laidlaw. 35 Swanspring Ave., Edinburgh EH 10-6NA. Phone: 0 31-445- 2377.

Mrs. J. Clarkson. Hillview, Balmore. Mr. Torrance, Glasgow. Phone: Balmore 262.




Rev. Geoffrey Howard. 30 Perth Rd., Westville, Natal. 3630. Phone: 03 1-821136


Mr. D S. Came, 110 8th St., Lindon 2195. Phone: 011-462982.


     KENT MANOR     
Louisa Allais. 129 Anderson Road, Mandini, Zululand 4490.

     Mission in South Africa:
Superintendent-The Rev. Norman E. Riley, 42 Pitlochry Rd., Westville, Natal. 3630.


Rev. Bjorn Boyesen. Bruksater. Furusjo. 5-56600. Habo. Phone: 0392-20395.

Rev. Ragnar Boyesen. Aladdinsvagen 27, 161 38 Bromma. Phone: 48-99-22 and 26-79-85.



Dr. R. Shepard. 4537 Dolly Ridge Road, Birmingham. AL 35243. Phone: (205) 967-3442.


Mr. Hubert Rydstrom, 3640 E. Piccadilly Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85018. Phone: (602) 955-2290.

Rev. Roy Franson, 8416 East Kenyon Dr., Tucson, AZ 85710. Phone: (602) 296-1070.


     LOS ANGELES               
Rev. Michael Gladish. 2959 Mount Curve, Altadena. CA 91001. Phone:(213) 797-5097.

Rev. Cedric King, 7911 Canary Way, San Diego, CA 92123. Phone: (714) 268-0379.

Rev. Wendel Barnett, 5351 Southbridge Pl., San Jose, CA 95 118. Phone: (408) 267-7730.


Mr. James Andrews, 9722 Majestic Rd., Longmont, CO 80501. Phone: (303) 652-2073.



Rev. Glenn Alden, 47 Jerusalem Hill Rd., Trumbull, CT 06611. Phone:(203)877-1141.


Mrs. Justin Hyatt, 417 Delaware Ave. McDaniel Crest, Wilmington, DE 19803. Phone:(302) 478-4213.

     District of Columbia-see Mitchellville, Maryland.


Rev. John Odhner. 413 Summit Ave., Lake Helen. FL 32744. Phone. (904) 228-2337.

Rev. Mark Alden. 253 S. Biscayne River Dr., Miami, FL 33169. Phone: (305) 687-1337.


Rev. Louis Synnestvedt, Rt. 3, Box 136, Americus. GA 31709. Phone: (912) 924-9221.

Rev. Christopher Bown, 3795 Montford Dr. Chamblee. GA 30341. Phone:(404) 457 4726


(Idaho-Oregon border) Mr. Harold Rand. 1705 Whitley Dr., Fruitland. ID 83619 Phone: (208) 452-3181.

Rev. Brian Keith, 27 12 Brassie Dr., Glenview, IL 60025. Phone: (312) 724-7829.

Mr. John Aymer. 380 Oak Lane, Decatur, Ill. 62562. Phone: (217) 875-3215.

Rev. Peter Buss, 73 Park Dr., Glenview, Ill. 60025. Phone: (312) 724-0120.

Contact Rev. Stephen Cole in Cincinnati, Ohio.


Mr. Henry Bruser. Jr., 1652 Ormandy Dr., Baton Rouge, LA 70808, Phone: (504) 924-3089


Rev. David Simons, 13213 E. Greenbank Rd., Oliver Beach, MD 21220. Phone: (301) 335-6763.


Rev. Daniel Heinrichs, 3809 Enterprise Rd., Mitchellville, MD 20716. Phone: (301) 262-4565.


Mr. Douglas Peterson. 124 Chalmers, Springfield, MA 01118. Phone: (413) 783-2851.


Rev. Walter Orthwein. 132 Kirk La., Troy, MI 48084. Phone: (313) 689-6118.

Mr. Christopher Clark. 5853 Smithfield, East Lansing, MI 48823. Phone. (517) 351-2880.


Mrs. Tore Gram. 20185 Vine St., Excelsior, MN 55331. Phone: (612) 474-9574.


Mr. David Zeigler. 1616 B Norma Ct., Columbia, MO 65201. Phone: (314) 442-0569.

Mr. Glen Klippenstein, Glenkirk Farms. Maysville, MO 64469. Phone: (816) 449-2167.

     New Jersey-New York:

Mrs. Edsall Elliott. 26 Fieldstone Dr., Whippany, NJ 07981. Phone: 1201) 887-0478.

     New Mexico:

Dr. Andrew Doering. 1298 Sagebrush Ct., Rio Rancho, NM 87124. Phone: (505) 897-3623.

     North Carolina:

Mr. Gordon Smith, 38 Newriver Trace, Clover, SC 29710. Phone: (803) 831-2355.


Rev. Stephen Cole, 6431 Mayflower Ave., Cincinnati. OH 45237. Phone: (513)6)1-1210.

Mr. Alan Childs. 19680 Beachcliff Blvd., Rocky River, OH 44116. Phone: (216) 333-1413.

Mr. Hubert Heinrichs. 8372 Todd Street Rd., Sunbury. OH 43074. Phone: (614) 524-2738.

Mrs. Louise Tennis. 3546 S. Marion, Tulsa, OK 74135. Phone: (918) 742-8495.


Mrs. W. Andrews. 2655 S.W. Upper Drive Pl., Portland, OR 97201. Phone:(503) 227-4144.

     Oregon-Idaho Border.-See Idaho, Fruitland.


Rev. Kurt Asplundh. Box 277, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009. Phone: (215) 947-3665.

Mrs. Paul Murray. 5648 Zuck Rd., Erie, PA 16506. Phone. (814) 833-0962.

Rev. Arne Bau-Madsen. Box 527, Rt. 1, Lenhartsville, PA 19534. Phone: (215)756-6140.

Rev. Kenneth Stroh. 7105 Reynolds St., Pittsburgh. FA 15208. Phone: (Church) (412) 731-7421.

     South Carolina:-see North Carolina.

     South Dakota:

Rev. Erik Sandstrom. RR 1. Box 101M. Hot Springs, SD 57747. Phone: (605) 745-6714


Mrs. Charles Hogan. 7513 Evelyn La., Ft. Worth, TX 76118. Phone: (817) 284-0502.

Mr. Bruce Coffin, 3560 Tamnaa Manor, Conroe, TX 77301. Phone: (713) 273-4989.


Rev. Kent Junge. 14323-123rd NE. #C, Kirkland, WA 98033. Phone: (206) 821-0157.


Mrs. Charles Howell. 3912 Plymouth Circle, Madison, WI 53705. Phone: (608) 233-0209).
Title Unspecified 1982

Title Unspecified              1982

     MINISTERIAL CHANGES-A formal list is forthcoming. Here is a partial list of ministers together with the places they will be located.
     Clark Echols-Denver; Roy Franson-Stockholm; Frank Rose-Tucson-Phoenix; Patrick Rose-Bryn Athyn; Kenneth Stroh-Colchester; Louis Synnestvedt-Toronto; Candidates (pending ordination): Michael Cowley-Glenview; Nathan Gladish-Atlanta; Jeremy Simons-Kempton; James Cooper-Bryn Athyn.



GRADUATION              1982

     Now is the time to order your gifts for graduation, especially if you want them engraved. Select from:

     The Writings
Swedenborg Society, blue edition, per volume      $10.00
Swedenborg Foundation, green, per volume           $6.50

     The Word
Morocco, hard or soft bound                     $20.00
Cloth                                    $12.00

     A Compendium of Swedenborg's Theological
Writings                               $5.00

     Or send for our free catalog including twenty pages of useful books and material.


Box 278
Bryn Athyn, PA 19009

Hours: 9:00 to 12:00
Mon. thru Fri.
(215) 947-3920


Notes on This Issue 1982

Notes on This Issue       Editor       1982

Vol. CII     May, 1982     No. 5


     Is "temptation" the right word to use in rendering the Lord's Prayer? Rev. Victor Gladish, a retired minister living in Glenview, addresses this question in his "reflections."
     Rev. William Burke was baptized into the New Church in 1978 and ordained into the ministry in 1981. He shows that the doctrine of prayer is to be understood in the light of other doctrines.
     "Much of what we speak is said to ourselves!" See the fourth paragraph on the page facing this one. Rev. L. R. Soneson's sermon brings out the teaching of the Writings that the conversation taking place in the seeming privacy of our minds is not as private as we imagine it to be.
     On page 195 Fred Elphick, a theological student from London, takes us into the British Museum where we find a rare old book which "leans on Galileo." Rev. John Odhner of Florida uses the story of Copernicus and the imprisonment of Galileo to put an historical perspective on New Church attitudes toward the work Earths in the Universe.
     Is self-esteem good or bad? Rev. Geoffrey Childs of Toronto begins a fascinating series entitled "Which Self?" This is the kind of study that can deepen understanding and reconcile differences.
     With so many articles and letters coming in it is not easy to find space to write about what is going on "in our contemporaries." We are delighted to see The New Philosophy appearing again. We manage a fleeting reference to the latest Theta Alpha Journal in this issue. We would like to salute the spring issue of The Sons Bulletin which features the subject of evangelization in such a challenging way. Incidentally, notice the evangelization effort described herein on page 202. This was undertaken by the Bryn Athyn Epsilon Society. We will report its results in a later issue.
     We would like to point out that eight of the twenty-seven baptisms reported in this issue (from five nations) are adult baptisms.




     "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors"(Matt. 6:12).

     When we talk to people, we call it "conversation." When we talk to God, we call it "prayer." But prayer, we are told, is conversation with the Lord. We can learn more of the meaning and value of conversation with God by examining our conversation with others.
     Because of the powerful influence of the five senses, we are sharply aware of the "things" around us. Myriads of sensations pour into our minds, dominating thought. The natural body captures a considerable amount of our conscious thought. We seek food, comfort, pleasures; the attractive, the luxurious, the valuable.
     We need only reflect on how much of our conversation is above time and space to be conscious of an imbalance. How much time is spent on the meaning and purpose of what we are doing? How often do we seriously evaluate actions and desires? How frequently do we lift our mind above appetite to contemplate purpose-the direction of life? What part of our year is spent in serious concern over serving the good in the neighbor? Indeed, how often do we think about heaven, about what is truly good and just-about the Lord?
     Analyzing our past conversations for value and content is not confined to what is uttered by the lips or received through the ears. Much of what we speak is said to ourselves! The steady stream of words and ideas passing through our consciousness is seldom verbalized. But it is conversation nevertheless. Our thoughts are actually expressions of our affections. We think about what we love all the time. A thought, expressed audibly or not, is a form of our real self, which is what we love.
     Communication is normally considered a two-way street. It involves talking and listening. We can learn to know ourselves by an honest evaluation of how much we do of one compared with the other. Even when another is talking, how much do we actually hear? Is the neighbor drowned out by our private thoughts?
     Our own private thoughts-how private are they? Nearly every waking moment is full of an endless stream of talking within ourselves. We ask questions of our memory; we debate issues back and forth about actions. We plan, we review, we calculate, we draw on our imagination to experience some future event even before it happens. And all the while we are perfectly convinced we are alone, unobserved, unheard by another. But is that true?


     The Writings of our church explain the spiritual world. Our unspoken thoughts and feelings dwell in that world. But is it a world that we, and we alone, live in? We are instructed that all thoughts and affections flow in from that world, and do not originate in our own minds. We read that spirits are constantly near us, influencing our lives from moment to moment. Can we be confident no one hears our thoughts?
     Does the Lord hear us?
     Certainly there are times when we think we don't hear ourselves! When we wish to pursue some end that we know is selfish and evil, we can quickly collect a number of specious arguments to justify our actions. It is as if we can cleverly shout down all arguments to the contrary, and delude ourselves, and become deaf to any counter arguments-all within the confines of our own private spiritual world. Evil loves can fill our understanding with a dozen arguments for our actions, blocking out any two-way conversations with our self, our better self. And because of the appearance of living in isolation, within our secret world of the mind, we can deceive ourselves into an illusion that we are free from detection!
     There are the other times, too, when we wish we were not so alone. We have been struggling with a difficult decision. We finally resolve to uphold a principle rather than succumb to what is convenient or easy. This may engulf us in a deep loneliness. If only a friend could know what we have been through! But alas, there appears to be no one who knows of our efforts. We are alone, or so it appears.
     Even Swedenborg felt his thoughts were private. He wrote: "Before I had been instructed by living experience, I had supposed, as do others, that no spirit could possibly know the things in my memory and in my thought; but that they were solely in my possession, and were hidden" (AC 2488).
     But now this great illusion has been penetrated! The appearance of our solitary mental experience is now exposed! Through the Writings of Swedenborg, who lived in both worlds at the same time, we can now remove self-deception! Swedenborg reports: "I can attest that the spirits with man know and take note of the smallest things of his memory and thoughts; and this much more clearly than the man himself; and that the angels know and take note of the ends themselves, how they bend themselves from good to evil, and from evil to good" (ibid.).
     Revelation from the Lord states the truth in unequivocal terms: "Let no man any longer believe that his thoughts are hidden, and that he is not to render account of his thoughts and of his deeds according to the degree and the quality of the thoughts that have been in them" (ibid.).


     Such sobering knowledge can become a "hard saying." We are not alone in our thoughts. They are shared by countless numbers in the spiritual world who hear every notion. They can even know our deepest loves and intentions. So what is left to hide? If spirits and angels can penetrate our minds, how much more the Lord Himself can be aware of our inner world. He who gives others their ability to share in our mental conversations is omniscience itself.
     This concept, once accepted, can have a profound influence on conversations with God. The words given in the sermon on the mount take on new meaning. Those who pray ostentatiously, and are receiving their reward, appear ridiculous! Some offer mere repetitious words. But those who converse with the Lord in the quiet recesses of their minds are given immediate reward. Answers, Divine words of wisdom, flow in from a loving Father.
     Once we set aside the conviction that we are alone in our thoughts, we can begin the serious work of conversing with the Lord. We assume first of all that there is a God, once we begin talking to Him. He listens to us. We believe He is all-wise and always present. We accept the fact that the Lord hears every word of our mental speech. Furthermore, prayer usually assumes that there is a merciful God; He forgives us when we err and ask for mercy. And we acknowledge that the Lord is all-powerful when we pray seeking some blessing.
     What should we pray for? How do we talk with God? What are the rules of conversation? Any serious student of the Word soon learns how to pray, what to ask for, and how it will be heard. We seek the impossible if we ignore what the Lord will do for us according to His own laws.
     The clear message from the three-fold Word is undeniable. We are asked to love the Lord as He loves us. And we are to love the neighbor assuming he, too, loves us. But these loves are gifts coming from the Lord. The Lord is all-wise and all-merciful. We need not waste our breath on prayers that ask for things, honor or praise. The Lord already knows what we need to lead us to heaven. He is ever mindful of our lot. He monitors every moment, every step along life's journey toward heaven. Asking for material things or events to take place only reveals what our loves and ambitions are.
     It is quite natural, however, to be confused in conversations with God. It is hard to separate natural desires of the senses from eternal goals.


We are not used to talking about eternity with others or with ourselves. Why would it be easy to do so when we talk to the Lord? It may explain why we are unfamiliar with proper prayer. But it does not excuse us. For the Lord has taught us how to pray. We call it the Lord's prayer. It contains all that we need ask of Him. But we must come to understand something of the meaning of His Divine Words.
     For example, our text reads: "Forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors." If we should create a prayer, and we often do, we might simply say; "Forgive us our debts." We have in mind that if the Lord will forgive us, we will be happy today, and eventually be in heaven to eternity. But that is not what the Lord instructed us to do. He puts the words into our mouth to repeat to Him: "Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors." These are difficult words to say. This means, literally, do not forgive us, Lord, as long as we hold grudges, seek revenge, harbor bitterness. To forgive others who have done injury to us, who hate us, who seek to harm us-that is the challenge! It means we must forgive, show mercy, understand and even forget the trespasses of others.
     We are further told to pray: "Deliver us from evil." That means we ask the Lord to remove selfish desires of rebuttal and revenge; to take away loves that prevent forgiveness of our fellow man; to replace our ambitions for preserving self-pride by means of fighting evil with evil. We are to ask the Lord to fill us with renewed desire to forgive others. We ask God to deliver us from evil yearnings by removing them from us. We invite Him to enter when we, as of ourselves, begin to resist temptations. We pray that He will plant a new love within us. We ask for the birth of a new will-we seek His gift of regeneration.
     And wonderful to say, as our evil loves are gradually replaced by heavenly ones, we will find our conversation with others, and with ourselves, changing! We will not be so preoccupied with treasures upon earth, that are so quick to decay. We will be more conscious of the eternal needs of our neighbor and of ourselves. Our thoughts and conversations will center more on the good in our neighbor, and the evils in self, rather than the reverse. Our private thoughts will begin to abhor lustful fantasies. We will rise above preoccupation with sensual appetites. Our goals will encompass values that exceed time and space and we will begin to enjoy the blessing of heaven even while on earth.
     Let us listen to ourselves more carefully, in open conversations and in those that take place in our minds.


Let us listen to the Lord as He speaks to us. We read in the lesson that the Lord "reveals" Himself to us through our inner thoughts, bringing hope and consolation. We can then prepare for prayer, by first forgiving those who have trespassed against us. We can search out an evil, a trespass against the Lord, and work on its removal. Then, and only then, will the Lord heed our prayers. And he will grant requests for mercy, forgiveness and life everlasting. Then will our life, both in thought and deed, be one continuous prayer-to God, the Giver of all. Amen.

     LESSONS: Matthew 6; AC 2535ARCANA COELESTIA 2535:

     "He shall pray for thee." That this signifies that it will thus be revealed is evident from the signification of "praying." Prayer, regarded in itself, is speech with God, and some internal view at the time of the matters of the prayer, to which there answers something like an influx into the perception or thought of the mind so that there is a certain opening of the man's interiors toward God; but this with a difference according to the man's state, and according to the essence of the subject of the prayer. If the man prays from love and faith, and for only heavenly and spiritual things, there then comes forth in the prayer something like a revelation (which is manifested in the affection of him that prays) as to hope, consolation, or a certain inward joy. It is from this that to "pray" signifies in the internal sense to be revealed. Still more is this the case here, where praying is predicated of a prophet, by whom is meant the Lord, whose prayer was nothing else than internal speech with the Divine, and at the same time revelation. That there was revelation is evident in Luke.
     It came to pass when Jesus was baptized, and prayed that the heaven was opened (iii 21).
     In the same.
     It came to pass that He took Peter, James and John, and went up into the mountain to pray; and as He prayed, the fashion of His countenance was altered, and His raiment became white and glistening (ix. 28, 29).
     In John.
     When He prayed, saying, Father glorify Thy name, then came there a voice from heaven: I have both glorified, and will glorify again (xii. 27, 28);
where it is plain that the Lord's praying" was speech with the Divine, and revelation at the same time.




What matter to us?

     "What do these things matter to us?" said the bishops. They had been given a number of recently published books. One of the books was Earths in the Universe. They took the books and looked at them, but their reaction was that they did not consider them worthy of notice. In fact Swedenborg says that the books were "so disgracefully rejected as not to be deemed worthy even of a place among the books to be listed in their catalogue" (AR 716:1, 3).
     Ever since Earths in the Universe (EU) was written, men have questioned the validity and importance of Swedenborg's description of life on other planets. As early as 1770, Oetinger questioned whether the whole thing should be taken as a fiction or not (Doc. II 1058). And even at this day we tend to think of EU as containing obscure teachings which we somehow have to explain away. As soon as anyone mentions Earths in the Universe we begin to discuss the question of whether there are men on the moon. When we are tired of arguing, we end the discussion feeling that what we believe about life on other planets really isn't that important anyway.

Surpassing in Excellence

     Swedenborg knew that EU was an important book-so important that he published it twice (first as part of Arcana Coelestia, and then as a separate book). In 1758 Swedenborg had just witnessed the cataclysmic events of the last judgment in the spiritual world. He must have been burning to tell people about heaven and hell, the last judgment, and the New Church. But first he took time to tell people about earths in the universe. It was the first book he published after finishing the Arcana and witnessing the last judgment. He thought it would be good for evangelization purposes. (See EU 124.) He sent copies of it to many bishops, great men and lords (see AR 716). The news that EU was among the first of the Writings to be rendered into German gave Swedenborg "singular pleasure, and his eyes, always smiling, became twice as bright" (Swedenborg Epic, p. 415). And EU was among the books given to the Africans (SD 5946). When spirits asked Swedenborg, "What news from earth?" he replied, "This is new-the Lord has revealed things . . . surpassing in excellence those hitherto revealed since the beginning of the church!" And his list of things "surpassing in excellence" includes what is revealed about "the inhabitants of the planets and the earths in the universe" (TCR 846).


They Worship Our Lord

     We could illustrate the excellence and significance of EU by a comparison with the work of Copernicus. Back in the sixteenth century hardly anyone ever thought of the possibility that the earth might go around the sun. They thought the earth was the center of the universe, with the sun, moon and stars all revolving around it. Then Copernicus, on the basis of careful observations, established the theory that the sun was fixed, and the earth and all the planets revolved around it. This change in perspective was one of the most important advances in the history of astronomy.
     What Copernicus did for astronomy, EU does for religion. It's easy for us to center all our thoughts about God around this earth and around ourselves. We might think that we are better than others because we know Jesus, or that our church will bring us to a higher place in heaven than others. EU does away with all this by showing that no matter where you go in the whole universe, the Lord Jesus Christ is worshiped as the only God of the universe. And seeing this truth is the most important advance toward true religion that we can make.
     Swedenborg writes that what is related in EU "has been revealed to the intent that it may be known that the heaven of the Lord is immense, and that it is all from the human race; also that our Lord is everywhere acknowledged as the God of heaven and earth" (HH 417). The Lord Jesus Christ is the sun of the spiritual world, and all the universe "revolves" around Him. Once the Lord (encompassed by the spiritual sun) appeared to spirits from Mercury. At the same time, He appeared to people who had seen Jesus on our earth two thousand years ago. They all confessed that it was the Lord Himself. Then spirits from Jupiter saw Him and they exclaimed that He was the very One who had appeared to them on Jupiter as the God of the universe (EU 40). In one planet after another Swedenborg discovered this amazing fact: They worship our Lord as the only God of heaven and earth! (EU 65, 91, 98, 107, 141, 154, 159, 162, 171)

Indescribably humble

     Part of the power of Copernicus' work was the perspective it gave us about the earth. Seeing the universe as Copernicus saw it can be a very humbling experience.*


He transformed our conception of the earth as the glorious center of the universe into an idea that our whole world is little more than a speck of dust drifting in space-no more significant than the little points of light we label 'planets' and seldom think about.
     * Perhaps it is no mistake that 'Copernicus' means 'humble.
     We learn a parallel kind of humility by reading EU. Several times we are shown the insignificance of our earth. "What would the human race . . . from one earth be for the infinite Creator, for whom a thousand earths, no, tens of thousands, would not be enough?" It notes there that given a million earths with 300,000,000 men on each one, and 200 generations over the past 6000 years, if all those people were gathered together with plenty of space between (enough for each person to have his own king-size bed), they wouldn't fill even a thousandth of the space filled by our earth. That's a speck smaller than a moon of Jupiter! (EU 126) The Lord's love is too infinite to be limited to so small a creation. If a million planets amount to so little, how much less is our one planet? And it is even more humbling when we compare our life with the life on other planets and realize that we are among the least good.
     EU asks us to humble ourselves. It shows us how the spirits who are the best in the solar system are the ones who humble themselves before the Lord "so deeply that it cannot be described," not even daring to turn their faces to the Lord-a humility never seen on our earth (EU 85, 91). So here again EU can have a profound effect on our spiritual perspective and progress.

Not a Scientific Fact

     It was a long time before the work of Copernicus was generally accepted. When his book explaining the solar system was published, it was labeled "not a scientific fact, but a playful fancy"! Today we might laugh at the learned men of the day for not believing that the earth could move around the sun. Or we might condemn them for not allowing for freedom of thought in scientific and theological matters. But for them the stability of the earth was as undeniable as the solid ground beneath their feet. Copernicus had many theories, but how could the theories of a "crazy priest" stand up against evidence as clear as the daily rising of the sun?
     EU also has been labeled as "not a scientific fact." But what is the evidence? Doesn't it all come down to this-"There is no life on the moon because we haven't seen it, and we can't comprehend how it could be there." Isn't this like saying, "The earth doesn't move because we can't see it move, and we can't comprehend how it could"?


The Copernican theory was not fanciful, but it was based on observations which the average person could not make. Likewise, EU is based on observations which we cannot duplicate and may wish to ignore. Yet we can at least have the humility to realize that there are many true things we do not know now, which we wouldn't believe if we heard them.

"But it does move!"

     Almost 100 years after the death of Copernicus his theory still was not accepted. Galileo was imprisoned for preaching the theory, and he was forced by the church to recant, saying, "I confess that my error has been one of vain ambition and pure ignorance . . . . I now declare and swear that the earth does not move around the sun." It is said that he then whispered, "But it does move!"-as if to say, "All my declaring and swearing won't stop the earth from moving."
     We can argue about men on the moon and try to answer the problem that EU poses for us, but when we finally decide which theory is the right one, it will not change reality. The moon will remain just as it is now, as surely as the earth turns. But if we read EU with a view to humbling ourselves and acknowledging the infinity of the Lord's love, it will change the reality within us.


     A good way to get a feeling of what it must be like in the other world is to visit a very large library. You get a taste, just a glimpse, of what a real library is like. Recall the surprise of newcomers in the spiritual world: "There are books also in this world!" and the reply-". . . all things that are in the natural world are here in their perfection, even books and writings and many things more" (CL 207). They were looking at a great library, divided into smaller libraries according to the sciences, being amazed at seeing so many books.
     The British Museum Library in London produces a similar awe as you enter it, with the towering domed cylinder of the main library lined with volumes, sombre corridors leading off to various specialised collections and select reading rooms with green leather-topped tables bathed in the subdued glow of old-fashioned reading lamps. A volume the size of a small paperback is placed carefully on the desk. Here, we can join in the excitement of discovery . . . .


     Fifty years before Swedenborg's birth, young John Wilkins, later to become a founder of the Royal Society and a bishop, published a little book called The Discovery of a World in the Moone tending to prove ". . . that 'tis probable there may be another habitable world in the Moone . . ." with a discourse concerning the possibility of a passage thither.
     This small work, appealing to reason but "written in a hurry" gives a glimpse of the kind of questing that was going on in many people's minds less than forty years after Bruno burned at the stake, heretically believing that the earth revolves round the sun and that most planets are inhabited-a questing, we believe, that prepared the way for the reception of the Writings.
     He begins by proposing that a plurality of worlds does not contradict any principle of reason or faith. "Certainly there are many things left to discovery, and it cannot be any inconvenience for us, to maintaine a new truth, or rectifie an ancient errour" (p. 33). (Such as Aristotle from Plate saying there is but one world because there is one first mover-God.) Yet some argue the position is against Scripture for:
     1. Moses tells us of one world and his "History of the creation had beene very imperfect" if God had made another.
     2. John speaks of the creation of the world in the singular.
     3. It was accounted a heresy in ancient times.
     A fourth argument, difficult to follow, is backed by this: "But you're reply, though it doe not necessarily conclude, yet 'tis probable if there had been another world, wee should have notice of it in Scripture. I answer, 'tis as probable that the Scripture should have informed us of the Planets they being very remarkable parts of the Creation, and yet neither Moses, nor Job, nor the Psalmes (the places most frequent in Astronomicall observations) mention any of them but the Sunne and the Moone, and moreover, you must know, that 'tis beside the scope of the Holy Ghost either in the New or Old Testament, to reveale anything unto us concerning the secrets of Philosophy; 'tis not his intent in the New Testament, since we cannot conceive how it might in any way belong either to the Historicall, Exegeticall or Propheticall parts of it: nor is it his intent in the Old Testament . . ." arguing that it is expressed in vulgar [common] language for the simple to apprehend. Just as we like to point out that the intent of the Writings is not to reveal scientific truth, so Wilkins gives as an example the fact that Moses does not mention air "they would not know any Such body" or the creation of angels (!) seeming to regard the latter also as science.


     Further, the Old Testament calls the moon one of the greater lights when it is one of the least ". . . so that the phrases which the Holy Ghost uses concerning these things are not to be understood in a literall sense; but rather as vulgar expressions . . . ."                    
     Such thought opens the way to receive teachings such as this from the Writings: "The Word in the letter cannot be apprehended except by means of doctrine formulated from the Word by one who is enlightened; for the sense of the letter is accommodated to the apprehension even of simple men; therefore they need doctrine from the Word as a lamp" (AC 10324). Down-to-earth Wilkins agrees with those of his predecessors who think that the worlds are composed of common matter and rather mocks such Aristotelian notions as the music of the spheres and quintescence. And there is an ingenious scriptural confirmation "That the Moone hath not any light of her owne" based on Matthew 24. The sun shall be darkened (therefore) the moon shall not give her light" (which is reflected).
     And so the reasons for believing that there is a "world in the Moone" gather: mathematicians, ancient and modern, had this it opinion. Pythagorus believed it was inhabited. There are "high mountaines, deep vallies, and spacious plaines in the body of the Moone."
     Most of all, Wilkins leans on Galileo, the argument seeming to rest on the ruggedness of the moon, thus its similarity to earth. "But however we may deal pro or con in Philosophy, yet we must not jest with divine truths, or bring Scripture to patronise any fancy of our own, though, perhaps, it be truth." Compare with this: "Be it known, moreover, that the literal sense of the Word is a guard to the genuine truths that lie hidden within. It is a guard in this respect, that it can be turned this way or that and explained according to the way it is taken, yet without injury or violence to its internal. It does no harm for the sense of the letter to be understood in one way by one person and in a different way by another; but it does harm for the Divine truths within to be perverted . . ." (SS 97).
     At the age of 24 Wilkins does not know where rain comes from; yet his mind is out beyond the moon to the planets where ". . . you shall find it probable enough that each of them may be a severall world. But this would be too much for to vent at the first"(p. 179).
     "As wee now wonder at the blindnesse of our Ancestors who were not able to discerne such things as seeme plaine and obvious unto us, so will our posterity admire our ignorance in as perspicuous matters. Kepler thinks that as soon as the art of flying is discovered, wee shall colonise the Moone" (p. 208).




     Our Lord Jesus Christ taught His disciples how to pray, and gave them the words which they should use. These words have been used and studied countless times through the centuries, and phrases from the prayer have entered into literature and common speech. Not that He taught that no other words were to be used; for He said, "After this manner, therefore pray ye," and He taught that "men ought always to pray and not to faint."
     The power and universal application of the Lord's prayer have been recognized by millions thro ugh generations, but much that lies within the prayer has not been realized, not perceived. Some have been critical of things in the prayer, particularly of the words, "lead us not into temptation." One of the reasons for this is a remarkable one, realized only by some students: for modern usage and modern dictionaries the word should not be "temptation," but trial. The word in the original Greek is peirasmon, meaning primarily trial, a putting to the test. In the time of the King James translation of the Bible temptation may have been a reasonably accurate translation of the Greek word, but it is not now, nor has been for generations. (For examples of peirasmon used where the meaning is obviously "try" or "test" see Matthew 19:3, 16: 1, 22: 18, 26:41.) The meaning of trial or proof is now listed in dictionaries as obsolete. The word came to us through Middle English from Old French, derived from the Latin rentatio, whose primary meaning is trial, like the Greek peirasmon, but our word took on the meaning of allurement, enticement, etc., which was at the most a subsidiary meaning of the Latin word. In the Writings tentatio is used a great many times and exclusively in the meaning of trial or combat. For some reason most translators of the Writings have used "temptation" for tentatio though they have often pointed out the sense in which the word is used.
     Another reason for misunderstanding of these words in the prayer is that there is little knowledge or understanding of the combats, or trials, within a man, of good against the forces of evil. The Heavenly Doctrine of the New Jerusalem tells us of merely natural trials where only worldly issues are at stake, and of spiritual trials, or combats, where heavenly issues are at stake. The natural ones are met by everyone, but spiritual combats are rare in this age, because of the lack of true faith from genuine charity. An early passage of the first published work of the Second Coming Revelation sets the whole matter in perspective.


This is in explanation of the words in the third chapter of Genesis, "He said to the serpent, 'Thou art cursed above every beast . . .'"; the internal meaning of which is that the sensuous in man turned itself from that which is heavenly, and thus cursed itself. This comment then is given, "Jehovah God, or the Lord, never curses anyone. He is never angry with anyone, never leads anyone into trial, never punishes anyone, and still less does He curse anyone. Such things are done by the diabolic crew. Such things can never come from the Fountain of mercy, peace and goodness. The reason of its being said, both here and other parts of the Word, that Jehovah God not only turns away His face, is angry, punishes and tries (tests), but also kills and even curses, is that men may believe that the Lord governs and disposes all and everything in the universe, even evil itself, punishments and trials; and when they have received this most general idea, may afterwards learn how He governs and disposes all things by turning the evil of punishment and of trial into good. In teaching and learning the Word, the most general truths must come first; and therefore the literal sense is full of such things" (AC 245).
     We wish to show some of the reasons why we find the phrases that we do in the Lord's prayer, and we have dwelt at some length on this matter of leading into trial or "temptation" because it has been more of a "hang-up" than other parts. The beginning is "Our Father Who art in the heavens." Notice, not my Father, but Father of all of us. The Father in the heavens is the Divine as to Love-the Divine Good. The same is signified by "Jehovah," while "God" signifies Divine Wisdom or Divine Truth. But how much more approachable for worship and prayer is the term "Father."
     Our Father in the heavens-reachable, but above. The Divine in Itself is above the heavens, but it is the Divine manifested in the heavens that we pray to.
     "Hallowed be Thy name." All things of worship have to do with what is holy, or hallowed. The Lord's "name" signifies all things by which He is worshipped. It is obvious that none of His names are to be used lightly or carelessly.
     "Thy kingdom come." His kingdom is His rule, the rule of the Divine Providence, but it involves His whole Divine and heavenly environment, His paradise.
     "Thy will be done, as in heaven so upon the earth." His will is to bring all men into heaven, and to preserve all mankind from every evil that they will allow Him to preserve them from-from every evil, not necessarily from a misfortune, trial or conflict that will better their eternal state.


"As in heaven so upon the earth" involves not only that a life like that of the angelic heavens be lived upon earth, but that what is internal be made secure in the external. This is the regeneration of the natural degree in men, which is the last and hardest step in the rebirth of man.
     "Give us this day our daily bread." Notice that it is give us; nowhere in the prayer do we find "me," "I" or "my." We are praying as children of the universal Father, not for ourselves as unrelated individuals. The kingdom of God is composed of innumerable parts mutually serving each other. We pray for our "daily bread." Bread has been a wide-reaching term through the ages. Much might be said about the equivalent for our word "bread" in ancient languages and cultures, but what concerns us in this matter is the usage in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments. For not only does this determine its use in the prayer, but governs much of what is said concerning bread on the many pages of the New Word. In the Old Testament the Hebrew equivalent for bread (lechem) means not only a loaf or cake made from grain, but all food in general. Thus when King Solomon's bread for the day was listed it included flour, meal, oxen, sheep, deer, and fowl (I Kings 4:22). Moreover, all the sacrifices in the Israelitish church were called the "bread of the offering made by fire unto Jehovah," (Lev. 3:11, 16) although the offerings included different kinds of flesh, meal, and wine. And in the New Testament our Lord said, "Moses gave you not that bread from heaven, but My Father giveth you the true bread from heaven; for the bread of God is He that cometh down from heaven and giveth life unto the world" (John 6:31-34). These things give some idea of what can be meant by "bread" in the prayer. Moreover, we are to pray "this day" for "our daily bread." We are not to harbor anxious solicitude for the future, but to seek and accept the needs, the good, of each day for its day, its state.
     "And forgive us our debts, as we also forgive our debtors." The acknowledgment of our need, our error, our debt to the Lord, our need to be forgiven is basic here. Also it is fundamental that we cannot be forgiven if we are unforgiving to others. Some translators have preferred to translate this phrase, "remit our sins as we remit what is owed to us." It is true that the word in the original means also to remit, or send away or banish; it is also true that the other word can mean sins or transgressions, but it seems evident that in this context the familiar words, "forgive us our debts as we forgive our debtors" cannot be bettered. This seems plain from the Lord's words elsewhere;


"And when ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have ought against any; that your Father also who is in heaven may forgive you your trespasses" (Mark 11:25). Also to Peter, "If he trespass against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him" (Luke 17:4). To this let us add these words from True Christian Religion, "I have also heard from heaven that the Lord forgives every man his sins, . . . Moreover He never inflicts punishment for sins and never imputes them, because He is Love Itself and Goodness Itself; nevertheless sins are not wiped off except by repentance" (409).
     With the next words, "Lead us not into trial," we have already dealt. Let there be added that J. F. Potts has a footnote on p. 191 of Vol. VI of his Concordance in which he points out that the primary meaning of tentationes in the Writings is trials, and that peirasmon in the Lord's prayer has a similar meaning, and says it is a pity that it has not been so translated, but so far as I know, he did not make this change in his own translating.
     "But deliver us from evil." With or without trials, temptation-combats, the Lord is continually delivering men from evil, and it is only He who can deliver from evil and hold man in good. "Without Me, ye can do nothing" (John 15:5). "Man from his birth is in the midst of infernal societies" (AE 1163). "For man's proprium, which is his will, in nothing acts as one with the Divine Providence," so that "man's proprial prudence is continually raising its head, and the Divine Providence is continually putting it down. If man felt this, he would be enraged and provoked against God." But "Providence works so secretly that scarcely anyone knows of its existence." "In this way the Lord by His Divine Providence continually leads man in freedom, and the freedom appears to man no otherwise than as of his proprium. And to lead man in freedom in opposition to himself is like raising a heavy and resisting weight from the earth by means of jack screws, through which the weight and resistance are not felt" (DP 211).
     "For Thine is the kingdom." The concluding words of the prayer, from this point on, in the gospel according to Matthew, are agreed by modern scholars to be an addition to what Matthew originally wrote. They are not included in the prayer which the Lord gave His disciples, as recorded in Luke. There may be, and is, argument over what was written earlier and what later, but the receivers of the Crowning Revelation given through Swedenborg know that these words are quoted many times in that Revelation, their obvious meaning emphasized, and much that lies within set forth. Similarly, that revelation tells that the Epistles which make up a large part of the New Testament accepted in the first Christian Church, and the part most often quoted, have not the spiritual sense such as lies within the gospels and the major part of the Old Testament.


Thus they are not the Word of God, though they contain much sound interpretation of the gospels and the Old Testament.
     Thus we see that it is most fitting that in the conclusion of this prayer of prayers all things should be ascribed to the Lord, that we should willingly acknowledge that His are the kingdom and the power and the glory, and that eternally. Remember the inspired words of Solomon at the dedication of the temple, "But will God indeed dwell upon the earth? behold, the heaven and heaven of heavens cannot contain Thee; how much less this house that I have builded?" (I Kings 8:27) "Power" refers to the Divine Good, the Divine Love; "Glory" to the Divine Truth, the Divine Wisdom and majesty. All this we need to acknowledge is the Lord's, and His alone, now and forever. "Amen" marks the Divine seal of truth, and on man's part is his acknowledgement of all that the prayer contains.


     The chairman of the General Church Evangelization Committee (and that is the new name of the Extension Committee) has produced a tape which has been played a number of times on WFLN, a classical music station in Philadelphia.
     Hello there! Have you ever wondered whether there might be another way of understanding the creation story in Genesis, chapter 1?
     I'm Douglas Taylor of the Bryn Athyn Cathedral, and I've written a sermon on the parable of creation. That's right-the parable of creation. Of course, it's literally true that "in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." But Genesis does not give us the details of how He created. It's talking about a different kind of creation.
     After all, there is light on the first day, but no sun until the fourth day! There are plants on the third day-before the sun existed!
     Bur if it's not about physical creation, what kind of creation is it?
     That's explained in the sermon. You can have a copy of it free of charge by writing to me: Douglas Taylor, Bryn Athyn, (spell) Pennsylvania 19009. Just ask for the Parable of Creation.




     No doctrine should be considered as isolated from other doctrines. If you would gain understanding of the subject of prayer, be sure to see it within the context of other doctrines. There is in the world today a general attitude of skepticism on the subject of prayer. This attitude is not alleviated by the pronouncements of misguided fanatics.
     We part company with the skeptics when we enter into specific doctrines. One such doctrine is that of spheres, which opens our minds to a dimension of reality unknown to skeptics. The same holds true of the doctrine of influx. And the doctrine of the spiritual world, in which we live even now as to our spirits, shows us that there are causes undreamed of by the natural man.
     Suppose we pray to the Lord for enlightenment. There are real phenomena that might be illustrated or pictured as the parting of clouds. The shining of light into our mind is not evident to the natural man, but it is real.
     Once Swedenborg prayed in the other world for the enlightenment of some bewildered people. "I will pray to the Lord, and thence bring a remedy by an inflow of light on this subject" (TCR 73:2). In another instance we read, "I prayed to the Lord, and suddenly the interiors of my mind were opened" (AR 926). Swedenborg was given to observe what actually took place inwardly as a result of prayer. "it has been given me to perceive the very influx, the calling forth of the truths which were with me, their application to the objects of prayer, the affection of good that was adjoined, and the elevation itself' (AC 10299).
     The objects of prayer are real. They have ultimate existence in this world. If, for example, we pray for love it is love of someone or something. Regardless of what one prays for, the Lord sees the intention in the heart of the one who is praying.
     If we ignore the doctrines we will be left to rely merely on our own experience like those who say they tried prayer and it didn't work! Some "who when they lived in the body and prayed for anything and did not obtain it were indignant, and gave way to doubts concerning Providence" (AC 4654). Let us do our thinking on the basis of doctrine and not on one doctrine alone.



WHICH SELF?       Rev. GEOFFREY S. CHILDS       1982

      (A Search for the True Human)


     A primary theme in modern psychology is that it is vital to love oneself. The titles of many books on psychology written in the past two decades reflect this theme: The Psychology of Self-Esteem by Nathaniel Branden; Looking Out for Number One by Robert Ringer; Pulling Your Own Strings by Dr. Wayne Dyer; The Self by Th. Mischel; and also such titles as The Disowned Self (Branden), Compassion and Self-Hate (T. Rubin), The Divided Self (R. D. Laing), etc. These books have earlier progenitors-fathers in the field such as the works of Erik Erikson (Identity and the Life Cycle). And there are parallel philosophers, though their approach is perhaps quite different: the novelist A. Rand and the earlier philosopher Nietzsche.
     Though not often reflected directly in the titles, the theme in recent books has been that the love of self is the vital basis of human happiness-that a good self image is the foundation for all else in life. A chapter heading in a book by Dr. Leo Buscaglia (Love, 1972, Fawcett Crest Books) states the theme explicitly: "To Love Others You Must First Love Yourself" (Ch. VI).
     The importance of loving oneself has also been expressed by General Church members in articles and letters to the editor. Again, the theme has been that unless one feels good about oneself, he or she cannot feel good about others. An anonymous letter in the Sons Bulletin (c. 1975) concludes: "P.E.T: may help this generation of New Church parents to give our children the true spheres and message of Christian J.O.Y. Love Jesus Christ, Love Others, Love Yourself. Self love, when ordered and chastened, is healthy and good."
     The title and primary focus of this paper are addressed to the question of loving oneself. We are told by many that it is vital to love oneself. Which self? We have more than one self, or feeling of self identity. It is not hard, upon reflection, to think of five or six "selves" or feelings of personal identity from the Writings. Which of these selves should we love?
     This is not a teaser or question of passing intellectual curiosity. The wrong answer could well lead to the spiritual "fall" of the General Church. I would suggest that loving the wrong self has led to the fall of every church since the beginning (AC 127). In today's cultural climate, the wrong self to be loved will probably come in psychologically-termed clothing. Herein lies the serpent or, as the Apocalypse terms it, the dragon, waiting to devour the Man Child (Rev. 12:3, 4).


     But there is a converse side to this also. The Writings do teach about self love as a tool, and a necessary and God-given love (see later references). This self in its own place is to be loved. Moreover, the Writings speak of mental illness (DP 141, AC 8164 et alia). And within this illness a "self' that is unwell. If loving oneself correctly is essential to emotional or mental health, then we should love self! so that oneself may be a tool to serve the Lord and the neighbor. But again, the question is: Which self?
     The Writings delineate a number of different selves or identities within an individual in a lifetime. This is reflected in the letter of the Word by a number of different characters present in an historical text, all depicting in the spiritual sense characteristics within one person. Thus with King David, for instance, there were his father, brothers, Nathan, Bathsheba, Solomon, Joab, etc.
     What is it that gives a separate sense of self, or identity? In CL 34 it is said, "His own love remains with everyone after death . . . . Although love is so universal in speech, yet scarcely anyone knows what love is. It is entirely unknown to man that it is his very life." "Everyone has his own love, or a love distinct from another's love . . . . The reason why his love remains with every man after death is because . . . love is man's life, and hence is the man himself" (CL 35, 36). But there are good and evil loves with man simultaneously. From earliest life until complete regeneration (or degeneration), both good and evil loves inflow and are received. These different loves give a different sense of self, of personal identity. How different a little child is in an innocent state than in a selfish state! How different we are in a state of feeling love and in a state of hate.
     What are some of the different selves or feelings of identity a person is aware of in a lifetime? There are the good loves given through remains; and from this, as a gift from the Lord, comes a loving self. There is the hereditary love of self, through which hell inflows with man, and this, as received and confirmed, is the evil self: In both childhood and adult life there are states in which good and evil are together-states of merit, of apparent good, and later of mediate good (references in later section). This could be entitled the intermediate self. There is the distorted self in unhealthy mental states, referred to implicitly in DP 141 and AC 8164e. And there is the heavenly proprium which is spoken of so beautifully in the Writings (see AC 154)-that wonderful state of freedom and heavenly love that is the Lord's goal of life with us.


Other factors, too, touch upon our sense of life and self: The concept of a Divine endowment or use-love imprinted on the soul itself (see "The Gifted Child," by G. Childs, NEW CHURCH LIFE, 1979, p. 353, 386); and also freedom of choice as essential to a feeling of true or independent life (DP 78, 211, HD 145, AC 1419, et alia).
     Each of these selves mentioned above gives an independent feeling of self. Some of these are never called a "self" in the Writings, because they are not man's own, but the Lord's gifts with man. This would include both remains and the endowment of an inmost love of use. And it would also include the heavenly proprium, which is the Lord's with man (AC 8497, 252, 987, etc.). In these states, man cannot really love himself! Rather, the Lord loves in man, and man feels this as if it were his own: a most wonderful sense of life-but not loving oneself! However, in states of apparent good in childhood, a child feels merit, and hence loves himself (and should feel this way!) in innocence (AC 1667:2). And in adult mediate good, there is a type of love of self that can be in innocence also (AC 3993:9-11). Man can then love himself and also love others-this number clearly teaches this. This happens in innocence, as an intermediate step. But man isn't really aware then of his hidden love of self. The evil quality secretly within is not yet for man to see (see "Mediate Good," NEW CHURCH LIFE, May 1960, p. 222). There is also the subordinated love of self-subordinated first to remains, then to regenerate states. This is a genuine and orderly love of self (TCR 394, 395), which can help perfect man. In it, self is seen as a means of use (AC 7819), but still self is put last (AC 6933). I will elaborate on this orderly love of self in a later article.
     The question of which self is to be loved includes two other feelings of self or identity: 1) the distorted self of mental illness, and 2) the hereditary love of self. If those who teach us to love ourself include in any way the hereditary love of self, the acceptance of this will lead to spiritual death. It will lead to the fall of the branch of the New Church which might advocate it. And the forces of hell would have this happen through their "enlightened" trickery: sure you should love yourself-it feels great! Once at a doctrinal class a young minister was advocating the love of self as a necessary step in mental and spiritual health. An old and experienced and feisty church member, a fine lady, responded: "I don't know about that love of self! My problem is that I don't have any trouble with that at all!" It is obvious that when those in the church who advocate loving self for mental health stress the need for self love, they do not mean the hereditary love of self. But the trouble is, it is so easy to mix up the two.


C. S. Lewis showed how wonderfully adroit the devils are at leading man to such mix-ups. It can happen in the New Church too!
     The real area of focus in the need or danger of loving self is in the field of mental health. Here it is often stressed that self love, self esteem, is vital to all other functioning. Is this true? How important is it to the New Church? Are there great goods to the New Church within this suggestion of a healthy love of self! And are there frightening dangers? Perhaps there are yes answers to both the last two questions. I would like to lead up to these two questions (the good and the harm of love of self in mental health) by treating of higher goals first-by treating of higher identities or feelings of self. For then the lower levels of this question may come into greater light.
     In AC 1953 it is revealed by the Lord: ". . . the rational can by no means think about itself in regard to its quality, for nothing can look into itself; but it must be something more internal or higher that thinks about it, for this can look into it." If we are going to understand a genuine love of self, which is a lower love (TCR 394, 395), higher love from the Lord must do the investigating. And the only way higher loves can enlighten is through the Word, the Lord speaking to us. From the highest sense of life-the highest sense of "self'-lower feelings of identity can come into light. The Lord alone is love (AC 149); from Him comes all real life with man. But the Lord, from His Divine Esse, wishes above all to give man a feeling of true life and true happiness (TCR 43). And in the New Church there is a new sense of life-a new heavenly proprium that the Lord would give to man-that we would treat of as the real goal of life.
     The nature of this new "self" is unfolded in Rev. 22:1, 2: "And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God and of the Lamb. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was there the tree of life, which bare twelve manner of fruits, and yielded her fruit every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations." That from the Lord, a New Church person may eat of this tree, and find startling, beautiful new life, is also clear from the Word: "to him that overcometh will I give to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God" (Rev. 2:7).
     The next article will treat of the highest "self"-the true proprium. This is the Lord's alone with man. But it can be received by man with an intense sense of life. It comes when the false self is overcome, and the Lord gives man "to eat of the tree of life, which is in the midst of the paradise of God."


Editorial Pages 1982

Editorial Pages       Editor       1982


     In February of last year we published an assembly address entitled "The Function of Prayer" and then in March a postscript on "Prayer for Others." Comments indicate that this major study brought out concepts that were new to a number of readers. Two ministers responded (June and August issues) illustrating differences of view on the use of prayer in public ritual and in private.
     In this issue a sermon and an article add more to our thought on this subject. Obviously there is room for increased understanding on every doctrinal subject, but in the case of prayer one limitation has been the lack of access to the teachings of the Writings. Often one can find the pertinent passages on a subject by looking up a single word in the Swedenborg Concordance. Accordingly students in the past have sometimes imagined they had a balanced overview of the doctrine of prayer after having read the passages listed under "Prayer" (oratio and prex).
     Important passages about prayer are to be found under "Implore" and "Supplicate." It is under the word "Ask" (petitio) that one finds the passage relating to a comment that there is no point in prayer since the Lord already knows. "The Lord knows it already, but still the Lord wills that man should first ask. . ." (AR 376). Some of the direct teachings on prayer were simply overlooked in the preparation of the Concordance. (See Additions to the Swedenborg Concordance, General Church Press.)
     Then, of course, there are enlightening passages bearing on certain subjects in which the actual word is not even mentioned. For example the concept of the "limbus" is clarified especially in passages in which that word is not used (see under "Border" in the Additions just mentioned). It is exciting not only to learn particulars you did not know before but also to find that teachings you already knew had applications you had not seen. Angels gain from truths "they did not know before," and they also get enlightenment "in the truths they already know" (see HH 225). We will say more on this presently.



     What could be less surprising than to discover that there is more in the Writings than one realized? If they are Divine it cannot be otherwise. It is a common saying among us that we have only scratched the surface of understanding the Lord's new revelation. And yet, somehow, one is surprised to find new applications. Something like surprise seems to be a concomitant of all discovery.
     Half a dozen of my friends have been doing extensive study of the Writings relative to the subject of abortion. I confess to surprise at the number of passages that have been found and the insights that have been gained. (For insights see the article by John Gandrud in the spring issue of Theta Alpha Journal entitled "A Duty of Love.") Let these few examples serve.

     "Angels who are in the inmost heaven . . . love infants much more than do their fathers and mothers. They are present with infants in the womb, and through them the Lord cares for the feeding and full development of the infants therein; thus they have charge over those who are with child" (AC 5052).
     In Apocalypse Explained 710 it is said that "the embryo, being yet in the womb, partakes more from the good of innocence than after it is born." The same number refers to celestial love out of heaven "with mothers during the time of gestation, and into the embryos; and from it springs the love of the babe with mothers, and innocence with babes."
     "While man is an embryo or while he is yet in the womb, he is in the kingdom of the heart; but when he has come forth from the womb, he comes into the kingdom of the lungs; and if through the truths of faith he suffers himself to be brought into the good of love he then returns from the kingdom of the lungs into the kingdom of the heart in the Gorand Man; for he thus comes a second time into the womb and is born again" (AC 4931:3).
     When one reads of the thousands and thousands of abortions taking place month by month one wonders how much there is an unwitting dramatization of the very thrust of hell itself.
     "It was further represented how opposed are those now within the church to innocence itself. These appeared a beautiful and innocent little child, at the sight of whom the external bonds by which evil genii and spirits are withheld from abominable deeds were slightly relaxed; and they then began to treat the little child in the most shocking manner-to trample on him, and to will the killing of him, one in one way, and another in another; for in the other life innocence is represented by infants.


I remarked that during their bodily life such things do not appear in connection with these men, but it was answered that such are their interiors, and that if the civil laws did not hinder, and also other external bonds, such as the fear of the loss of property, of honor, of reputation, and of their life, they would rush insanely in the same way against all who are innocent. When they heard this answer, they made sport of it also. From what has been said we may see what is the quality of the men of the present day . . ." (AC 2126)
     In the Spiritual Diary under the heading "That Evil Spirits Especially Hold Infants in Hatred" it is said, "Often when I saw infants they desired to harm them in various ways, yea to kill them . . . ." (2284)
     At the end of the chapter on innocence in Heaven and Hell it is said that all who are in hell are wholly antagonistic to innocence and burn to harm innocence. If they see little children "they are inflamed with a cruel desire to do them harm" (283).
     Reflecting on some of these passages one wonders about what has come to be called the "battered baby syndrome." This phenomenon existed long before it had a name and long before its extent was publicly realized.

     Note: The Writings abound with uplifting teachings. They speak much more of heaven than of hell. They speak more of beauty than of ugliness, more of happiness than of misery, more of love than of hatred.
     We would avoid morbid preoccupation with problems, but trying better to understand them seems preferable to ignoring them.


Dear Editor,
     In the early 1850's when slavery was the issue of the times in the United States, Salyman Brown and Richard de Charms broke a long New Church silence on the slavery question by publishing pamphlets on the subject. Brown felt the answer did not lie with forced abolition of slavery but that southerners would voluntarily abolish slavery once New Church reasons were known and accepted.


De Charms felt that reasoning for truth and justice would have no more success than any other plan "which does not contemplate radical changes in the manners, customs, and entire social economy of the whites." De Charms advocated education as the fundamental means of achieving their social change.
     Rev. George Bush, planning a full airing of New Church thoughts on slavery, sent out questionnaires seeking the opinions and viewpoints of New Church people on the slavery question. He published his findings in the New Church Repository (Vol. V.N.Y. p. 280, 281; 1852). He concluded that although New Churchmen conceded that slavery was intrinsically an evil, they held that "there is no prospect of getting rid of it for some generations to come, and that our duty as Christians is to submit to it as a mysterious but wise and beneficent dispensation of the Divine Providence. . ." Rev. Bush departed from this accepted stance in speaking out clearly against slavery, losing subscribers in the process. He wrote:

     . . . We believe the New Church can never be fully faithful to its mission without entering into direct collision with every form of evil that exists among men. We have no faith in mere abstract and general deprecations or denunciations of what is [in opposition] to absolute truth and good. There must be a hand-to-hand encounter . . . . It is, in our view, a very great fallacy to expect that needed reforms will take care of and accomplish themselves, and that the simple preaching of love to the Lord and love to the neighbor will renovate society without the positive putting the finger upon the diseased parts of the body politic, and actually grappling with the crooked things that are to be made straight, and the rough places that are to be made smooth. (Research courtesy of Wendel Barnett)

     Do we in the New Church today face the issues of our time aggressively with courage and strength, or do we grope for a middle ground, trusting in the wise dispensations of the Divine Providence? Do our publications reflect the patient idealism of Brown and de Charms or the spirited realism of Bush? And what are the issues of our times: I submit that abortion is the human issue of our time as slavery was in the last century. Innocence is now being attacked as freedom was attacked by slavery. We need a spirited dialogue on the question. Our own innocence is at stake.
          Sarver, Pennsylvania

Editor's Note: Besides the excellent article by John Gandrud to which we refer on p. 209, we would call attention to the article "Correspondences of Embryology" by Linda Simonetti in The New Philosophy (January-June, 1981, p. 10).


WE WANT MORE! Please? 1982


Dear Editor,
     Hooray for the new translation of Conjugial Love in the March issue of NEW CHURCH LIFE!
     We were so delighted at the readability of these portions that we actually burst out laughing for joy! The language was so straightforward that the meaning virtually leaped from the page.
     If you had enclosed a "tear-out" response sheet on which your readers could have indicated their desire for more of the same, we suspect your mail would have filled many bushel baskets.
     So, our suggestion to the language experts among the clergy and laity: Stop everything else, and hurry through the whole book of Conjugial Love in the refreshingly clear and easy-to-read style used by David Gladish.
          Bloomfield, Connecticut

IMMEDIATE NEED       Rev. A. W. (TERRY) SCHNARR       1982

Dear Mr. Rose,
     It is with regret that I write to give you my reaction to the March issue, which included "A Rendition of a Chapter from Conjugial Love." I have to ask, Why has the clergy kept the Word from the people for so long? Are we not acting like the Catholic church? If the Word is translated with such scholarly accuracy that the ordinary person cannot read it and understand it, the laity becomes dependent on the clergy for the interpretation. Does this not effectively remove the Word from most of the people, and give the clergy dangerous authority and power? If we really want people, other than the highly educated who are trained in skills of concentration, to study and understand the Word of the Lord, don't we have a very great responsibility to provide a translation that is easily read and understood? I express my great delight in reading the rendition printed, and would like to see all of the Writings so printed. Our own members have needed such readability for so long, and if we are going to be successful interesting others through the sale of books, isn't this the time to begin making more of these kinds of translations?
          Mississauga, Ont., Canada


REPLY TO "Let's Keep Conjugial" 1982

REPLY TO "Let's Keep Conjugial"       JAMES BRUSH       1982

Dear Editor,
     One can sympathize with those who from tradition do not wish to change a word long familiar. But is the meaning long familiar also?
     In the January issue an article entitled "Mercy" discusses the exceedingly great damage that unlimited divorce causes the church. This is a stain that requires for its solution a thorough knowledge of that most practical book which we ought now to call Marital Love. We need clarity with regard to its application to life and clarity of its meaning. Also in the January issue Rev. Walter Orthwein defends the word "conjugial" and raises questions which call for scholarly solutions.
     The Writings were deliberately cast in a language whose meanings would not change with time. Translations of them, therefore, must use the language of those who read them if they are to be understood and applied to life. Many like myself must rely upon translations, and little is accomplished by casting words in the unknown original language. There is much to be gained by using a word with which we and the world around us are familiar. Such a word is "marital love." We must of course infill it with the marvelous wisdom now revealed to protect our marriages. The chaste marriages of the church, free of disorderly divorces, are its heart and foundation.
          Aarhus, Denmark


Dear Editor,
     I have been looking at recent issues of the LIFE. Although there is much truth in Pat Rose's "Mercy" (January) I found it very disturbing. I was thinking of all the passages in the New Testament warning against harsh punishments and thinking ourselves better than others: the Prodigal Son, the woman taken in adultery, the workers who came at the eleventh hour, the woman who washed the Lord's feet with tears, and others.
     The Pharisees were always scolding the Lord for associating with sinners. (Of course there are at least two types of sinner-those who are humbly asking and pleading for help from the Lord and those who are not.)
     I think, perhaps, Andrew Heilman (in "The Pearl of Great Price" in the March issue) has the answer. "We must remember the Lord's words, 'Judge not, that ye be not judged.'


though we can forgive the trespasses against us, who are we to forgive a sin against the Lord?" (p. 101) He goes on to say, "And in helping our neighbors in their struggles toward heavenly goals, we must not take it upon ourselves to forgive them or let them into the church; instead we should direct them to the Lord in His Word. In this way we remove the beam in our own eye, that great falsity of thinking we can save or condemn others, and then see clearly to direct our brothers to the Lord in His Word, Who alone can remove the falsities which cloud the understanding."
          Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania


Dear Editor,
     There apparently have been many discussions in response to my article on mercy in the January issue. Rev. Patrick Rose raised some good points in his letter, especially that true mercy is not exercised in a spirit of condemning but from concern for society. Divine laws (and ecclesiastical laws derived from them) are not for avenging evil but are a positive aid in resisting it.
     The three letters in the April issue have raised some good questions to discuss.
     In his letter, Rev. Eric Carswell mentioned that, contrary to my statement, there is no teaching in the Writings saying that it is repentance that earns forgiveness. He may not have been able to find them because they are listed in the Concordance under "remit," also translated "forgive." One of the numbers is AC 9014:3-

The Lord forgives everyone his sins because He is mercy itself. Nevertheless they are not thereby forgiven unless the man performs serious repentance and desists from evils, and afterward lives a life of faith and charity, and this even to the end of life . . . . When from this new life the man views the evils of his former life, and turns away from them, and regards them with horror, then for the first time are the evils forgiven . . . . From this it is plain what is the forgiveness of sins, and that it cannot be granted within an hour, nor within a year. (See also DP 280.)

     This says not only that repentance is prerequisite to forgiveness, but that forgiveness is not immediate even when there has been repentance. Simply saying I am sorry is not enough: "Sins are not forgiven through repentance of the mouth, but through repentance of the life" (AC 8393). Note well Luke 17:3, 4.


     Mr. Carswell quoted AC 6324: that if man believed that all evil and false things are from hell, he could not become guilty of evil. This has to be referring to resisting evil from the recognition that it comes from hell, because other numbers say that once the person has made it his own he is guilty. For example:

To confess sins is to become thoroughly acquainted with evils, to see them in one's self, to acknowledge them, to regard one's self as guilty, and to condemn one's self on account of them (AC 8388).

     When a person appropriates evil to himself, it is inextricably connected to him to eternity-shunning it afterwards pushes it to the sides but does not eradicate it. That is why it is so important for the church to help its members (including our young people) to see clearly what evils are before being confronted by them, to avoid indulging in them in the first place.
     TCR 459 contains examples that apply to our discussion of whether to judge an action apart from the person who does it. For example, it is said that a person does evil when he helps a robber escape from prison, saying to himself, "It is not my fault that he commits robbery; I have given aid to the man." Or that a judge does not act with judgment from justice when he acquits an evil-doer because he appears pious or begs for pardon. AC 6703-6712 goes into specifics about judging the neighbor. It is summed up in the statement, ". . . it is the part of Christian prudence to search well the quality of a man's life, and to exercise charity according to it." This certainly doesn't recommend separating the person from his actions. Obviously we can be discriminating and still practice true charity.
     The theme of Janet Doering's favorite article, Bishop W. F. Pendleton's "Notes on the Government of the Church," is that no external bonds should be imposed on the church or its members, but that it is to be ruled by influx from the Lord. A section in the Arcana beginning with No. 10789 indicates otherwise-that there must be higher and lower overseers (including overseers over ecclesiastical things) to keep men in order and not permit evils that are contrary to order. Priests must teach men according to the doctrine of their church and "must lead them to live according to it."
     It is a popular belief in the church that a person must be free to do evil so he can see it and shun it. But that is not what the teaching says. DP 281 makes the distinction: "if man is permitted to think about the evils of his life's love, even so far as to intend them, they can be cured by spiritual means . . . . he is indeed permitted to think about and to will the evils of his inherited nature but not to talk about and do them" (my emphasis).


Man's destruction of holy things "is prevented by civil, moral and ecclesiastical laws . . . " (ibid. ). Ecclesiastical laws based on Divine laws perform an essential use to the church.
     Referring to the abuse of their office by the Catholic priesthood for personal gain, AR 799 singles them out for dispensing with ecclesiastical law when "they remit [forgive] sins, even enormous ones, and thereby release from temporal punishment" and "by intercessions with the pope they get power for contracting marriages within the prohibited degrees . . . ." Since Conjugial Love 276 states that "It is from the Divine law that a man may not put away his wife and marry another except for scortation," have we also been contracting marriages within prohibited degrees?
     Bishop Pendleton was concerned that under church-imposed laws individual freedom would be violated. One of his main points was that government by man is government by external bonds such as fear; that it leads to compulsion and destruction of freedom, and closes the understanding. Yet Divine Providence 139 assures us that:

     . . . fear can in no wise take possession of the internal of thought; this is always in freedom . . . . The internal of thought is not closed by a fear of civil punishments or of external ecclesiastical punishments, because such laws only prescribe penalties for those who speak and act contrary to the civil interests of the kingdom and the spiritual interests of the church, and not for those who merely think in opposition to them. (Emphasis added)

     If we look at freedom as being equilibrium, which is how the Writings define it, we see that to be in freedom a person must be under an influence toward good to balance his inclination to evil (see AC 5992 and TCR 475-478). If we want to promote the choosing of good over evil, we should provide influences for choosing good. Nonetheless, each person is still free to do evil.
     Apparently the laws given in Divine Providence have been misinterpreted as telling us how to preserve freedom instead of describing the Lord's government. No. 70e even calls them "laws by which the Lord cares for and rules the things of man's will and understanding." The translation is misleading: for instance, ". . . man should act from freedom in accordance with reason" sounds as if he could act otherwise. But No. 96 makes it plain that the Lord preserves these faculties of freedom and rationality "inviolate." So what the heading says essentially is that it is a law of the Divine Providence that man shall act from freedom in accordance with reason.


He does so act.
     Similarly, "man should not be compelled by external means to think and will . . . the things of religion" sounds as if external compulsion is wrong. But No. 136:2 tells us that the internal that man has in common with animals can and should be compelled by external things such as threats and punishments, but the human internal cannot be compelled. So essentially that heading says that it is a law of the Divine Providence that man is not compelled by external means to think and will the things of religion.
     No. 70 even warns us: the laws of the Divine Providence are "now to be revealed that what belongs to the Lord may be ascribed to Him and what does not belong to man may not be ascribed to any man." Yet through these many years we have been ascribing to man the guardianship of freedom when it rightly belongs to the Lord. This shows what a tremendous effect a particular translation of the Writings can have. The idea that we and not the Lord preserve freedom is deeply ingrained in the thought of the church. This has provided the foundation for misconceptions about "leaving people in freedom" and the very basis for Bishop Pendleton's "Notes on the Government of the Church."
     To quote Mrs. Doering on another subject: "I am also very much aware of the numerous warnings the Writings give against women preaching . . . ." I don't consider my article to constitute preaching any more than does her missionary pamphlet about the doctrines. Although I know of only one passage that mentions women preaching (Spiritual Diary 5936), I believe that the Writings do indirectly teach that women should not preach. However, let's make a distinction between preaching and writing about doctrinal teachings.
     There are passages that give a most interesting teaching regarding women and doctrine-that of a reversal in the roles of men and women. AC 8994 deals with the subject at length, but I will quote only part of it here:

     . . . it is according to Divine order that men should be in knowledges, but women solely in affections; and thus that women should not love themselves from knowledges but should love men; whence comes the conjugial. From this also it is that it was said by the ancients that women should be silent in the church . . . . But be it known that the case is so with those who are of the Lord's spiritual kingdom, but the other way about with those who are of His celestial kingdom. In the latter kingdom husbands are in affection but wives in the knowledges of good and truth. From this comes the conjugial with these.


     AC 4434 reveals that this reversal is reflected in what they do:

     In the spiritual church the wife represents good and the man represents truth, but in the celestial church the husband represents good and the wife truth; and what is a mystery-they not only represent but also in all their activities correspond to them.

Some of the other numbers dealing with this subject are AC 4823, 4843 and 9942:3.
     I will mention only briefly how I think this idea relates to the New Church. From the Most Ancient church, characterized as celestial, mankind spiritually declined through the Ancient (a spiritual) church, to the Jewish and Israelitish churches (which were natural). Then the Lord, through His two comings, established the Christian church (a spiritual church), and finally the New Church, the crown of them all. By the Writings' promise that love truly conjugial would be re-established after the second advent (see CL 81e and De Conj. 7 in PTW II), the true New Church is characterized as celestial.
     It is interesting that the passages mention that it is wives (uxores), not women, who are in the knowledges of good and truth. My own interest in the doctrines developed from my husband's understanding of them and our discussions together about them. Since I have the time and the love for doing research, I have written articles, but each one has resulted from the interaction of our thoughts and ideas.
     If wives in the celestial church are interested in the knowledges of good and truth, does this imply that they could become ministers? The Writings indicate the answer indirectly: no one in the celestial kingdom (the celestial church in heaven) preaches, but preachers come to them from the spiritual kingdom (HH 225) or from an intermediate society (De Verbo iii:3 in PTW I). I am wholeheartedly opposed to women preaching, in the New Church or otherwise.
     Does it follow from the reversal of roles that wives who enjoy studying doctrine are celestial:, Certainly not, any more than that all ministers are spiritual. But what it does tell us is that it is not disorderly (or a "permission" as some have called it!) for a wife to have a love for studying the Writings. Through the years, that teaching has sustained me in the belief that my love of research is orderly. Thanks to Mrs. Doering and others for providing the incentive to do some enjoyable "Mary" work. Now back to my "Martha" responsibilities, which I also enjoy.
          Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania



REVIEW       ERIK SANDSTROM       1982

Den Gudomliga Forsynen, new translation from the Latin by Rev. Bjorn A. H. Boyesen. Published by Skandinaviska Swedenborgs sallska pet, 1981, 588 pages.

     You meet a person and get a first impression of him from his facial expression, the way he dresses, and his posture and manners. When he begins to talk you know him better. The new translation of Divine Providence into Swedish has a very pleasing dress and facial expression and looks dignified. The binding is red cloth with gold print, and the paper is rich and thick, making the volume look bigger than one familiar with the "DP" paperback pocket edition would have expected. Even the dust jacket is nicely designed with only a pillar as decoration, and a good summary of the contents of the book on the back. A thumbnail introduction to Swedenborg the statesman, the philosopher and theologian, and a few quotes from famous personalities (including Strindberg's "he has answered all my questions, however difficult they seemed to be") round off the first impression of the would-be reader.
     The new translation replaces one made in 1911 by postmaster T. Holm, a faithful member of the Stockholm society whom the present reviewer well remembers from my childhood years. Mr. Holm's rendering was of necessity couched in old Swedish phraseology and outdated spelling. It also consistently had "God's Providence" rather than the "Divine Providence," and so unwittingly associated with the traditional view of a secret providence from a supreme but unknowable God.
     All that is changed in Mr. Boyesen's version. The language is modern, and the spelling is. For example in the 'old days' the written language (hardly ever the spoken language!) called for different verb forms in the singular and the plural ('jag sitter-vi sitta' for I sit-we sit); but that fell by the wayside after the second world war or thereabouts, and so in the new translation all verb forms are the same.
     Also there is now a special attempt to render difficult words like apparentia, jucundum, and proprium into understandable Swedish equivalents. This is an important step forward. Apparentia for example consistently turned up as 'skenbarhet' in the former translation, although 'skenbarhet' has the force of 'false appearance,' leaving all the genuine appearances to fend for themselves beyond the reach of the reader. As for jucundum Mr. Boyesen found phrases like 'gladjefornimmelse' for the good 'jucundum' and 'lustfornimmelse' for the bad variety (perception of joy, perception of lust respectively).


Proprium, almost untranslatable, is simply carried over into Swedish. These and some other problems are discussed in a careful preface, and the reader can then launch into the volume with some unnecessary obstacles removed.
     While Mr. Boyesen has obviously and I think nearly always successfully striven for accuracy I nevertheless found a few instances where the Latin and the Swedish do not seem to match fully. The beautiful doctrine in no. 27:V, containing that special concept of apparentia (here in the verb form appareat), seems to come through obscurely in its Swedish form. I think the clause eo distinctius appareat sibi quod sit suus simply means "desto tydligare synes hon vara sin egen" (the more distinctly he appears to himself to be his own), rather than "desto tydligare framgar det for henne att hon ar sin egen" (the moreclearly it stands forth to him that he is his own). Nor was I happy with Swedenborg "trying" to explain a matter, when the Latin simply has volo id . . . evolvere (I will . . . unfold this). But these are exceptions. Accuracy is the rule.
     I think Mr. Boyesen and Skandinaviska Swedenborgssallskapet are to be congratulated on this first fruit of a long-ranging plan to put one work of the Writings after another into updated and readable Swedish, and good wishes and happy expectations will accompany any further progress on the way.

NEWS FROM BENADE       R.R.G       1982

     Betrothals and Freedom

     It's surprising how often Bishop Benade seemed to be discussing or dealing with matters-over 100 years ago-which occupy our attention and our church journals today. One of those new-old topics was betrothal: how long a time should elapse between it and marriage. We tune in to Benade as he writes Walter C. Childs, who, in 1879, is about to be married to a pretty New Church girl named Edith Smith in far-off San Francisco:

     . . . in the matter of betrothals, I am entirely with you in thinking that they had better not be entered into if the time of marriage is set very far off. But this is an opinion and a judgment nothing more. We have no doctrine on this point that I know of . . . . As you say, it is an act in regard to which "the parties are to be directed by their common sense," i.e., it is a matter of individual judgment.


     Benade then expatiates at some length on "the great and fundamental principle of freedom in thought and action." He continues: "As New Churchmen it is our duty to learn and to teach the truths given of the Lord in the doctrines drawn from the Word. To learn them well we need to speak of them with others, to discuss them, to have them increased in our minds and purified from the falsities" with which they may be mixed in our minds. And so in our society a general and common judgment will shape itself in regard to matters of common concern. But, Benade warns,

     We cannot determine for each individual . . . How . . . he shall apply the doctrine . . . . We may advise and counsel, if he is open to and desires advice and counsel, but we may not direct him to do this and to leave that undone. Even counsel and advice . . . should never, with adults, be pushed to the extremity of such direction. If it be, it will tend to destroy liberty and rationality, and to prevent the growth and development of the true spiritual life.
     We all believe that betrothals are of Divine order. . .and that it is best not to enter into them if there be the prospect of an indefinite postponement of the . . marriage . . . . But in no wise can we be justified in imposing our judgment upon others . . . . Neither we nor our friends . . . know anything of the future.
     . . . And yet, many of these objections bear with equal force against an understood engagement or against an actually existing attachment between young people. In the N. C. such an attachment should not be allowed to exist without the ultimate end and purpose of marriage. If a betrothal is entered into on either part with any idea of binding the other by solemn promises, and not with the sole idea and purpose of fulfilling a state of love, and resting it on a permanent basis, . . . to represent its eternity, it is of course wrong . . . . I would sum up thus: Betrothals are according to Divine order; in our judgment it is not wise, nor for the best, that they should take place at a time long anterior to the probable period of marriage. This is all that we have a right to say. . . .

     (W. H. Benade, Paris, to Walter C. Childs, San Francisco, Feb. 6, 1879)
     Is there a slight contradiction herein? The individual must be free, but-"such an attachment should not be allowed to exist. . . ." Benade often speaks of prizing his neighbor's freedom, but that is not what he is famous for.
Title Unspecified 1982

Title Unspecified              1982

     The state of betrothal may be likened to the state of spring before summer. Conjugial Love 301


Church News 1982

Church News       Various       1982


     On certain especially clear evenings in La Crescenta, usually after a rain has washed the haze from the air, the city lights of Pasadena, Glendale and Los Angeles spread like a carpet of jewels below the Gabriel Church. Sometimes the eye can follow their glitter all the way to Long Beach and the Pacific Ocean, some forty miles distant.
     On such evenings, the sky may shine with as many stars as one expects to see only in the Mojave Desert, an hour's drive over the San Gabriel mountains to the north. If there is a moon, the snow on the mountains will show with a ghostly hue.
     A person thus venturing to the edge of the parking lot can, by looking to the east and south, gaze on both at once, as the Gabriel Church is located at almost three thousand feet elevation, midway between these twin splendors of city and sky. Sometimes nothing more than a light sweater is required for warmth.
     The September evening that Rev. Michael Gladish, with his family, arrived from Australia to assume the pastoral leadership of the Los Angeles society was not such a night.
     It was smoggy.
     The dust of a long rainless summer covered everything. It covered the ivy, nearly dead because the automatic sprinkler system was broken. It covered the juniper trees that had grown to almost hide the church building from the road. It lay on the bulbless light fixtures above the parking lot. It coated the pews in the church building, which had been built to seat 250, but which all too often had held fewer than twenty for Sunday morning worship.
     Reverend Gladish, wife Virginia Mike and Ginny--and their five children were met at the airport by Ray David, one of the few members of the society with a vehicle large enough to transport a family of seven and their luggage. A one-hour drive brought the Gladish family to the attractive three-bedroom home rented for them in Altadena (30 minutes from the church) by Greta and John Davidson. Anika, Brett, Charity, and Dar Gladish tumbled out of Ray's Volkswagen to inspect their new home; Evangeline stared from Ginny's arms.
     Since the Gladish family had decided to sell everything in Australia, they had to begin anew to furnish their home. They became familiar faces at neighborhood garage sales. Jerry Jensen helped them find two used cars in the local classified ads. Shirley Jensen and Diane Davis loaned them sheets, towels and pillowcases while theirs were still in transit.
     Michael visited his new church. The first two times he went to work, he drove right past the church building, not recognizing it behind the circle of juniper trees that had grown up around it. The sign had been partially covered over with weeds. He inspected the grounds. He found the exterior of the church and Sunday school buildings had a fresh coat of paint, applied during a series of work parties organized by Fred Fiedler. He also saw the ivy, the light fixtures and the dusty pews. He went to work.
     Michael met the following Sunday with the Board of Trustees of the Los Angeles society. He got authorization to order minor repairs to the building and grounds. He needed a desk and a typewriter. The church should purchase a mimeograph machine to decrease the cost of producing the Trumpet, the society newsletter. Could we get bulk rate for the postage? (It turned out we could and now do.) A copying machine was needed. (Later one was donated by Rob Stitt.)


The cross in front of the church needed painting, so a work party was organized. Gaylor Smith volunteered the loan of a truck with a crane to reach the top of the cross. A plumber was called to come repair the sprinklers. Light bulbs were purchased for the parking lot. The weeds in front of the sign were pulled out.
     Summer turned to autumn. The Sunday school committee purchased a sound film projector with monies from the David Campbell Memorial Fund. The Rev. Douglas Taylor paid a visit, giving a class on evangelism. Howard Brewer assumed the office of society treasurer, relieving Brian Blair who had been given increased responsibilities in his work at the Burroughs company. Bob and Janet Brown had their third child; Bergen and Mary Jane Junge announced expectations of their fourth. Mrs. Charles Robbins (Patricia Edmonds) was unexpectedly called to the spiritual world. In the Sunday morning worship services, the strains of the organ music, provided on alternate Sundays by Shirley Jensen and Ruth Zuber, were being matched by the strains of new voices in the congregation.
     Christmas festival was preceded by two classes on the internal sense of the Christmas story. For the Christmas festival service Gabrielle Echols organized and directed a Christmas play with spoken lines: theater, not tableaux! Linda Scalbom and Gabrielle designed the stage and sets. The cast included M'lissa Mayo and Walter Weiss as Mary and Joseph and Martin Echols as the angel Gabriel.
     On the Sunday following Christmas, Rev. Jan Weiss, now residing in the Los Angeles area, delivered a wonderfully affectional sermon followed by a Holy Supper. He gave a second service three weeks later when Michael traveled to visit the San Francisco circle, three hundred miles to the north. Rev. Weiss has also become interested in remodeling the chancel and is enthusiastically involved in a committee looking into the matter.
     At the annual society meeting, held in early January, Michael reviewed his first four months in Los Angeles. He spoke optimistically about the state of the Los Angeles society. He urged us to work hard and give all we could, but he cautioned us not to volunteer for church uses beyond the point where we could perform those uses well. He then reviewed society growth over the past year. Now everyone knew, as their eyes could see, that our numbers had grown, and they also knew that true spiritual growth had nothing to do with mere numbers. Still, it was a happy surprise to learn that the average attendance for Sunday morning worship for the last four months of 1981 was the highest ever recorded since the Los Angeles society acquired the present church building thirteen years ago. (Oh, there are still vacant pews: so all you New Church folk considering a move to southern California can still get a seat. But don't tarry.)
     After the meeting, the Board of Trustees met briefly to elect officers and welcome new member Bob Davis. Michael asked if he could begin cutting down the line of juniper trees that hid us from the neighboring community. The board agreed; Gaylor Smith volunteered his power saw. (Michael didn't wait for Gaylor's power saw; he used his hand saw, and in a few days they were gone.)
     The day following the society meeting, a light rain fell washing away, as it were, the haze that coated the valley below. A full moon rose over the mountains and a warm breeze blew from the east, as evening fell and the city lights below spread like a carpet of jewels to the sea.
          Altadena, California






Sept. 7 Tue.      Faculty Meetings
                Dormitory students arrive (Secondary School students before 7:30 p.m.)
                Registration of Secondary School local students
     Wed.           Registration of Secondary School dormitory students
               8:00 a.m.-12:00 noon: Registration of all Theological School and College students
                2:00 p.m. College Orientation for all new students
                3:30 p.m. College Orientation for foreign students
                8:00 p.m. Opening Convocation for all College students
     Thu.           Fall Term begins in Secondary Schools following Opening Exercises
                8:05 a.m. College classes begin
                1:00 p.m. All student workers report to respective supervisors or to Benade Hall Auditorium (see notice in dormitories and schools for assignments and locations)
Oct. 15 Fri.      Charter Day:
                    8:30 a.m. Annual Meeting of ANC Corporation (Pitcairn Hall)
                    11:00 a.m. Charter Day Service (Cathedral)
                    9:00 p.m. President's Reception (Field House)
16 Sat.           7:00 p.m. Charter Day Banquet (Field House)

Nov. 17-19 Wed.-Fri.     College Registration for Winter Term
24 Wed.           Fall Term ends and Thanksgiving Recess begins in all schools after exams and scheduled student work*
28 Sun.           Secondary Schools dormitory students return by 8:00 p.m.
29 Mon.           Winter Term begins in Secondary Schools

Dec. 6 Mon.      Winter Term begins in College
17 Fri.           Christmas Recess begins for all schools after completion of regularly scheduled classes and student work*


Jan. 2 Sun.      Dormitory students return (Secondary Schools by 8:00 p.m.)
3 Mon.           Classes resume in all schools
Feb. 21 Mon.      Presidents' Birthday Observance
Mar. 24 Wed.-Fri. College Registration for Spring Term
10 Thu.           College Winter Term ends*
11 Fri.           Secondary Schools Winter Term ends. Spring Recess begins for Secondary Schools after scheduled exams and student work*
15 Mon.           1983-1984 Preliminary Secondary Schools Applications due
20 Sun.           Dormitory students return (Secondary Schools by 8:00 p.m.)
21 Mon.           Spring Term begins in all schools
Apr. 1 Fri.      Good Friday Holiday
15 Fri.           Deadline for College applications
May 6 Fri.           7:45 p.m. Joint Meeting of Faculty and Corporation (Assembly Hall)
7 Sat.           Semi-Annual Meeting of Academy Corporation (Pitcairn Hall)
30 Mon.           Memorial Day Holiday
June 9 Thu.      Spring Term ends
               10 Fri. 8:30 p.m. Graduation Dance (Field House)
               11 Sat. 9:30 a.m. Commencement (Field House)

     * See Catalog or Handbook for holiday regulations





     The following ministerial placements have been effected:

     Rev, Ragnar Boyesen-Pastor of the Le Roi Church, Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania, effective July 1, 1982
     Rev. J. Clark Echols-Visiting Pastor to the Central Western District, resident in Denver, Colorado, effective July 1, 1982
     Rev. Roy Franson-Pastor of the Stockholm Society, Stockholm, Sweden, effective July 1, 1982
     Rev. Allison L. Nicholson Pastor of the Bath Society of the New Jerusalem Church, Bath, Maine, effective July 1, 1982
     Rev. Frank S. Rose-Minister of the Tucson Circle and the Phoenix Circle, resident in Tucson, Arizona, effective July 1, 1982
     Rev. Patrick A. Rose-Teacher in the Academy of the New Church, Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, effective July 1, 1982
     Rev. Kenneth O. Stroh-Acting Pastor of the Colchester Society, resident in Colchester, England, effective July 1, 1982
     Rev. Louis D. Synnestvedt Assistant Pastor of the Olivet Church, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, effective July 1, 1982

     Candidates (pending ordination):

     Michael K. Cowley-Assistant to the Pastor of the Immanuel Church, Glenview, Illinois, effective July 1, 1982
     Nathan D. Gladish-Resident Assistant to the Pastor of the Atlanta Society, Atlanta, Georgia, effective July 1, 1982
     Jeremy F. Simons-Assistant to the Pastor of the Kempton Society, Kempton, Pennsylvania, effective July 1, 1982
     James P. Cooper-Assistant to the Principal of the Bryn Athyn Church Elementary School, and Assistant to the Pastor of the Bryn Athyn Church, Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, effective July 1, 1982



NINETEENTH OF JUNE              1982

May we suggest the following:
THE APOCALYPSE, Parts I and 11                         $2.15
These worship talks, by Bishop George de Charms, are particularly appropriate in preparing families to celebrate the Nineteenth of June. The Apocalypse is of special significance and should be of special delight to the New Church.

     NINETEENTH OF JUNE                               $1.15
These talks by different ministers have been collected in the hope that the variety of presentation will help to show the true nature of this great spiritual event-the Second Coming of the Lord.

     JOHN IN THE ISLE OF PATMOS                     $3.35
Here are presented stories of the Apocalypse, carefully prepared and made acceptable for the minds of children. The first 16 stories describe the judgment that took place in the spiritual world at the time of the Lord's Second Coming. The last 12 stories describe how the Lord would establish a New Church among men in the natural world.

     Also available are Flannel Figures depicting the joy and delight felt by the angels in heaven at the time of the Second Coming.                     $1.60

By Samuel Warren                                   $6.00
The full topical index and index of references to the Writings make this the one most valuable and useful book to give the student embarking upon a college career.

GENERAL CHURCH BOOK CENTER                    
Hours: 9 to 12
Monday thru Friday
Phone: (215) 947-3920


Title Unspecified 1982

Title Unspecified       Editor       1982

Vol. CII     June, 1982     No. 6


     The shunning of evils as sins may be regarded as a definition of the Christian religion itself-hence the theme of the sermon this month by the pastor of the Kempton society. We are pleased to present the second in an outstanding series of articles by Rev. Geoffrey S. Childs.
     In the year 1906 the subject of the gender of plants was the subject of a lively discussion in this magazine. Now Dr. Norman Berridge of England offers some more reflections.
     We invite your attention to the May-June issue of New Church Home with its tribute to Rev. B. David Holm, who died on April 20th (see page 273). We will speak of Mr. Holm in the next issue.
     These notes are cut short to make room for the following announcements.



     Mr. Leonard E. Gyllenhaal has been elected to serve as Vice President and Development Officer of the Academy of the New Church and Development Officer of the General Church of the New Jerusalem, beginning September 1, 1982.
     Mr. Neil M. Buss has been elected to serve as Treasurer of the Academy of the New Church and the General Church of the New Jerusalem, effective September 1, 1982. It should be noted that Mr. Buss has been elected to the Corporation of the Academy of the New Church.
     Mr. Nathan Gladish has been appointed by the bishop to serve as an instructor of Religion in the secondary schools of the Academy of the New Church, delaying for one year his assignment as assistant to the pastor of the Atlanta society and traveling minister to the southeastern district, effective July 1, 1982.

ORDINATION              1982

     Odhner-At Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, May 9, 1982, Rev. Grant H. Odhner into the second degree of the priesthood, Rt. Rev. Louis B. King officiating.




     "Wash you, make you clean. Put away the evil of your doings from before mine eyes. Cease to do evil, learn to do well" (Is. 1:16).

     In the sense of the letter of the Word the truth is usually hidden behind a heavy veil of appearances, often quite contrary to the genuine doctrine. But here and there the light of the internal sense shines through and manifests itself in clear statements of genuine truth.
     Our text today is a very good example of such a pinpoint of light in the general darkness of the letter: "Cease to do evil, learn to do well." Not that these two teachings, regarded individually, are exceptional departures from the general message of the literal sense. Denunciations of evil and exhortations to do what is good in the eyes of the Lord are so frequent and emphatic that even the most casual reader of the Old and New Testaments would be fully aware of this. It is the ordering or sequence of the two teachings that makes the statement so remarkable and significant, for herein do we see reflected the oft-repeated teaching of the Writings: that the good that a man does is not genuine good unless he shuns evils as sins against God; and, as we are also taught in AE 979:2-

When a man shuns evils as sins, he then daily learns what a good work is, and the love of doing good and the love of knowing truths, for the sake of good grows with him.

     Doing good from love and with delight is the end; but to enter into this state man must resist and reject the efforts of the hells to lead him astray. This is where the choice is made. This is how man opens the door and welcomes the Lord into his heart and mind-which is why the Writings also teach that shunning evils as sins is the Christian religion itself.
     It is thus of the greatest importance not merely to know that it is so and that it ought to be done, but also to clarify and infill our idea of what is actually involved, or how we properly do it.
     The first idea that often comes to mind on hearing the words "shunning evils" is simply to abstain from committing the acts that are condemned in the ten commandments.


This is perfectly true, of course, in the sense that without such an effort the life or piety would be but an empty shell. Yet, we are also taught that merely to abstain from evil in act is of no effect in itself.
     The man who abstains from evil on the basis of mere civil and moral considerations gains nothing of lasting value thereby. He may reject murder, adultery, theft, and dishonesty as injurious to the order, peace, and happiness of the society in which he lives, and thus, in the final analysis, as injurious to himself; and he may even live according to his convictions. Yet, if his motivation is purely on the civil and moral plane, his internals will remain unchanged. He certainly is more prudent than the man who blindly follows the dictates of his lusts, with no concern for future consequences, and he is unquestionably a useful member of society; but the fact is nevertheless, that, far from being removed, his evil lusts are merely hidden behind a veil of external propriety.
     This does not mean, of course, that such a man is beyond salvation. If there is some sincerity in his motives-external as they are-this may serve to keep the door ajar, so that he may be instructed and convinced in the other life. But meanwhile he can, at best, be preserved in a state of potential receptivity without any real spiritual change or growth.
     If the shunning of evil is to be of internal benefit it must be done from a knowledge and acknowledgment that these things are contrary to eternal Divine laws, and not merely opposed to civil order and moral conventions. Only then do we combat from the Lord as of self, rather than of self from worldly and pragmatic considerations.
     But the shunning of evils involves more than abstaining from them from faith in the Lord and His Word. Surely, this is the state of obedience which introduces man into the church and into the presence of the Lord. But for man of enter more fully and interiorly into the church-to be purified and made whole-something more is required, as is also indicated in the following teaching from AR 49:

The natural man is purified whilst he is fleeing from the evil things that the spiritual or internal man sees to be evil.

     The nature of this spiritual sight, which is so essential to the regeneration or healing of man, is further elucidated by the teaching from DP 296 concerning the means of separation and purification from evils:


The means are chiefly the delights of meditation, thought, and reflection for the attainment of certain ends which are uses.

     Meditation or reflection, resting upon the solid foundation of a life of external charity and use, is the key that opens the higher reaches of the mind, so that the light of heaven may inflow, exposing the interior evils, as they really are, to the sight of the internal man.
     Reading the Word, learning truth, and shunning evil in externals without ever reflecting is really going through the motions of living without being fully and consciously alive.
     That way man may know about the truth; but he cannot really know it. He may know about the Lord, but he does not know Him; and he may shun evils outside of himself, but not within himself.
     Man's belief or disbelief in life after death profoundly affects his outlook and the quality of his life; but it also makes a tremendous difference how he believes in life after death: Is his idea a clear or an obscure one? Is it real or remote?
     A man who does not reflect upon spiritual things may very well believe in the existence of the spiritual world and life after death. But his awareness-his conscious life-is anchored in the things of the external world. His idea of the spiritual reality is as of something far away, something that awaits him after death. In other words: his idea is steeped in the appearances of space and time, and this again affects his attitude toward evil.
     If he is sincere and has gained some experience in life, he has certainly seen the ugliness of evil in act as well as the sadness and suffering it causes, and he is capable of regarding it with aversion and even of feeling horror at the thought of committing such acts; and if he stumbles and falls in a state of momentary weakness, he will be genuinely repentant. From his knowledge of doctrine he also combats evil thoughts and lusts; but not with the same feeling of aversion and horror, because the vision of the internal man is obscured by the appearances of the world.
     This is indeed something most of us know from experience. We may shudder at the thought of taking someone's life, causing him bodily harm, or even hurting his feelings; and yet we often catch ourselves nurturing states of anger and resentment, hiding them and keeping them under restraint, but only sending them back where they came from with great difficulty and perhaps even reluctance.
     We may find it unthinkable that we would ever commit an act of theft, but how easily feelings of envy can insinuate themselves and gnaw away at our interiors, unnoticed and unopposed.


     To the man whose awareness is focused on life in this world, thoughts and affections seem less real than words and deeds, but the fact is that on the spiritual plane evil lusts are as concrete and deadly as are the corresponding acts on the natural plane, and perhaps even more so, as they are more interior and thus part of a higher reality. And it is also a fact that until we are able to reject such lusts with the same aversion and horror with which we turn away from their ultimations in act, we are not fully shunning evil and cannot be purified.
     It is only by developing a profound and lasting awareness of ourselves as essentially spiritual beings and of the reality of the spiritual world, not as a remote something awaiting us after death but as part of our here and now, that we can begin to see the real consequences and ugliness of interior evil and thence reject it wholeheartedly.
     This raising of our consciousness or awareness above the appearances of life in the world can only be accomplished through reflection from and upon spiritual truths and principles. Or as it is taught in AC 6201 concerning sensuous spirits who excite evil lusts in man:

For man to be removed from such spirits he must think about eternal life.

This is why the words of our text: "Cease to do evil, learn to do well" is followed by an exhortation and a promise:

Come now and let us reason together, saith the Lord. Though your sins be as scarlet, they shall be white as snow. Though they be red as crimson, they shall be as wool.

     This is more than just a general promise of salvation to the man who abstains from evil. It is rather a statement concerning that state of reflection which should accompany the shunning of evil in act, and the consequent purification, or as we are also taught in TCR 659:

     Thought has a purifying and purging effect upon hereditary evil.

     Reasoning together with the Lord is-we may say-to reflect or meditate from the Lord upon His wise and loving care for us; to reflect from the Word upon the Word; to increasingly realize how individual and intimate our relationship with the Lord really is; and to see more and more clearly the real nature and purposes of life.


That is how we gradually develop a constant and living awareness of the closeness and reality of the spiritual realm, and of ourselves as citizens of that realm first and foremost.
     Surely this is not something we can achieve overnight, and it does not come all by itself. Conscious effort and regular practice is necessary, as with an infant when he gradually learns to stand erect and then finally walks.
     Neither is the environment in which we live conducive to such reflection or elevation of the mind. External demands on our time, attention, and energy distract and exhaust our minds, presenting obstacles that often seem insurmountable.
     But if we honestly assess the routine or pattern of our daily life it will become evident that it is possible to find the time to detach our minds from the worldly and corporeal things and turn our thoughts to higher and eternal ones. Not every day perhaps, or not for too long, but it is not impossible, and it is most essential for our spiritual development.
     As we strive to do this the Lord can fully conjoin Himself with us, dispersing our fallacies and imbuing our understanding with a genuine vision of the truth as bright and brilliant as snow, purifying our loves from base desires, infilling them with an innocence as pure and soft as fine wool, and turning fallen man from a dragon into a lamb.
     As individuals and as a flock we must be a reading church and an active church, combating external evils and performing our uses faithfully. But we must also be a reflecting or meditating church, for without this the other things have no lasting effect.
     It is our lot during life on earth to live and move in the lowlands and valleys; but we must not become so immersed in the external activities, demands, and cares that we forget to lift our eyes to the mountains of the Lord's heavenly kingdom, for that is our true home; that is from whence our help comes: the power to reject evils in internals as well as externals or, as we are taught in AC 6953:

When the sensual is elevated toward the interiors, power is communicated from the Divine.

     Thus, and only thus, can we fully enter into the joy, peace and security of the New Jerusalem where the Lord Himself will preserve our going out and our coming in for ever and ever. Amen.

     LESSONS: Isaiah 1:2-31; Psalm 121; Doctrine of the Lord 18, 19, 21.



HAPPINESS       Rev. BRIAN KEITH       1982


     Has anyone ever told you that his goal in life is to be unhappy? Or have you ever woken up and said to yourself, "Today I will do my best to be sad"? Of course not! Everybody wants to be happy. Nobody wants to be miserable. While a person may act in such a way that unhappiness results, it was not his conscious intention to do so. This desire for happiness is a universal and a strong motivator for many of our decisions. One of the primary lures of adulthood is the happiness one would have without others telling you what to do or where to go. Often job decisions are made with the desire to be happy in mind. "I would be so happy if I became a rich doctor or businessman" (usually with the emphasis upon the word "rich"!). And we also make some spiritual decisions on the basis of happiness. Does hell sound like a fun place? If we want true happiness we had better go to heaven.
     This desire to be happy is said to be the first motive in regeneration (see AC 3816:2). It is a beginning stage because we look at the surface happiness that we would like to have, and we then begin working toward it. Now there is no reason to be ashamed of these desires. The Lord wants us to want to be happy, for that is how He can improve us. Imagine if heaven did not sound like a pleasant place, or hell did not sound so bad. How hard would we work to go to heaven, or to avoid hell? Because we have some concept of happiness in the present, we can be encouraged to improve. Even if we have selfish desires, our pursuit of happiness is something the Lord can work with, as He leads us to rationality and goodness.
     Yet there is always the danger that we might mistake an external, temporary delight for genuine happiness. Consider people's ideas of heaven described in the beginning of Conjugial Love. Many believed heavenly happiness to consist in feasting and conversation, power and perpetual worship. It was not too long before they discovered that these things were but external delights, and that lasting happiness was derived from a different source.


The warning here is that we should not be too dogmatic about deciding that our current delights are one and the same with eternal happiness.
     But the Lord really does want us to be happy. He did not create us to laugh at our follies, or take delight in our shortcomings. This earthly life is not a test to prove that we deserve heaven. We are all born so that we could be happy. This is the very nature of His love; it breathes forth happiness (see TCR 43:3). He wants to give Himself to all (see AC 6478). He wants us to be in His image and likeness so that we know His joy (see AC 3539:4). All the commandments and teachings of the Word look to this end. "These things have I spoken unto you, that My joy might remain in you, and that your joy might be full" (John 15: 11). It is an end of creation not that we suffer or experience pain, but that we be affected with mutual love and "so be happy" (AC 1388e; Can. vii). The Lord would never allow a single human life to exist if it were not His intention that it live to eternity in a happy state. The Lord does not expect a certain percentage of people to go to hell, although He knows it may happen. Each one here, and throughout the universe, was born that he or she might know genuine, eternal happiness (see DP 324:6; AC 4320).
     And this is so important, for the Lord always has an eternal view before Him. His providence does not look to temporary ends or purposes, except to the extent that they support His eternal goals (see AC 6481, 10409:3). The stream of providence leads all to heaven, yet, as we know so well, there are numerous sharp curves and obstructions that we seem to bump into as we make our natural and spiritual journeys (see AC 8478:4, 8480:3, 8717:3). Sometimes we are simply not going to be happy. Sometimes other people or events will do things to us that prevent us from sensing joy. And sometimes we will do stupid things that prevent the Lord from giving us what He would like to. Also, we often do not feel happy because we are so caught up with worldly worries that spiritual delights cannot break through into our conscious minds. In the early stages of regeneration there is not much exciting about loving the neighbor, and yet we are taught to do it so that we can know its joy later on. Although the Lord has the goal of happiness for us all, there will be times when we are not happy, or times when we cannot feel the joy that the Lord wants to give us (see AC 3938:7, 9648e, 10722; DP 41).
     But this does not mean that our desire to be happy is meant to be frustrated because it is merely selfish. It takes time for us to learn how to be genuinely happy. And where does this happiness come from? The Writings give a simple answer: "in use, from use, and according to use" (AC 454, 7038).


We can know happiness to the extent that we put selfish and worldly concerns in a secondary place, and elevate care for the neighbor. Happiness results when we do not worry about ourselves or our possessions. When we can forget ourselves and think of others, then we are able to know peace and happiness. This is what use is all about. What we do for those with whom we live and with whom we interact is our use: it is our impact upon them. And as we are drawn out of ourselves, then obstacles that would block our joy can be removed by the Lord. As the doctrines teach: "heaven and the joy of heaven first begin in man when his regard to self in the uses which he performs dies out" (AC 5511:2).
     The eternal joy of heaven can then first begin because an inner feeling of serenity or calm exists (see AC 2780, 5662:3, 8455:2, 8722:2; HH 268e). If we are agitated or upset, good feelings cannot be conscious with us. It is when we stop being concerned for our future, our past, or our present that we can place some confidence in the Lord, knowing that He is in charge, He will care for us. Then we can know happiness, for the inner peace allows the Lord to be present. "In Thy presence is fulness of joy" (Psalm 16:9). Selfless trust in the Lord breeds peace and joy. "Let all those that put their trust in Thee rejoice; let them ever shout for joy" (Psalm 5:11).
     Is not this the state of the angels in heaven? We are taught that heaven is so full of joy "that regarded in itself is nothing else than blessedness and delight" (HH 397). The happiness of the angels is so great that it is indescribable (see DP 39; HH 409). What we know of joy on earth is but the slightest image of what the Lord intends us to have to eternity. The angels then inmostly feel happiness (see Love xx; HH 409). They are said to have no other possession than the happiness of life from what is good and true (see AC 5135:5). And "the happiest are they who desire others to be the most happy, and themselves the least so" (AC 2654:5, 1936:4, 3887; SD 2935). This is one of the reasons that they can experience such joy-they wish it for others and not for themselves. Indeed, the more they acknowledge that there is nothing of joy from themselves, the more happiness they perceive (see AC 1153:2). This is because they then do not seek to be happy. Happiness comes to them because they seek to give it to others.
     This is the very nature of love and its happiness. It cannot exist isolated. It cannot be shut up in one individual, or limited to a small number. The Lord created the heavens so that they could be continually increased. As they are not limited in membership, so the joy that comes from the Lord is meant to be spread throughout the human race.


In heaven the delight that the angels feel is not because they are a privileged minority, but because they can communicate with others (see AC 2057). They welcome newcomers because as the numbers increase so can the harmony, and so can the expansion of their happiness (see AC 2130:2; SD 359). For they are not happy if they remain alone. The nature of love and use is that it wants to affect other people. If it remains within one individual it is, as the Writings say, like "food stored up in the stomach which is not distributed for nourishment of the body and its parts, but remains an undigested mass from which comes nausea" (CL 266:3). Joy that is not shared is not true joy. This is one of the reasons it is so hard to keep happy news, such as engagements, a secret. When we hear such joyous news we feel compelled to tell others, so that they also might be touched with that joy.
     And so the picture of heaven is one of each angel seeking to reach out to others, bringing them happiness. And this giving to others is total. They want to give everything they have and retain nothing for themselves (see AC 6478). Their intent is to "transfer their happiness to others" (see AC 1392). No loss ever takes place, for the wonder of the Lord and His creation is that when one loves so well, much more flows in than is ever given out (see AC 6478). Since each angel is so giving, each one also then receives what many others share. A multiplication takes place, with each angel becoming a center of happiness (see AG 549, 2057:2, 6388:2, 10723; HH 268; SD 4593). As each angel shares his joy, he opens himself up to receive the greater joy of the entire community.
     This is the reason we are here today. We celebrate the creation of the Academy for it is a reflection of the Lord's love. The Academy was begun, and is faithfully continued, because the nature of love and its happiness demands that it be so. Years ago, those early New Churchmen could have rested content in the satisfaction they derived from the Heavenly Doctrines. But where there is true love and its happiness there must be a communication of it to others. This is the nature of the Lord, of the angels, and is also the nature of those who have been deeply affected by the New Church. And so the joy that was then known required that it be communicated to others. The academy exists as an act of love, a desire to give the happiness of the Lord to those we have the privilege to touch, our children and youth. This is not to say that a school system was commanded by the Lord to be created. There is no Arcana 4032 that says we must have church schools, or do missionary work. But where there is a spiritual affection for the truths of the New Church, we cannot do otherwise.


     A school, the Academy, was begun; and, as with all others that have since been started, it was seen as a requirement of the desire to share happiness with others. The Academy exists so that the goods and truths of the New Church can be communicated to others. In this, the Academy's fundamental purpose is religious. If what we primarily wanted was a fine educational institution so our children could be well instructed, the Academy would not exist. This school is not here so that we may take pride in our fine buildings, place students in fine colleges, or insure an income for some members of the church. We exist so that the happiness that has been known from the New Church can be shared with the youth, that they also might know this joy in their hearts.
     In this endeavor we may seem to be like many secular institutions, with apparently similar courses in the sciences, social studies, and the arts. Yet these courses are offered here so that natural and spiritual realities can be given at the same time, so that students may learn how to be useful in life. The distinguishing feature is often not the subject matter but the purpose for its presentation. A goal of all our education is to provide knowledges, both natural and spiritual, so that students can learn to distinguish eternal happiness from temporary delight. But even as good is primary, so our underlying purpose is to provide a setting in which the Lord can instill affections for heavenly life.
     Everything one learns can be directed to this end, and this is the hope and goal in our educational system. The Academy is a meeting ground, where truths seen by New Churchmen might be given to others who can make them their own in a special, individual way. The Academy's existence today is a testification of love shared and an acknowledgment of truth that needs to be communicated. It is a spreading of the joy known by some to the many who may appreciate it.
     And there is so much potential for the future of the Academy it is almost unbelievable. Here is an institution supported by the very nature of love. Here is a place where the goods and truths of the Lord may be shared with joy. Here is a place where heaven might be tasted, where each one can contribute his all, and then feel in the return the general happiness of all. Here is a place where people can learn true happiness. Here is a place where the Lord might be seen again, "and your heart shall rejoice, and your joy no man taketh from you" (John 16:22).




     A STUDY

     In Number 791 of the True Christian Religion we read:

After this work was finished, the Lord called together His twelve apostles who had followed Him in the world; and the next day He sent them all forth throughout the whole spiritual world to preach the gospel that the Lord God Jesus Christ reigns, whose kingdom shall be for ages of ages, according to the prediction in Daniel (7:13, 14), and in the Apocalypse (11:15). Also that "Blessed are those that come to the marriage supper of the Lamb" (Apocalypse 19:1). This took place on the 19th day of June, 1770. This is what is meant by the words of the Lord:
"He shall send His angels, and they shall gather together His elect, from the end of the heavens to the end thereof' (Matthew 24:31).

Such is the testimony of the Writings concerning what we have come to recognize as the birthday of the New Church on earth. The specific reference is to what happened in the spiritual world but it must have happened on earth at the same time because a specific date is given. The words "After this work was finished" refer to the completion of the first draft. Some months later, the draft that was submitted to the printer was completed, and in this draft we find the following statement in number 180:

Some months ago the twelve apostles were called together by the Lord, and were sent forth through the whole spiritual world as formerly they had been sent through the whole natural world with the command to preach this gospel. And to each apostle was assigned a particular province; and this command they are executing with great zeal and industry.

Why this added note was inserted at this point is a matter of conjecture. It is significant, however, that the subject being treated of in this number is the formation of a new Christian heaven by the
     We do not often reflect upon the long preparation the twelve apostles had to undergo before they were prepared to proclaim the gospel of the Lord's Second Coming. When they entered the spiritual world, at the end of the first generation of Christians, they carried with them a simple faith in the Lord as their God. But His Second Coming was no more than a Divine promise and a distant hope. They had no idea whatever as to what it would be like.


They came into the first beginnings of the Christian heaven, where they were reserved and protected by the Lord during seventeen centuries of steadily declining faith in the church they had been instrumental in establishing. Their preparation for the role they were to play in the spiritual world began in 1757, when Swedenborg first completed the writing of the Arcana Coelestia. This produced a profound effect in the world of spirits, and set on foot the Last Judgment upon the imaginary heavens there. Meanwhile the Christian Church on earth had fallen into increasing error. Its leaders became confused as to the relation between Jesus Christ and the Infinite Father. It could not be otherwise because the inhabitants of western Europe who received the New Testament Gospel were for the most part very simple men without intellectual learning. Their faith was not spiritual except in potency. It was based on a natural understanding of the Lord's teachings. They had a vague idea of a divinity within those teachings, but wherein this divinity lay they had no idea. Because they did not understand, they could be led astray by human interpretations of the Word. Of this the Lord had warned them, saying:

If any man shall say unto you, Lo, here is Christ, or there, believe it not. For there shall arise false Christs, and false prophets and shall show great signs and wonders; insomuch that if it were possible, they shall deceive the very elect. Behold I have told you before (Matt. 24:23-25).

     Many religious leaders arose proclaiming their human interpretations of the gospel as the very truth of God. Their followers divided the Christian Church into warring sects. When they died they carried these mistaken beliefs with them and established in the world of spirits what the Writings call "imaginary heavens." Here the simple were held bound by their confidence in their leaders. But when the Arcana Coelestia had been written, the simple in faith among them began to perceive the hypocrisy and self-seeking of those who had led them astray, and they rejected their leaders. This constituted the "Last Judgment" effected by the Lord. All who followed this new teaching from the Lord were gathered together into societies on the outskirts of the Christian heaven. Here they were instructed by the Lord Himself in the teachings of the Heavenly Doctrine, Among those to receive this Divine teaching were the twelve apostles. It is impossible to imagine what a tremendous change this new teaching must have effected in the minds of these simple Christians. It revolutionized their whole concept of what is meant by the glorification of the Lord's Human.


Concerning this they had previously had no idea whatever. They had no idea of the Lord's grievous temptations whereby He conquered the hells and held them under subjection to Himself. They had known Him only in states of glorification, when He performed miracles and taught with Divine authority and power. Now for the first time they witnessed the Last Judgment and the separation of the good from the evil. In consequence their whole concept of the Lord's life and work was completely changed. For the first time they began to glimpse the meaning of the gradual glorification of the Human, and its approach step by step toward eventual union with the Infinite Father. Even in the spiritual world this remarkable change could not take place instantly but only by gradual stages. It had to progress for thirteen years, from 1757 to 1770, before these twelve apostles could possibly be prepared to teach the gospel of the Lord's Second Coming. They had to be introduced into the marvels of the Heavenly Doctrine, and explore the mysteries of faith. They had to be introduced into the Laws of Order governing the creation of the universe, and the Laws of Order for the preservation of all things created. They had to learn how the two worlds are interrelated, the one being the world of causes and the other the world of effects. They had to learn all these things before they could even begin to teach them. They had to behold the Lord in His glorified Divine Human, and worship Him as the one God of heaven and earth. Only when the Lord so appeared to them as God-Man could they go forth to teach and preach in His name.
     That these twelve human beings were actually sent forth to proclaim the Second Advent of the Lord we cannot doubt. They had established during their life on earth the proclamation of the gospel as their life's love; and this love they took with them into the spiritual world. It was their whole life, not only on earth but also in the spiritual world. Nevertheless, the whole burden of transmitting or proclaiming the gospel throughout the vast heaven is an appalling thought. Such a personal concept is, after all, a natural idea which is inadequate to explain the inner truth concerning the advent of the Lord to all the heavens. We must remember the teaching that the twelve apostles "represent all the goods and truths of the church in a complex." It is the truths and goods of the Heavenly Doctrine that are to be spread through all the heavens. All who receive these truths and goods in faith and life become members of the New Christian Church on earth, and angels of the new Christian heaven after death. Everyone who so receives them is called upon to proclaim them openly, and so spread the "Good News" to others in both worlds.


This is what is meant by the Lord's words, "He shall send His angels, and they shall gather together His elect, from the end of the heavens to the end thereof' (Matt. 24:31). This means that in addition to the twelve apostles, untold millions of angels also were sent forth to spread the gospel of the Lord's Second Advent. All who belong to the New Church on earth and all who belong to the new Christian heaven are called upon to spread the knowledge of the Lord's Advent. We suggest that this is the specific use entrusted to those who belong to the New Church, because the Lord wishes to share with them the joy and the blessing of this great use. For the same reason He has introduced all the angels of the new Christian heaven into the love of this use. We cannot begin to grasp the full meaning of this Divine mission. It includes not only those who come from the Christian world, but also those who come from the gentile nations descended from the Ancient Church. It includes not only those who come from our earth but those who enter the spiritual world from the planets in our solar system, and even from the planets in the starry heaven. It cannot be otherwise, for the entire universe, in the sight of the Lord, is a Gorand Man, of whom the Lord Himself is the inmost Soul. The Lord came into the world to "save the whole human race," and His infinite mercy fills the heavens, to the utmost reaches thereof.


     We cannot present Swedenborg's teachings without sooner or later hearing the question, "Why do you accept his Writings as a Divine Revelation? In what way are they different from or superior to the others, or even to the revelations given through spiritists such as Jacob Boehme?" This is a vital question, and one we must consider and answer to our own satisfaction and to that of others. What is the basis for our acceptance of the Writings as the Revelation of the Lord in His Second Coming? How are they different from the others that claim to be revelations? What are the criteria for determining revelation, that it comes from the Lord? There are two aspects to the answer. First the claim itself and then the nature of the revelation. Swedenborg claims that these Writings are from the Lord.


They are His second coming. They are to build a New Christian Church. Second, as to the nature of and necessity for the revelation itself, does it teach something new, necessary for man's salvation that could not be discovered some other way?
     First let us look to Swedenborg's claim, and whether it is believable. Swedenborg says that the Lord appeared to him and commissioned him to publish a new revelation. The Lord introduced his spirit into the spiritual world, so that he could be conscious of both worlds. The Lord alone instructed him even though he recorded things he heard from angels and spirits and saw in the spiritual realm, or studied from the Word. Only the things received from the Lord in these experiences were written down-so the Writings are a New Revelation.
     There are many ways to test these claims. Probably the first and most important would be to use the same tests that establish testimony in a court of law concerning the competency and reliability of the witness, and the validity and relevance of the subject matter.
     1. Was Swedenborg honest? In over 50 years of public life as a member of the House of Nobles and as an assessor or judge in the College of Mines, he was one of the very powerful political figures of Sweden. As with all in public office, there were other political parties and powerful individuals who opposed him, sometimes bitterly, yet not even his enemies impugned his motives or his honesty.
     2. Was he a competent witness? Could he understand and report accurately what he observed? As a scientist he had shown such rare acuteness and accuracy in observation that some of his discoveries are still timely and valuable after 200 years. His love of truth and scientific detachment made him an ideal observer and reporter.
     3. Had he any motive for bias or dishonesty? Far from having anything to gain by giving this revelation, he had everything to lose. He gave up the scientific work that had brought him great honor. He published the Writings anonymously, so they could not, even if widely approved, contribute to his fame. He published them at his own expense, and gave directions that the money received from their sale should be given to the Society for the Propagation of the Bible. So they could not add to his wealth. He sought no personal following nor did he try to head an organization of the church-although he knew that a New Church would someday be established.


     4. Did his actions confirm belief in his own testimony? From the time of his Divine commission he left his former studies and entered into an extensive study of the Word. His preliminary research filled many volumes over a period of many years. He certainly believed in, and obeyed, his call.
     5. Does the revelation serve a use that is necessary, that could be met in no other way? Yes. If it is accepted it proves the life after death and its nature. It gives a new and most needed understanding of God, of His unity and trinity. It provides the doctrinal foundation for a New Church in which all things will be made new. It restores the basis for love truly conjugial. It gives a rational basis for religion to resolve the rational doubts that had destroyed the former church.
     From these things we can see that Swedenborg was an honest, competent, detached observer, able to perform the use commanded-so sincerely convinced of his call that he devoted nearly three decades of his life, and his personal fortune, to its fulfillment. He bore solemn testimony to the truth of his teachings before a priest of the Lutheran Church, just before his death, when he would have nothing to gain by deceit and much to lose spiritually.
     These things provide the witness to the human agent. However, the Lord dismissed the testimony of man as being of little importance saying: "These things I say that ye might be saved . . . . The works that I do bear witness of Me." So in the second coming, what is the witness of the Writings-of the works-themselves?
     1. Are they from the Lord? They proclaim that they are from the Lord and that Swedenborg merely served as an amanuensis. He disclaimed authorship, save as a servant of the Lord. So he wrote: "The books written by the Lord through me are to be listed" (Eccl. His. 3). ". . . when I think of what I am about to write and while I am writing, I enjoy a complete inspiration, for otherwise it would be my own; but now I know for certain that what I write is the living truth of God" (Doc. II, page 404). ". . . from the first day of that call I have not received anything whatsoever pertaining to the doctrines of that church from any angel, but from the Lord alone, while I have read the Word" (TCR 779).
     2. Are they consistent? Over a period of nearly thirty years of association with those in the spiritual world, he describes the same world-laws, purposes, relationships, and appearances are described in detail from first to last.


We find a growth in understanding but no conflict of ideas or purposes. So the new doctrines, in a multitude of volumes, teach every aspect of life and use, on the deepest practical and philosophical subjects, yet the doctrine is one. Every aspect fits into and confirms every other part. Such consistency is impossible from merely human prudence, and confirms the perfect inspiration he enjoyed.
     3. Do they perform a use that could be done in no other way? They reestablish the authority and holiness of the Word, and reveal its spiritual sense. They establish the certainty of the life after death, and explain its nature. They give a rational understanding of God and remove the falsities concerning the tri-personal concept which had destroyed the former church. They show the beauty, dignity, and nature of the life of charity and use. They give the means for the re-establishment of genuine Christian marriage. They show the universality of the church, and they were given by the Lord for man's salvation which had been threatened.
     4. Do they agree with truth formerly seen? Although the Writings contain new truths and perform uses that could only be given by a new revelation, they can be accepted as true only if they are consistent as to purpose and use with what had been revealed before. The new things are established and confirmed from the letter of the Old and New Testaments and from the basic laws of nature. Former teachings are given a new interpretation in many cases, but always proved and established as being consistently taught in the whole Word. The Lord did the same at His first advent. He made the Old Testament new, by His teachings-yet they did not deny. So He said: "I come not to destroy the law and the prophets, but to fulfill" (Matt. 5:17), to fill them full of new and deeper truths confirmed by their letter. He did the same thing by the Heavenly Doctrine, opening the Old and New Testaments to expose the deeper spiritual sense within (AE 641:2 and 948:2).
     5. Do they fulfill prophecy? Before its fulfillment, prophecy is often misunderstood. The Lord's first advent fulfilled all prophecy about it, but in a way that the Jews had not expected. However, the fulfillment was recognized afterwards. So the Writings completely fulfill all the prophecies given in the letter of the Word concerning the Second Advent.


They are the promised Spirit of Truth that shows men plainly of the Father. They are the Divine Human of the Lord, coming in the clouds of heaven-in the appearances of the letter-so that every eye should see Him. His coming is as a thief in the night, quietly, to be discovered only by searching Him out. His coming was like the lightning in the sky, for it is the enlightenment which opens up the spiritual sense of the Word. The sun and moon were darkened, and the stars fell from the heavens, picturing the fallen state of the former church when love to the Lord and genuine faith were extinguished, and spiritual principles of life no longer shone in the firmament of man's endeavors. The stone of Divine Truth was cut from the mountain without human hands and struck the image of the churches at its feet of iron mixed with clay, where the truths of the Word were mixed with natural falsities, and utterly destroyed the statue. But the rock grew until it filled the earth.
     The last point in regard to the internal testimony of the Writings themselves becomes more and more evident as the Writings are read and used. For they present a religion of such beauty and high principles and standards; they renew so perfectly the vision of God, the God whom we serve and the life of charity and use by which we serve Him; the goal and purpose of life here on earth, and the fulfillment of the spiritual world, that it becomes impossible to deny the spiritual quality and the Divine source of this heavenly doctrine. And the fact that every doctrine is bolstered with complete proof passages-page after page, so that nearly a third of the Writings are from the Word of the Old and New Testaments-shows that it is impossible to be a made-up, lying presentation.
     But there is one final proof of great importance. A scientist reporting the results of an unusual experiment is believed. His experiment can be duplicated and his conclusions tested. The Writings also give us the means to test and prove their claims. Formerly the Lord said, "Search the Scriptures, for they are they which teach of Me." Thus He invited men to prove His
Divinity for themselves. The same test can be applied to the Writings. As the Old Testament proved the Divinity of the Lord in His first coming, so the Old and New Testaments can prove the Divinity of the Writings as His second coming.
     The books of the Old and New Testaments were revealed by the Lord over a period of approximately fifteen hundred years. They were written in many different places by many different men.


There were several gaps of a hundred years or more between prophets and the giving of revelation. Yet they have been gathered into a book which in morals and ethics is consistent in itself, presenting a living history that is accepted in Judaism and Christianity. It is accepted as revelation. The Writings were published seventeen hundred years after the last of the Old and New Testaments had been published. Now here is the test that everyone can apply for himself. If we found a book written in Hebrew characters, beautifully bound, and we did not understand Hebrew, we could say, "it looks like a book in a foreign language." But because we could not understand it, we might add that it could be an elaborate hoax. If we put that book away and later buy another book which says in English, "English-Hebrew and Hebrew-English Dictionary," we could examine this and say, "It looks like a dictionary." We can understand the English part of it, but because we cannot understand the Hebrew characters, again, it might be an elaborate hoax. But if we use the dictionary to translate the book that we had previously found, and the dictionary translates the book, we have proven two things-that the book was written in a genuine foreign language, and that the dictionary is exactly what it claims to be-a Hebrew-English dictionary. The book proves the dictionary; the dictionary proves the book.
     Here there is a parallel; the Writings of the New Church as to one aspect of their use say that the entire Old and New Testaments have a spiritual sense within the letter, and they give the laws of exposition by which the spiritual sense might be drawn forth. But men have been blind to that meaning in the Word, and so to them it has been a closed book. Now they may test the truth of the claim made by the Writings that they will open the Old and New Testaments as they do with the book of Revelation and the books of Genesis and Exodus, verse by verse. So if we use the Writings to translate the letter of the Word into its spiritual sense, we have the same proof as was evidenced in the use of a dictionary to translate Hebrew. The letter of the Word will prove the Divine dictionary, that it does translate, and the Writings will prove the book, that there is an internal plane of holiness and spiritual meaning within the entire revelation. So the fact that we can find that deeper meaning consistently from the beginning to the end of the Word proves that the Writings are what they claim to be.


This is a test we can all make, so we have not only the testimony of a competent witness-an honest man with no ulterior motive; the consistency of the Writings; the agreement with the former truth; a new, beautiful religion; the revelation of new truths that are needed to establish the church; and the fulfillment of prophecy, but we have also a way to test these things for ourselves. I don't think we need anything more. By these arguments it is possible to prove to those willing to learn that the Writings are a new Divine Revelation, different from all the spurious revelations that are presented to the world today.
     So we can give thanks to the Lord that in His Providence He has guarded the spiritual welfare of mankind, and raised up a New Church to preserve the possibility of salvation for all people. And we can be grateful for the character that Swedenborg displayed, that in humility, with a deep love of truth and great spiritual courage, he obeyed the Lord's call to become the servant of the Lord Jesus Christ.
     The Lord's spiritual church exists throughout the universal world; for it is not confined to those who have the Word and thence know the Lord and some truths of faith; but it exists also with those who have not the Word and therefore are altogether ignorant of the Lord and consequently know no truths of faith (for all the truths of faith regard the Lord); that is to say, this church exists among the gentiles who are remote from the church; for there are many among them who from rational light know that there is one God; that He has created all things and preserves all things; and also that from Him is all good, consequently all truth; and that likeness to Him makes man blessed; and moreover they live according to their religion, in love to that God and in love toward the neighbor; and from the affection of good they do works of charity, and from the affection of truth they worship the Supreme Being.

     The gentiles who are of this character are they who belong to the Lord's spiritual church (Arcana Coelestia 3263:2).

NOTICE        King       1982

     Mr. William Harold Eubanks has been recognized as an evangelist of the New Church, as of April 1, 1982, and is authorized to preach and teach the doctrines in Americus, Georgia.
     Bishop King




     The article by Rt. Rev. George de Charms (NEW CHURCH LIFE, September 1981) interested me greatly and aroused my admiration. It includes a thought which I would like to develop further, because it illustrates a rather frequent experience which is that a "difficult" passage of the Writings, if explored in detail, will often lead to new and delightful views of the truths revealed in other passages. The example I will discuss also confirms my belief that many parts of the Writings are specifically designed to take the leader away from mere acquiescence into realms of active thought under the auspices of Providence.
     The case in point concerns the sex of plants. We are allowed, even encouraged, to confirm the truths of the second advent by every means and botany is one such!
     As we are told, the Writings state that there are not two sexes in plants, but only the masculine (TCR 585). However, the Writings also imply that plants are feminine, for in the Apocalypse Explained we find that plants are said to "bloom like brides before their nuptials, and afterwards, causing as it were their wombs or eggs to expand, they bring forth fruits as their offspring . . ." (AE 1203). This shows equally clearly that plants are female, for whoever heard of a male having a womb or eggs?
     So in the Writings we find support for plants being either male or female. If you accept, as most people do, that pollination is the equivalent of fertilization in animals, then you will accept that many plants must be regarded as both male and female since they produce both pollen and seeds. On the other hand some, e.g. holly, are either-some giving pollen, others giving seeds. To some extent, then, there is agreement between the Writings and modern knowledge.
     However, the T.C.R. passage is so definite! Let us look at it in more detail. The reader is encouraged to think by the arguments brought forward, the chief of which is that "the earth alone or the soil is the common mother, thus as it were the woman." Lest this should seem strange, the facts about all the bees of one hive having but one mother, the queen, are cited.


However, the bees are an entirely different case as the Writings themselves point out, for Swedenborg had already written that minerals are correspondences in the third degree while plants correspond in the second degree, and animals in the first (see HH 104). Thus the facts about bees do not strengthen the case but weaken it. From the natural point of view the difference is obvious. The earth merely provides water, minerals and some degree of protection to enable the living seed to germinate. The earth itself is not living. The queen bee on the other hand provides no protection or nourishment, but the egg is a living cell grown from the living tissue of the mother.
     Knowing that nothing trivial or merely decorative is included in the Writings we must ask why these points were included. A possible answer is to make us think! Another answer appears to be that the idea of common motherhood is not that single closely defined concept that we first assume, but a wider more inclusive idea, branching out in many directions. The paragraph about it refers to the motherhood of the church and continues with reflections on the correspondence between the church and the earth. This leads to fascinating thoughts about the life of the church compared with the lack of life in minerals, about sons being truths, the church being people, trees corresponding to people and so on. It leads one to ask, what are the dead things in the church which nevertheless nourish the growing truths and goods? Thus the way is opened to an unending intellectual journey which must lead the traveler toward the Lord.
     Now if the reader of T.C.R. does not wish to discuss such points within himself he is left with the poetic and useful idea of the common motherhood of the earth and the masculinity of plants; good can be received and the way is still open for further exploration-indeed any number of ways.
     But the most interesting question still remains. Why should we be asked to think that plants are male? The reason may be a spiritual one and it may be that the true correspondence of plants as males could not be given at the time owing to the lack of necessary knowledge.
     Since the flood, the human race has been predominantly spiritual rather than celestial, and the man has therefore been predominantly intellectual and the woman predominantly affectional (AC 4823:2). In other words the man, as to his spirit, has lived by means of truth (not, of course, truth alone!).
     There are two main classes of truth which our language fails to distinguish. One class is that which is light and life and is united with love and flows from the Lord and is the Lord.


It is called Divine Truth or Divine Wisdom-or better, Divine Love-and-Wisdom. It corresponds to sunlight. The other class consists of knowledges, facts, scientifics, cognitions, doctrines, which dispose the man to receive the first class. This second class of truth, i.e. truths of knowledge and doctrine, has many correspondents, e.g. stone, iron, water, fish, birds, presumably because it includes a wide variety of kinds of facts.
     I said above that truths of the second class dispose a man to receive. This is an inadequate generalization. We know very well that doctrinal truths may be received into the memory for the wrong reasons and then will not dispose a man to receive the Divine Wisdom. The truths must be loved and obeyed. When this happens they are no longer abstract. They are real forms in the man's mind. They become part of his personality. They become living organs, whose function is to accept the Divine Wisdom which flows continuously from the Lord. If we now turn to correspondences again we can find things that correspond to these living organs which receive Divine Wisdom, and a process that corresponds to the reception. The organs are leaves and the process is photosynthesis. We find, for example, "There is also a correspondence between a man and a tree" (AR 400) and leaves signify truths pertaining to the man (AE 109) and truths of the sense of the letter of the Word (AE 386:29). The leaves of trees accept sunlight and use it to make carbohydrate for the use of the whole plant. So the tree lives by means of its leaves. Thus green leaves provide a very clear correspondence, showing how truths of class two, living in man, accept and make use of the Divine influx of Truth of class one. I suggest that living by means of truth is characteristic of the masculine mind for male in general signifies truth (AC 4005:2). It follows that green plants are masculine.
     In the time of the Most Ancient Church the truth was received in a different way. T.C.R. was not published for them, but perhaps something derived from their way of thought is the reason for plants being regarded as feminine in the A.E.
     If one examines a larger number of the correspondences, details emerge, some of which confirm and enlarge the idea I have just put forward while a few fail to do so at first sight. The subject is delightfully wide and complex. I hope to explore it a little more later.




     The Writings tell us that the Word is such that "wherever it treats of one person, it treats of all men, and of every individual . . . ." (AC 838). I would like to present the following version of the creation story to the readers of NEW CHURCH LIFE.* It is a condensation of the creation story as it appears in Genesis 1 and 2, in a format and style somewhat resembling the story in the King James Version. The story is re-written to emphasize the main parts of the internal sense which are relevant to individual regeneration and to make them obvious within the context of the literal story. It is a frankly affectional-and affectionate-presentation of the story which may be useful in missionary work. Have the readers any comments on this way of presenting the teachings of the Writings?
     * Copyright 1981, Charlotte Gyllenhaal-Davis. The work is copyrighted as I am hoping eventually to use it in a book of similar stories. Readers of the LIFE may use it in any way they like, as long as the copyright notice is included. I would like to acknowledge the inspiration of Louise B. Rose in the formation of this idea.

     In the beginning God created you both heavenly and earthly.
     And you were empty and dark spiritually. And the Spirit of God's mercy moved even in the waters of your darkness.
     And God said, Let there be light, and you knew His light could enter your life.
     And God saw that light, that it was good. And God made you aware that He was light and you, by yourself, were darkness.
     And your darkness and your dawn were your first day.
     And God said, Let there be a division in the waters of your darkness that you may distinguish how you were made.
     And you saw that above the division you could be heavenly, and below the division you were earthly.
     And your darkness and your dawn were your second day.
     And God said, Let your living waters be gathered together into one place that they may moisten your dry earth. And God saw that the living waters and dry earth were good.
     And God said, Let your dry earth be watered and bring forth tender plants and fruits. And you found that you could nourish those around you with the fruits of your labors. And God saw that your fruits were good.


     And your darkness and your dawn were your third day.
     And God said, Let there be lights in your heaven: a sun of love to rule in the bright days of your life, and a moon of faith to lighten your darkest nights. And God saw that your love and faith were good.
     And your darkness and your dawn were your fourth day.
     And God said, Let your waters be filled with the silvery fish and great whales of knowledge and principles, and let your thoughts take wing as the birds. And God saw that your faith was good.
     And God blessed your faith, and it multiplied throughout your life.
     And your darkness and your dawn were your fifth day.
     And God said, Let your earth be enlivened with true charity. And your life and work began to have the energy of all God's creatures. And God saw that your life was good.
     And God said, Let us make you truly human, in My image and after My likeness. You will have true faith, and your love will become like Mine. And your faith and love will marry as man and woman. And the fruits of your faith and love will fill your whole earth, and I will give you the food you need to bring forth those fruits. My herbs and trees will sustain you in your best and worst times.
     And God saw all that He had made you, and behold, you were very good. And your darkness and your dawn were your sixth day.
     And your heavens and your earth were complete. And on the seventh day, God finished His work, and you knew that His love was your love, and His love ruled your life. And God blessed that day with inner peace for you, and He finally rested from the work of creating you.


     A Search for the True Human


     The True Proprium (The Tree of Life)

     The question of self, self-image, self love leads to a prior question: the nature of the Lord. For if we believe in Him and that He created us, then this is the primary qualifier of all our thinking and loving. And it is said in Genesis: "God created man in His own image, in the image of God created He him, male and female created He them" (Gen. 1:27).


The very best within us, His "own" with us, is created in His image. What is He like? We can see from the angels who are nearer to His image than we are: "when the angels become present, love so pours out of them that you would believe them to be nothing but love . . . . This being the character of the angels in heaven, what must not the Lord Himself be, from whom the angels have everything of love, and whose Divine Love appears as a sun? It is the Lord's Divine Human which so appears . . . . From this it is evident what is meant by the Lord's Divine 'body,' namely, the Divine Love . . . . Moreover, the Lord's very nature when glorified . . . is nothing else [than Divine Love]" (AC 6135).
     The Lord is the only Man, a Divine Person waiting for us to come directly to Him. In His glorified body of love, He is present, having reality even to our natural and sensuous minds. For He has glorified His very body; His presence is with us in Divine flesh and bones. If we turn to the Lord in humility, honest humility, we will find Him in His Word, and then in our very heart. We will see Him in a way that is new: as our Tree of Life. He will lead us to see and feel a true self, a heavenly proprium.

     The term "proprium" is hardly ever used in a complimentary way in New Church conversation. But to identify the proprium with evil, especially with hereditary evil, is a theological mistake. For genuinely speaking, the Lord alone has Proprium. And He is nothing but Good. A direct teaching of this is: "Man's proprium is a mere dead thing, although to him it appears as something, indeed as everything. Whatever lives in man is from the Lord's life, and if this were withdrawn he would fall down dead as a stone; for man is only an organ of life, and such as the organ is, such is the life's affection. The Lord alone has proprium. By this proprium He redeemed man, and by this proprium He saves him. The Lord's proprium is life, and from His proprium, man's proprium, which in itself is dead, is made alive. The Lord's proprium is also signified by the Lord's words in Luke: 'A spirit hath not flesh and bones as ye see Me have (xxiv:39)'" (AC 149).
     The first chapter in Bishop de Charms' small book entitled The Doctrine of the Proprium is devoted to defining the term proprium from the Writings, and this chapter is headed: "Only the Lord Has Proprium." This is a fascinating booklet, ahead of its time in almost foreseeing how the nature and quality of self would become an issue before the church, and turning beautifully to the Writings for the startling insights they offer. He inquires first into the real meaning of the term "proprium" as used in the Writings:


     "Proprium" is a Latin word for which there is no equivalent in the English language. Some translators have rendered it "own"; but "proprium" is a noun, while "own" is either an adjective or a verb and cannot be used as a noun. We can say a man's own house, or "our own country," or that a man "owns his property;" but it is not good English to say, "every man has an own which he loves above all things," or that "man from own loves himself more than the Lord." It is preferable, therefore, to retain the word "proprium" and learn what it means. However, we are prompted to treat of this subject because it is so easy to derive from the Writings a mistaken idea of what is meant.
     The word "proprium" is used in a number of different connections, and its meaning is modified by the context. In order to understand it rightly, we must have a clear idea of the essential meaning, the meaning that underlies all its various applications. The Writings state over and over again that man is born into evils of every kind, and that his hereditary proprium is nothing but evil. This is the way in which we are prone to think of it. "Man's proprium," we read, "is infernal, and it is his very hell." . . . Again, "The love of self is nothing else than man's proprium, and how filthy and profane this is may be seen from what has been shown above concerning man's proprium" (AC 1049, 1326).
     It would appear from these and from many other numbers in the Writings that the proprium is to be identified with evil, and that from birth it is inherent in man's nature . . . . In the Christian Church it was believed that man had this evil nature because of the sin of Adam, for which the whole human race was condemned . . . . Of course, the view of modern scientific psychology is just the opposite of this, namely, that man is inherently good. The concept of original sin has been largely discarded. It is now believed that evil arises from the environment rather than from heredity . . . .
     We would point out, however, that the teaching of the Writings concerning man's proprium differs markedly from all these human interpretations. In spite of the appearance to the contrary, the numbers we have cited do not imply that man at birth is totally depraved; nor do they imply that he is inherently good. They teach that the proprium man inherits is not to be identified with the man himself, but is to be regarded as a tendency to evil to which he may or may not yield. Only if he chooses it freely and deliberately does it become his very own. He has power if he wills to reject this proprium in favor of one that is good . . . . The inner truth, the all-embracing truth, is that proprium can be rightly ascribed only to the Lord. No man, spirit, or angel has . . . any proprium whatever. The reason is that only the Lord . . . has life in Himself . . . . Man is nothing but a vessel. This vessel is dead. It has no life and no power of its own (Doctrine of the Proprium, G. de Charms, pages 9-13).


     Man's proprium is a receiving vessel. Man is not evil, nor born evil. Nor is he born good. The heavens inflow through remains, which are received as if they are man's own. In this, man feels happy, joyous angelic life. The hells inflow through hereditary evil tendencies. If these tendencies are received and confirmed, man's proprium does become evil-through his own choice. What a release this teaching concerning the proprium can be! We are not evil, despite any appearance-unless we freely choose to make evil our own. Nor are we good-this inflows as a gift from the Lord. Thus we can delight in what we hope is good inflowing, and ascribe it to the Lord, releasing us from the dead weight of merit.
     These teachings are elaborated in two major passages in the Writings:

If man believed, as is the truth, that all good and truth are from the Lord and all evil and falsity from hell, he would not appropriate good to himself and make it meritorious, nor would he appropriate evil to himself and make himself guilty of it (DP 320).

The Lord imputes good to every man, but hell imputes evil to every man. That the Lord imputes to man good and not evil, while the devil (meaning hell) imputes evil and not good to him, is a new thing in the church . . . . There is actually a sphere proceeding continually from the Lord and filling the entire spiritual and natural worlds which raises all toward heaven. It is like a strong current in the ocean which unobservedly draws a vessel. All who believe in the Lord and live according to His precepts enter that sphere or current and are elevated; while those who do not believe are unwilling to enter, but withdraw themselves to the sides, and are there carried away by a current that sets toward hell (TCR 650-652-Italics added).

     Here is a message of joy from the New Church: something that "is a new thing in the church." Man is not born evil. The Lord does not impute evil to him. Man's proprium or self is rather a vessel, and from freedom man can choose a true proprium: one made alive and sparkling by the Lord Himself. And there is a strong current of the Divine Providence, of the Holy Spirit or the Lord within our hearts, that would elevate man toward that true and living "self'-that heavenly proprium that is the Lord's with man, but felt intensely as man's own. The teaching is that "the Lord alone has Proprium" (AC 149). This Divine Proprium is Life itself (Ibid). And with the Lord, this Life itself is the Divine Esse: Divine Love. In His glorification, the Divine Love came even to the very ultimates of life: thus it is said that "as regards 'flesh,' in the supreme sense It signifies the Proprium of the Lord's Divine Human, which is Divine Good" (AC 3813), or His Love in ultimates (AC 6315, 1865:2, 3).


He is, even as to His Human Essence, the Divine and celestial love itself (AC 1865:2). This love, this Divine Proprium, is so intensely outwardly loving, it is staggering to our finite and qualified affections. It is so full of love itself that it is nothing but love, Whose intense desire is to love others, be conjoined with them, and make them happy from Himself (TCR 43).
     Talking about this Divine love makes one feel inadequate-because we don't have it! Of ourselves we are without life, and by hereditary inclination turn our backs on loving others. Yet we can become alive, from Him. And that is the promise of Rev. 22:

     And he showed me a pure river of water of life, clear as crystal, proceeding out of the throne of God. In the midst of the street of it, and on either side of the river, was the tree of life, which bare twelve manners of fruits, and yielded her fruits every month: and the leaves of the tree were for the healing of the nations (22:1, 2).
     By 'the tree of life' is signified the Lord as to the Divine love. By 'fruits' are signified the goods of love and charity . . . . By 'twelve' are signified all, and it is said of the goods and truths of the church. From these things collected into one sense, it follows that by 'in the midst of the street and of the river on this side and on that was the tree of life bearing twelve fruits' is signified that in the inmosts of the truths of doctrine and of life in the New Church is the Lord in His Divine Love, from Whom all the goods which a man does apparently as of himself flow forth. This takes place with those who go to the Lord immediately, and shun evils because they are sins; thus who will be in the Lord's New Church, which is the New Jerusalem (AR 933-Emphasis added).
     'I will give to eat of the tree of life' signifies appropriation of the good of love and charity from the Lord. 'To eat' in the Word signifies to appropriate; and 'the tree of life' signifies the Lord as to the good of love . . . . The Lord is the 'tree of life' from whom comes all the good with the man of the church (AR 89).

     The promise of the tree of life for the New Church is a promise of deepest hope. Our proprium is neither good nor evil. For proprium is life, and the Lord alone is life. But we may receive life from His proprium-we may eat of the tree of life, of its fruits. Then we receive true life, not ours but His in us. This is the true proprium. It is the true "self," in the sense of self being the equivalent of life.

     The more man is conjoined with the Lord, the more distinctly does he seem to himself as if he were his own, and the more clearly does he recognize that he is the Lord's.


There is an appearance that the more nearly one is conjoined with the Lord, the less he is his own. It so appears to all who are evil (DP 42).

     But since through self-examination and repentance man recognizes evils he has confirmed, and repents of them and shuns them, a change takes place. He very gradually finds a release.

     It is conjunction with the Lord that makes a man seem to himself to be free and therefore his own; and the nearer the conjunction with the Lord is, the more free he seems, and thus the more his own . . . because the Divine love is such that it wills its own to be another's (DP 43). The more distinctly a man appears to himself to be as if he were his own, the more clearly he recognizes that he is the Lord's because the more nearly he is conjoined with the Lord the wiser he becomes . . . (DP 44).
     The end of the Lord's Divine Providence is for man to appear to himself more distinctly to be his own, and yet to recognize more clearly that he is the Lord's (DP 45).

     To say that the true self is given by the Lord, as man with innocence and humility eats of the tree of life, is a revealed truth. To say that the Lord is Love Itself, such an outpouring of Divine Love that it is a thing of awe and wonder, is a revealed truth. Sometimes these truths move and touch our hearts. Sometimes we neither perceive nor understand, nor even feel love. Why? Because the hereditary tendencies to evil are se strong with us? Because we have made the mistake of identifying our proprium with received evil? Because regeneration is a step-by-step process, and it takes a lifetime to be reborn (AC 4063)? The hells would trap us in the illusion that one's proprium is evil. And of course it is if one confirms hereditary tendencies to evil. But if the proprium receives evil and confirms it, there is still room for repentance. If man makes his bed in hell, the Lord is there. The Divine Proprium can inflow, to strengthen what is still innocent and to lead to an escape from a contaminated proprium. In fact, the purpose of the Lord is to lead man out of a contaminated proprium into a true self, a true proprium. One help in this process is to read what the Lord reveals about how different these two propriums are:

     Nothing evil and false is ever possible which is not man's proprium and from man's proprium, for the proprium of man is evil itself, and consequently man is nothing but evil and falsity. This has been evident to me from the fact that when the things of man's proprium are presented to view in the world of spirits, they appear so deformed that it is impossible to depict anything more ugly . . . , so that he to whom the things of the proprium are visibly exhibited is struck with horror, and desires to flee from himself as from a devil.


But truly the things of man's proprium that have been vivified by the Lord appear beautiful and lovely. . . ; and indeed, those who have been endowed with charity, or vivified by it, appear like boys and girls with most beautiful countenances; and those who are in innocence, like naked infants, variously adorned with garlands of flowers encircling their bosoms, and diadems upon their heads, living and sporting in a diamond-like aura, and having a perception of happiness from the very inmost (AC 154).


     (The Tree of Knowledge of Good and Evil)

     This is a section one would rather not read! The quality of the proprium when it receives and confirms evil is disclosed in the number just quoted: ". . . he to whom the things of the proprium are visibly exhibited is struck with horror, and desires to flee from himself as from a devil" (Ibid). But it is vital to know the nature of hereditary love of self, and that evil is a thing of horror. Unless we know the enemy, he can deceive and trap us. And when we are told to love self, it is the most crucial thing in man's life to be sure it is not the hereditary love of self! In brief, man's proprium is all the evil and falsity that springs from the love of self and of the world, and from not believing in the Lord or the Word, but in self (see AC 210). When man receives evil and makes it his own, then man's proprium is nothing but evil and falsity. (See AC 210, 215, 694, 874-876, 987, 1023, 1044, 4318, 5786, 8480 et alia.)
     The appearance is that we live from ourselves, that life is our own. To confirm this, with conceit, is to eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil. Thus the proprium, as a vessel, receives a self that is evil, and becomes evil.

     And the Lord God commanded the man, saying, Of every tree of the garden thou mayest freely eat: but of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil, thou shalt not eat of it: for in the day that thou eatest thereof thou shalt surely die (Gen. 2:17).
     Now the serpent was more subtle than any beast of the field . . . And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden. But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil (Gen. 3:1-4).


     The serpent represents the sensuous part of man in which he trusts (AC 194). "In ancient times those were called 'serpents' who had more confidence in sensuous things than in revealed ones. But it is still worse at the present day . . ." (AC 196). "Who have a stronger belief that their eyes are open, and that as God they know what is good and evil, than those who love themselves, and at the same time excel in worldly learning? And yet who are more blind?" (AC 206) "If they are asked what it is to live from the Lord, they think it is a phantasy. If asked whether they know what perception is, they would merely laugh at it and call it enthusiastic rubbish. These above all others are the 'serpents' who seduce the world" (Ibid).
     To eat of the tree of knowledge of good and evil is to accept self as a god. It is to adore self and what self feels and senses, and to reason upward from this to spiritual and Divine things. This approach has been the cause of the fall of every church (see AC 129). As the Arcana teaches so succinctly: "Man's starting point must be from the Lord and not from himself; for the former is life, but the latter is death" (AC 129). To reason from what self feels and senses is also the negative principle (AC 2568-cf. AC 126-130).
     The proprium when it receives and confirms evil is very tricky. It can even admit, "The lower part of myself is evil. But my proprium is good in its higher levels. My interiors and inmosts are where the Lord is in me, and here I am good. My proprium is good! And I should love this self! It is good!" The Lord foresaw this argument! Thus it is said in the heading of SD 3474: "Of the proprium of man, spirit, and angel, and a clearing up of a truth respecting it." This number then states: "When engaged in writing and saying that the proprium of man, spirit and angel was in itself nothing but pure evil, certain spirits of an interior quality insinuated that they had a proprium which was not evil, namely, an inward and still inmost mind; and that the inmost gave to the inward the power of becoming celestial and spiritual. I have never . . . supposed any other than that there was an inmost mind in man which does not exist in brute animals; but they insisted that these minds, the inward and inmost, are their proprium, and because they are receptive of celestial and spiritual things from the Lord. . . they had not evil, but goon. But it was answered them that these inward and innermost minds were not theirs, but the Lord's. . ."
     Surrounded by the psychological ambience of today, which is mostly implicit and explicit about man's innate goodness, the argument used above by certain spirits of "an interior quality" is one that a New Churchman is tempted to use.


For are not our remains and our human internal good? Aren't they really our good self? Enticing, but not so! Remains are a gift from the Lord: they are never man's but always the Lord's in man. It is directly taught: "remains . . . are of the Lord alone in the man" (AC 1050). And the soul or inmost of man, on the plane of human internals, is also the Lord's alone in man-it is always above man's consciousness and he can claim no credit or self in it! (AC 8443, HH 39, 435 et alia). It is true that remains touch man with love, and love is what gives man a sense of life (CL 34-36). Remains are deeply felt as states of love and friendship, of deep affection for the Word. They feel as is they are man's own. And thank heavens they do-for they make man spiritually alive, and receptive of a true proprium (see "The Gifted Child," NEW CHURCH LIFE 1979, pp. 353, 386). But they are not man's "self." They are the Lord's in man. Thus the Writings never call them a self, but always remains, or states of innocence, trust, love and truth within the heart.
     It can be thought that, yes the proprium of man or spirit is evil if he has confirmed and appropriated evil to it in freedom, but that an angel's own proprium must be good. Well, again, not so! "The proprium of man, spirit and angel is in itself nothing but pure evil" (SD 3474). "An angel's proprium cannot make heaven, nor a man's proprium the church, since the proprium, both of angels and of men, is not good. Consequently it is the Divine that goes forth from the Lord, as received by them, that makes heaven and the church. . ." (AE 850a).
     And if this is too gentle, it is said that "Man is nothing but evil; he is a mass of evils, all his will being merely evil; which is what is said in the preceding chapter (Gen. 8:21): that 'the imagination of man's heart is evil from his youth.' It has been shown me by living experience that a man and a spirit, even an angel, in himself regarded, that is, as to all that is his own, is but vilest excrement; and that left to himself he breathes nothing but hatred, revenge, cruelty, and most foul adultery. These things are his own . . . . In order that the evil in man may be subjugated, that is, hell . . . man is regenerated by the Lord and endowed with a new will, which is conscience, through which the Lord alone performs all good. These are points of faith: that man is nothing but evil; and that all good is from the Lord"(AC 987-Italics added).
     In various forms, a pseudo-celestialism has always attacked to undermine the church and the individual man of the church. In various differing ways, the theme of our pseudo-celestialism is the same: you are good! In fact, sometimes, you are Divine.


Love the good in yourself, the Divine in yourself! But if man does this, he eats of the tree of the knowledge of good and evil. He becomes in his own eyes a god, knowing good and evil. He is puffed up or even tranquilized by his own Divineness-his own supposed goodness. And the temptations to do this are intensified by a wonderful appearance the Lord gives to each of us, out of His Divine love: Remains are felt as our own, and anything of the heavenly proprium (that good which comes from the Lord alone) is felt as our own. To say, no, despite the appearance these things are from the Lord alone is to eat of the Tree of Life. It is to find heaven and the Lord.
     What is the true human? First it is said: ". . . the human with every man begins in the inmost of his rational; so also with the Human of the Lord" (AC 2194). What is the inmost of the rational? "In an infant there is innocence in external form, and innocence is the human itself, for into it as into a plane flow love and charity from the Lord. When man is being regenerated and becoming wise, the innocence of infancy, which was external, becomes internal" (AC 4797:2). "Innocence is the human itself" (Ibid). From it is the true proprium-the Lord's life in a regenerate man. What is limited or false within us would say, in ascribing all life to the Lord, what do we have left? We have heaven itself! To do this is to begin to live (AC 8462). To find the new intense sense of self-life that comes with eating the tree of life, man must first reject pride in his own confirmed proprium. There is an amazing number on man making himself "nothing."

     What it is to be nothing: it was perceived that when the most deceitful spirits . . . spake among themselves, wishing even to destroy me [Swedenborg], they said they could not do it, because there was nothing of me to be found, but if there had been anything, they could have done it. It was then perceived and so represented that for one to be anything, so as to have a proprium, was to present something which they could assault and destroy, as the most deceitful would then have it in their power. But when it was represented that I was, as it were, nothing, then they seemed to themselves to have no power over that which thus appeared as nothing, for they would then have nothing to assault. Thus he is safe who in true faith believes himself to be nothing (SD 4067).

     Yet there are three contexts in which man may feel love of himself and not have it be disorderly. In two of these contexts, the proper love of self is essential to a complete and spiritually human life. These three contexts are found in the intermediate self; the sub-ordinated self, and the mentally healthy serf-discovered within the vastation and psyche-therapy of mental illness.


Editorial Pages 1982

Editorial Pages       Editor       1982


     Two hundred years ago there came upon the Writings the first man ever to be baptized into the New Church. Note that in 1782 there was no such thing as New Church baptism; therefore the lapse of five years between his discovery of the Writings and his actual baptism must be uniquely considered. You see, the "five year duration" has become a kind of rule of thumb among experienced evangelists. They tell us that when you give a book of the Writings to someone and it actually results in his joining the church, the joining should not be expected for about five years. How useful it is to be reminded of this, because we are persistently inclined to unrealistic expectations. Some evangelization effort is launched, and within months we are apt to be saying, "Well, nobody joined the church as a result of it." By the way, "success" in giving a book of the Writings should not be measured by whether someone joins the church. "Success" could be the planting of some truth which will be of use to the person after death! Reflect, if you please, on the following phrase in another context: ". . . give them some knowledge of the Lord before they entered the spiritual world" (See DP 255:4). Giving a book of the Writings might just do the service of answering questions in a person's mind. And it might just give the person a little joy.
     Robert Hindmarsh had questions in his mind when he first got a book of the Writings, and he was in for a joy that lasted. What a day it was for that young man! For on that day he met a charming girl, a pleasant beginning which led to more than fifty years of happy marriage. That was the very day he first set eyes upon a book of those Writings which were to become for more than half a century the great commitment of his life. Let's look at the story.
     Robert Hindmarsh was 19 years old when he overheard the name Swedenborg in a conversation about the possibility of life after death. It was an inconclusive conversation.


Robert remembered saying in the privacy of his own teenage mind that it was a pity that a fundamental question such as that of life after death must be left to inconclusive conversations and speculations. Robert was interested in answers.
     He had a brilliant; independent mind. As a lad he had mastered Latin and Greek. When confronted with the orthodox doctrine of the Trinity he got busy and studied the Scriptures until, without anyone else's help, he virtually worked the problem out. He concluded that there was one God in one person, the Lord Jesus Christ. We who look at this story would say that this young man, born two years after the Last Judgment, was being prepared for his reception of the Writings. And in retrospect that is precisely what he would say.
     Once having heard the name of Swedenborg, he heard it on a number of occasions in the next few years. He heard "extraordinary accounts" of this man Swedenborg, who had died there in London a decade earlier.
     The momentous day came when Robert was 23 years old. His reason for making a trip to Canterbury was to visit his father. He did not dream that the journey would bring him to the girl he would marry, nor did he anticipate the other discovery at hand. During conversation with his father, a Methodist clergyman, he asked about Swedenborg. His father had little interest in that subject, but he did know of a Quaker gentleman in the town who owned some of those books. The gentleman's name was Keen.
     Mr. Keen was accordingly visited by this earnest young man who asked politely if he might borrow a book by Swedenborg. And the young man left carrying two books, one of them being the book Heaven and Hell, which had been published within a few months of the day Robert was born. Robert's own testimony on this reads as follows: "These works I read with the utmost avidity, and instantly perceived their contents to be of heavenly origin. I therefore as naturally embraced and delighted in them as the eye embraces and delights in objects that reflect the golden rays of the rising sun."
     Robert Hindmarsh now wanted to find others who shared his love of the Writings, and he wanted to get new people to benefit from the new teachings. Both these things he found most difficult. People were not at all receptive, not even his own father (although his father did "see the light" a few years later). And where were the people who had found the Writings? The great William Cookworthy had died a couple of years earlier (NCL 1980, p. 479). Thomas Hartley who had found such "great delight" in the Writings was still alive in Kent, but he would die in a couple of years as would Dr. Messiter, Swedenborg's physician and friend.


James Glen had the previous year experienced "the happiest day of his life" when a ship's captain had given him a copy of Heaven and Hell (NCL 1981, p. 649), but how could Glen and Hindmarsh know of each other's existence?
     A hundred and fifty miles to the north John Clowes was working to spread the knowledge of the Writings. This work had begun after the dramatic and delightful experience Clowes had upon reading True Christian Religion (NCL 1981, p. 538), and by that time it was beginning to bear fruit. Very near the time of Hindmarsh's discovery of the Writings a group of gentlemen, inspired mostly by John Clowes, formed an organization in Manchester with the purpose of spreading the Writings. The organization still exists, and we will be telling about its 200th anniversary celebration.
     For the present let us picture the young Robert Hindmarsh, filled with joy at having found the Writings, but literally able to count on the fingers of one hand associates who shared his acceptance of the Writings. As we celebrate the 19th of June this year, we share with Hindmarsh the wonder that the Writings are known to so few. We share something of the determination to spread the knowledge and to apply it to our lives. And we also share with those first receivers a certain kind of joy. This is called in the final paragraph of Heaven and Hell the joy of knowing spiritual truths.


     There are two separate questions which Dr. J. Durban Odhner raises in his article in NEW CHURCH LIFE (Feb. 1982, pp. 66-72). He claims that the term 'marriage love' is acceptable in modern English as a translation of amor conjugialis; and he has a theory to explain why Swedenborg used the Latin word conjugialis rather than the normal conjugalis to express the idea 'of or associated with marriage.'


     It is true that in modern English we can use one substantive as attributive to another, and 'marriage love' can therefore stand as a reasonable expression to denote love between husband and wife. But there are two associated problems which are not easy to solve. First, Swedenborg is careful to explain that amor conjugialis is derived from the conjugium caeleste or heavenly marriage, and it thus acquires a heightened sense which is often called amor vere conjugialis. We can translate that easily as 'truly conjugial love,' but the best we can do if we avoid the word 'conjugial' is to say 'true marriage love,' which is less specific since it might refer to the love of partners who are true to each other.
     The second problem is the use of conjugiale as a noun. For instance:

Ad interrogationem 'euid conjugiale illud?' dixit, 'est desiderium vivendi cum una sola uxore. . .

When asked 'What is that conjugial [principle]?' he said, 'It is a desire to live with only one wife. . .' (CL 80:2)

If we replace 'conjugial' here with 'marriage,' it is hard to see what we can say. I dislike the use of 'the conjugial' as a substantive in English, but by adding a word such as 'principle' it will pass. I do not think 'marriage principle' is equally acceptable, and if a periphrasis is needed, this spoils the effect.
     I grant that 'conjugial' is not a word of standard modern English. But any special craft or science requires technical terms which are readily learned and understood by its practitioners. If there were another simple way of expressing the idea in English I should be glad to adopt it. But if this is a special concept, and the 32 pages of quotations in Potts' Concordance suggest that it is, then I can see no reason to refuse to create a special term for it.
     I cannot leave this subject without mentioning another difficulty which I find even more intractable: how do we translate the opposite term, amor scortarorius? The Oxford English Dictionary quotes 'scortatory love' from the title of the 1794 translation of De Amore Conjugialia, and has one later quotation from a non-Swedenborgian author. If we reject 'conjugial,' we ought even more to reject 'scortatory.' The Latin word is easily understood, since it is derived from scortum, the rather derogatory term for 'prostitute' (the more polite term is meretrix). Scortatorius is more nearly derived from the verb scortari'to frequent prostitutes.' Here I would suggest that English is not so lacking in vocabulary; would 'bawdy' be an acceptable translation?


     The second question is not going to make our task any easier. Dr. Odhner's remarks on Latin scansion are in error, and since I understand he now wishes to withdraw them, I will limit myself to one observation. Latin verse is based upon the patterning of long and short syllables, not, as in English, on patterns of stress. The form conjugalis has the pattern long-short-long-short and cannot be accommodated in the type of verse written by Ovid and by Swedenborg himself in his youth, since there short syllables always occur in pairs. Thus conjugialis, long-short-short-long-short, is excellently suited.
     I must confess that I am a little sceptical about Dr. Odhner's theory of 'the significance of sounds in Latin as a vehicle of Divine revelation.' There are many passages in the Writings (e.g. HH 241, SS 90:2, TCR 19:2, SD 5112, 5620, 5787, 6063:2) which refer to language in the other world, and distinctions are drawn between the languages of the celestial and spiritual heavens. It is therefore not impossible that human languages may distantly reflect the heavenly ones; but should we not expect to find this primarily in the Hebrew and Greek of the Word? (See AC 7939, De Verbo 4, AR 29:2).
     At least before we apply these ideas to the Latin of the Writings we need to be clear about the pronunciation of Latin in Swedenborg's time, since different countries have different habits and these have changed with time. Thus it is impossible to deduce from Swedenborg's preferred spelling coelesris rather than caelestis that he was influenced by the sound, since there can be no doubt that he pronounced ae, oe and eall alike. The first letter was pronounced as is, so the word would sound approximately as tselestis, with vowels of Dr. Odhner's 'spiritual' group.
     The often-quoted remark of Clowes about the 'softening' effect of i also needs to be properly understood. What he meant was that in the pronunciation of Latin current in England at his time, conjugalis had a hard g (as in English girl), but conjugialis had a soft g (as in English George). In other words, Clowes pronounced these words very much like English conjugal and conjugial. For Swedenborg this distinction did not exist, since he would have pronounced hard g in both words; and he of course would have pronounced j like English y.
          Downing College, Cambridge, England






     Borrowing from the Toronto Experience, featuring Rev. Al Nicholson et al, we in Glenview have launched our very own door-calling campaign. With typical scientific precision, we selected the sub-community of Swainwood (quite posh) for our first effort, primarily because it is/was just across Shermer Road from us and may be reached by cutting across the McClarrens' front lawn.
     The acceptably Rev. J. Clark Echols, Jr. and I made our first essay in the spring of 1981. (Fortunately, our planning for this event took us the entire, blithering-cold winter.) So, on a warm, sunny day last May, we ventured forth with smiles on our faces, scripts in our pockets, and well concealed trepidation (we went together, you see) in our hearts. With each successive not-at-home our confidence grew, so that when finally the sixth door opened we were totally unprepared to speak. It was my turn, and, observing Mr. Echols' efforts to keep a straight face, I managed to stumble through some sort of monologue without losing too much of my own face. The young lady at the door politely took our literature, said she was just visiting, and left us with a smile and a 'thank you.' She smiled but did not laugh! The trauma was past, yet the day remained as serene as ever, and we had made an important discovery: Young ladies visiting from Kansas do not necessarily bite, and they can even smile.                         
     Upon reaching the roadway once more, we held a little conference. Clark would now take one side of the street and I the other, for we had learned something surprising: we were far more frightened of playing the fool in front of each other than we were of doing so before a total stranger. We had thought it would be a comfort to have a moral supporter in our hip pocket, but that proved not to be the case.
     Actually, there has been a smidge of method in our madness. We have bee n taking 200-home bites, but making a significant change in our procedure for each. This way, by comparing results we expect to find the "best" procedure, which we can then continue and which could be duplicated by others. Unfortunately, our significant changes have produced results which are not significant.
     For the sake of interest (but not duplication . . . yet), our first effort was preceded by a door-hanger distribution of Peter Buss' Sunday-talk booklet, "Ye Are of More Value Than Many Sparrows."


In the actual door-knocking phase, we identified our church sufficiently to get some sort of recognition. (We became more successful in this after we stopped calling our park pond a "lake.") Then we told them we were calling on every home in the area, and said that we did not want to disturb anyone who was active with a church, but that we did want to invite anyone who was not active to pay us a visit some Sunday. If that only generated a mere, "That's nice," we would ask if they were active in a church (which sometimes produced stumbled mumbles), but most people told us their affiliation without prompting. Showing them a copy of "Sparrows" to aid their recognition, we also asked if they recalled receiving the little booklet. Most did not. And those who did did not usually want to talk about it, often coming up with another, "That's nice." Finally, before they could take their hand off the door, we handed them our newly printed folder about the Immanuel Church and bid them farewell.
     Our second segment of 200 homes was very similar to the first, except that we eliminated the Preliminary round of 30 cent booklets. By this time we had 60 cent booklets available, "The New Church, A New Christianity," and we simply handed out one of these along with our folder about the Immanuel Church. Our verbal approach remained about the same.
     For the third effort we selected a somewhat less affluent area of Glenview with the rather dubious reasoning that perhaps poor people don't feel as compelled by peer pressure to be active in a church as do rich people. (Well, it's true. We did. We'll let you know how it turns out. Swainwood was over 80% solidly churched, you see.)
     Anyhow, as we always like to upgrade each effort, this time we placed three (3) of our 30 cent booklets on the door knobs in a three-week preliminary distribution, and we will follow with "The New Church" plus our Immanuel Church folder. And, due to this wealth of literature, we have modified our verbal approach substantially, especially with a view to encouraging discussion of the booklets. If this latest effort demonstrates any significant improvements, we'll be sure to keep you posted.
     So, with 400 homes canvassed (including Saturday call-backs for the not-at-homes) we found about 50 who we felt should be followed up (personal letter and then a printed invitation to a specific First Sunday with another personal note), and we've had two actual visitors whom we can trace directly to our door-calling.
     Though we can't lay a finger on precisely what we are doing right (or wrong) with all our extension efforts here in Glenview, one thing is becoming apparent: we are getting more and more visitors, more and more public awareness and interest.


It is no longer unusual for us to receive telephone inquiries about our church and religion. I'm not sure what, but something seems to be starting to perk.
     As a finale, let me add some useful data to the memory bank of any would-be door knockers. Dogs that never bite, do. People taking baths, sleeping, talking on the phone, or painting their kitchen ceiling are remarkably uninterested in religious matters. The majority of housewives in wealthy neighborhoods are not home on weekdays and do not pick up their morning papers until after the 5:58 gets in from Chicago each evening.
     Now, if you'll excuse me, the weather is cold and sunny, and as it is the season for Jingling bells, I can think of no legitimate reason (though I've tried) why I should not be out calling on my neighbors.
Church News 1982

Church News       Lygia Dalcin       1982


     One of the aspirations of our society is to have in Portuguese the books of the Writings, such as the Arcana Coelestia, which is found either in French or English and therefore it is limited to the members who know those languages. Developing the knowledge of the doctrine among our own members of the church, our publications permit direct instruction, which will prepare us adequately to fight against evils, and will also elevate the spiritual level of our society.
     Another of our desires is that our publications, by means of libraries and schools, will be received by other people, who, although not knowing of the existence of the New Church, will have the opportunity of entering into contact with the Heavenly Doctrine, and, knowing the seed of truth, will be able to receive answers to their questions about the mysteries of faith. This has been confirmed by several letters and visits to our church in the past two years, among whom are two men who had been working on a translation of Heaven and Hell from French for about a year before coming across, in a bookstore, a book of the Writings published by our society. Finding our address in the book they came to our church in search of other books, and have come back several times since. Also, a man living in a city 300 miles away through the purchase of one of the Writings published by our society has visited us several times and is helping us in the publication of the Arcana Coelestia.
     Thus, for over two years now, various members of our society have participated in the work of publishing the Writings, through translating, revising, typing, copying and binding. This combined effort has also served as an excellent means of bringing our society together in use.


We also appreciate the help given to us by Rosy Sconce, who, although she lives in the United States, has translated several collateral works, the most recent being Spirits and Men by Rev. Hugo Odhner. This work is being published chapter by chapter in our magazine.
     Our most recent efforts in publishing the Writings include the following works:

     The Brief Exposition-An old translation (1921) by Dr. Levindo de Lafayette was revised and published professionally in August of 1981. The work is being advertised by sending out a pamphlet with the same cover containing the preface and table of contents in full form.
The Apocalypse Revealed-For over two years a translation of this work has been underway by Rev. Jose Figueiredo. Seven chapters are now completed and typed up for reproduction in fascicles by way of mimeograph.
The White Horse-A revision of Dr. Lafayette's translation was published as the first part of two of our recent magazines.
Arcana Coelestia-Due to great interest by many people in and out of the church, a revision of Dr. Lafayette's translation has begun. It is being reproduced through mimeograph and the first chapter has already been published through our magazine.

     There are also several other works translated by Dr. Lafayette which are not published. These manuscripts are being photocopied to preserve this invaluable work.
     The members of the society of Rio de Janeiro are thankful for the fund set up for the publication of the Writings in Portuguese, established by John Pitcairn, who, after his visit to Brazil in 1915, felt the necessity for us to develop here, through our own work, the way for the reception of the Heavenly Doctrines. We often forget we are a small nucleus, and, supported by this material base and filled with spirit, we believe that, firmly founded on the rock of the doctrine, we can contribute to the dissemination of the New Church in Brazil and other Portuguese-speaking countries.
     Lygia Dalcin

IN OUR CONTEMPORARIES       Various       1982

     The May-June issue of New Church Home contains a short editorial tribute to Rev. B. David Holm, who died on April 20th of this year. The tribute sketches briefly Mr. Holm's career from the time he was ordained in 1952 and became assistant to the pastor of the Durban society to the time when he became a full-time teacher of religion and chaplain at the secondary school level of the Academy "where he was dearly loved by his students."
     The same issue devotes attention to what many Sunday school teachers call "The Dole Notes." These Bible Study Notes were reviewed in NEW CHURCH LIFE in December of 1977.



NEWS FROM BENADE       R.R.G       1982


     At the ninth annual meeting of the Canada Association of the New Church, held in Berlin (Kitchener) Ontario, the Rev. W. H. Benade (not yet generally called "bishop") dealt with what might well have been an upsetting question. A Mr. Martin questioned the ex officio right of ministers to represent associations of the General Convention in which they happened to reside. ". . . it seemed to him as if this was claiming a Divine right for the ministers, somewhat like the Divine right claimed by kings. The Rev. W. H. Benade replied that there was a Divine right of the priesthood, for the priests represented the Lord in His Divine function of saving souls, and the priests were constituted not by the people but by the Lord; societies did not make their priests but chose them from those already constituted. He added that civil governors had a Divine right to govern in civil affairs, as priests had a Divine right to govern in ecclesiastical affairs. In either case, it is the Divine Law or the Divine Truth that rules, or the Lord through His representatives who carry out this Divine law. The idea that the will of man was to rule either in church or state was a grievous error, for the human will was corrupt and only corrupt, and the rule of this will was the rule of hell. We must be guided by the Lord, through the Divine Truth He has revealed. Governors in church and state are constituted not to carry out the will of the governors but the will of the Lord as revealed in the Divine Truth, and in so far as the Lord rules, the church advances into intelligence and into peace" (NEW CHURCH LIFE, July, 1881, P. 5).




Bryn Athyn. Pennsylvania
Public worship and doctrinal classes are provided either regularly or occasionally at the locations listed below. For details use the local phone number of the contact person mentioned or communicate with the Secretary of the General Church, Rev. L. R. Soneson, Cairncrest, Bryn Athyn. PA 19009, Phone (215) 947-4660.


     SYDNEY. N.S.W
Rev. Erik E. Sandstrom. 22 Dudley Street, Penshurst. N.S.W. 2222. Phone: 57-1589.


Rev. Andrew Heilman, Rua Ferreira de Sampaio 58. Apt. 101. Abolicao, Rio de Janeiro 20.000.


     British Columbia:

Rev. William Clifford. 1536 94th Ave., Dawson Creek, V1G 1H1. Phone: (604) 782-3997.

Mr. Douglas Crompton. 21-7055 Blake St., V5S 3V5. Phone: (604) 437-9136.


Rev. Christopher Smith, 16 Bannockburn Rd., R.R. 2. N2G 3W5. Phone: (519) 893-7460.

Mr. and Mrs. Donald McMaster. 726 Edison Avenue, Apt, 33, Ottawa, Ontario K2C 3P8. Phone: (613) 729-6452.

Rev. Geoffrey Childs, 2 Lorraine Gardens. Islington, Ontario M9B 424. Phone: (416) 231-4958.


Mr. Denis de Chazal, 17 Ballantyne Ave. So., Montreal West, Quebec H4X 2B1. Phone: (514) 489-9861.


Mr. Jorgen Hauptmann. Strandvejen 22, Jyllinge, 4000 Roskilde. Phone: 03-389968.


Rev. Patrick A. Rose. 2 Christchurch Court, Colchester C03 3AU.

Mr. and Mrs. R. Evans, Ill., Howard Drive, Letchworth. Herrs. Phone: Letchworth 4751.

Rev. Robert McMaster. 135 Mantilla Rd., London SW17 8DX. Phone: 672-6239.

Mrs. Neil Rowcliffe. 135 Bury Old Road, Heywood, Lancs. Phone: Heywood 68189.

Mrs. R. Griffith, Wyngarth Wootton Fitzpaine. Bridport DT6 6NF. Phone: Charmouth 614.


Rev. Alain Nicolier, 21200 Beaune, France. Phone: (80) 22.47.88.


Mr. Daan Lupker. Wabserveen Straat 25. The Hague.


Mrs. Marion Mills, 8 Duders Ave., Devonport. Auckland 9. Phone: 453-043.


Mr. Eyvind Boyesen. Vetlandsveien 82A, Oslo 6. Phone: 26-1159.


Mr. and Mrs. N. Laidlaw. 35 Swanspring Ave., Edinburgh EH 10-6NA. Phone: 0 31-445- 2377.

Mrs. J. Clarkson. Hillview. Balmore. Nr. Torrance, Glasgow. Phone: Balmore 262.




Rev. Geoffrey Howard. 30 Perth Rd., Westville, Natal. 3630. Phone: 03 1-821136


Mr. D S. Came, 110 8th St., Lindon 2195. Phone: 011-462982.


     KENT MANOR     
Louisa Allais. 129 Anderson Road, Mandini, Zululand 4490.

     Mission in South Africa:
Superintendent-The Rev. Norman E. Riley, 42 Pitlochry Rd., Westville, Natal. 3630.


Rev. Bjorn Boyesen. Bruksater. Furusjo. 5-56600. Habo. Phone: 0392-20395.

Rev. Ragnar Boyesen. Aladdinsvagen 27, 161 38 Bromma. Phone: 48-99-22 and 26-79-85.



Dr. R. Shepard. 4537 Dolly Ridge Road, Birmingham. AL 35243. Phone: (205) 967-3442.


Mr. Hubert Rydstrom, 3640 E. Piccadilly Rd., Phoenix, AZ 85018. Phone: (602) 955-2290.

Rev. Roy Franson, 8416 East Kenyon Dr., Tucson, AZ 85710. Phone: (602) 296-1070.


     LOS ANGELES               
Rev. Michael Gladish. 2959 Mount Curve, Altadena. CA 91001. Phone:(213) 797-5097.

Rev. Cedric King, 7911 Canary Way, San Diego, CA 92123. Phone: (714) 268-0379.

Rev. Wendel Barnett, 5351 Southbridge Pl., San Jose, CA 95 118. Phone: (408) 267-7730.


Mr. James Andrews, 9722 Majestic Rd., Longmont, CO 80501. Phone: (303) 652-2073.



Rev. Glenn Alden, 47 Jerusalem Hill Rd., Trumbull, CT 06611. Phone: (203)877-1141.

Mrs. Justin Hyatt, 417 Delaware Ave. McDaniel Crest, Wilmington, DE 19803. Phone:(302) 478-4213.

     District of Columbia-see Mitchellville, Maryland.


Rev. John Odhner. 413 Summit Ave., Lake Helen. FL 32744. Phone. (904) 228-2337.

Rev. Mark Alden. 253 S. Biscayne River Dr., Miami, FL 33169. Phone: (305) 687-1337.


Rev. Louis Synnestvedt, Rt. 3, Box 136, Americus. GA 31709. Phone: (912) 924-9221.

Rev. Christopher Bown, 3795 Montford Dr. Chamblee. GA 30341. Phone:(404) 457 4726


(Idaho-Oregon border) Mr. Harold Rand. 1705 Whitley Dr., Fruitland. ID 83619 Phone: (208) 452-3181.

Rev. Brian Keith, 27 12 Brassie Dr., Glenview, IL 60025. Phone: (312) 724-7829.

Mr. John Aymer. 380 Oak Lane, Decatur, Ill. 62562. Phone: (217) 875-3215.

Rev. Peter Buss, 73 Park Dr., Glenview, Ill. 60025. Phone: (312) 724-0120.

Contact Rev. Stephen Cole in Cincinnati, Ohio.


Mr. Henry Bruser. Jr., 1652 Ormandy Dr., Baton Rouge, LA 70808, Phone: (504) 924-3089


Rev. David Simons, 13213 E. Greenbank Rd., Oliver Beach, MD 21220. Phone: (301) 335-6763.


Rev. Daniel Heinrichs, 3809 Enterprise Rd., Mitchellville, MD 20716. Phone: (301) 262-4565.


Mr. and Mrs. Joel Hoo. Phone: (617) 277-5988.


Rev. Walter Orthwein. 132 Kirk La., Troy, MI 48084. Phone: (313) 689-6118.

Mr. Christopher Clark. 5853 Smithfield, East Lansing, MI 48823. Phone. (517) 351-2880.


Mrs. Tore Gram. 20185 Vine St., Excelsior, MN 55331. Phone: (612) 474-9574.


Mr. David Zeigler. 1616 B Norma Ct., Columbia, MO 65201. Phone: (314) 442-0569.

Mr. Glen Klippenstein, Glenkirk Farms. Maysville, MO 64469. Phone: (816) 449-2167.

     New Jersey-New York:

Mrs. Edsall Elliott. 26 Fieldstone Dr., Whippany, NJ 0798 1. Phone: 1201) 887-0478.

     New Mexico:

Dr. Andrew Doering. 1298 Sagebrush Ct., Rio Rancho, NM 87124. Phone: (505) 897-3623.

     North Carolina:

Mr. Gordon Smith, 38 Newriver Trace, Clover, SC 29710. Phone: (803) 831-2355.


Rev. Stephen Cole, 6431 Mayflower Ave., Cincinnati. OH 45237. Phone: (513)6)1-1210.

Mr. Alan Childs. 19680 Beachcliff Blvd., Rocky River, OH 44116. Phone: (216) 333-1413.

Mr. Hubert Heinrichs. 8372 Todd Street Rd., Sunbury. OH 43074. Phone:(614) 524-2738.

Mrs. Louise Tennis. 3546 S. Marion, Tulsa, OK 74135. Phone: (918) 742-8495.


Mrs. W. Andrews. 2655 S.W. Upper Drive Pl., Portland, OR 97201. Phone:(503) 227-4144.

     Oregon-Idaho Border.-See Idaho, Fruitland.


Rev. Kurt Asplundh. Box 277, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009. Phone: (215) 947-3665.

Mrs. Paul Murray. 5648 Zuck Rd., Erie, PA 16506. Phone. (814) 833-0962.

Rev. Arne Bau-Madsen. Box 527, Rt. 1, Lenhartsville, PA 19534. Phone: (215)756-6140.
Rev. Kenneth Stroh. 7105 Reynolds St., Pittsburgh. PA 15208. Phone: (Church) (412) 731-7421.

     South Carolina:-see North Carolina.

     South Dakota:

Rev. Erik Sandstrom, RR 1. Box 101M. Hot Springs, SD 57747. Phone: (605) 745-6714


Mrs. Charles Hogan, 7513 Evelyn La., Ft. Worth, TX 76118. Phone: (817) 284-0502.

Mr. Bruce Coffin, 3560 Tamnaa Manor, Conroe, TX 77301. Phone: (713) 273-4989.


Rev. Kent Junge. 14323-123rd NE. #C, Kirkland, WA 98033. Phone: (206) 821-0157.


Mrs. Charles Howell, 3912 Plymouth Circle, Madison, WI 53705. Phone: (608) 233-0209).




A Handbook of General Information

     A Brief Summary of the Doctrines of the New Church

     The Life and Mission of Emanuel Swedenborg

     The Beginning of the New Church

     Organization and Uses of the General Church

     Worship, Instruction and Life

     The aim of this Handbook is to give an introductory knowledge of the General Church, its beliefs, its historical setting, its organization, and its field of endeavor. Its numbers are as yet small and its accomplishments modest. But despite these human limitations, it has placed its faith in the truth now revealed for the New Church by the Lord in His second advent; and in this truth will be fulfilled the Divine promise:



     PRICE $1.00 postpaid
Hours: 9 to 12
Monday thru Friday
Phone: 215 947-3920


Notes on This Issue 1982

Notes on This Issue       Editor       1982

Vol. CII     July, 1982     No. 7


     In the March issue Rev. Bruce Rogers listed passages on the resurrection of the Lord's body. In this issue Rev. Erik Sandstrom (who now resides in South Dakota from whence he has been visiting Colorado) invites us into a further consideration of this subject. We look forward to another treatment of this theme in the August issue. Do you remember the "Radio Spot" quoted in the May issue? We promised to report the results of this interesting effort, and we do so this month. As we go to print we learn that there have been half a dozen more requests, and so you can up that figure on page 325 to 198. It may exceed 200 by the time you are reading this. The number of requests for monthly sermons has also been increasing. More than 230 people (not members of the church) are now receiving these sermons from the Evangelization Committee. It would be easy to confuse this evangelization use with quite a different use-that of mailing out sermons to members of the church, and so we have included in this issue a note on that use. (See p. 311.)
     Have you ever dreamed of how well you could be doing your work if it were not for the difficulty of dealing with other people? Whether this is in committee work or your daily occupation, it is one of the common ingredients of life. Most readers will find that the sermon this month is eminently applicable. This is the first time we have published something from Rev. Christopher Bown (now pastor of the Atlanta society).
     "There has been a school of thought-and it has been around for a long time-that you should love yourself first, and then you can love others." See the third of the articles entitled "Which Self?"
     "He could be impatient with what he regarded as non-essential traditions . . . . He wanted the church to be for everyone . . . he was inventive in trying to reach out." The reference is to the beloved and esteemed David Holm. (See page 295.)




     "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity" (Psalm 133:1).

     There are many experiences that we have during our youth that are very important for the rest of our life here on earth. In fact, they are important for our life to eternity in the other world. Among these experiences are even ones that might seem to be trifling, such as playing team sports or singing in choirs.
     It may not be obvious to us how playing team sports is important for our eternal welfare. Yet if we reflect, we will be able to see that in playing team sports one begins to learn the ability of working with other people; hopefully, one also begins to be inspired with the delight of working with others. It may not seem that this is eternally important, but the fact is that those who are not willing to work with other people are not allowed into heaven, for they would not enjoy the delights of eternal life there. (See SD 1837, 4046; AC 687, 1594:4, 2027, 3350, et al.)
     Think of the times when there seems to be a lack of delight in team sports. Frequently that lack of delight comes from someone-a player or even a coach-trying to show off and stand out from the others, taking away from the common good and the common delight. Perhaps the team wins that day. Yet there is a feeling of sadness on the part of many members of the team, for their sense of participation and of usefulness has been taken away by those who try to show off.
     In the case of people singing together in choirs, it is more obvious that those who are not able or not willing to work together not only take away delight but they mar the harmony and unity that is possible. A choir has many different voices that hopefully blend together into a one, without any one person's voice standing out above the others and taking away from the performance of the group. Yet when one person does stand out above the others-when he or she has a loud voice or has a voice that is off key-it probably will mar the performance so it is not as beautiful, perfect or delightful as it could be otherwise.


     We learn from experiences such as these-and hopefully what we learn remains with us and inspires us later in this life and onward to eternity. To learn to work with others in harmony and unity is so extremely important for us to learn-and right now, here on earth! Every association with other people is based upon our ability to work in harmony and unity with them, whether it is in a marriage of husband and wife, in a larger extended family, in our local community, in our nation, or even in our church. Every association of men and women depends upon the ability of all those individuals who comprise it to be willing to work together, looking toward the common good and seeking that end. This is true both in this world and in the world to come.
     At times it seems hard for us to learn this here on earth-yet it is possible! In one memorable story of the other world, Swedenborg tells us of upright gentiles who had just died three or four days before. He heard a choir of them for several hours, "and it was perceived that even during the short time in which it was heard they were being perfected more and more. When I wondered at this I was told that these can be initiated into choirs, and thus into harmonies, in one night; while most Christians barely can in thirty years . . . . [Such] choirs exist when many speak together, all as one, and each as all" (AC 2595).
     It is possible here on earth for people to learn to work together so that right after they die-within the course of only a few short hours-they have worked together with a new choir that becomes a society in heaven. Yet for some of us, it barely can take place even in thirty years.
     Perhaps this is what the Writings mean when they speak of people waiting in the world of spirits up to even thirty years before they are able to enter into a society of heaven (See HH 426) for a society of heaven is described as a choir, and the image of a choir or group of people speaking and singing together is used again and again in the Writings.


     Perhaps we may have to wait thirty years to work out all of our difficulties of getting along with other people. Perhaps we will have to be in a holding pattern before we can enter heaven because of the obstacles within ourselves that prevent us from quickly learning to cooperate with others. Yet that need not be the case. It is possible here on earth, just as in the case of the simple upright gentiles, to learn to work together. And this is so important for the Lord's kingdom here on earth also-the Lord's kingdom which is His church.
     Heaven is not a place; heaven is a state of life that is present, or can be present, within each of us. To go to heaven after death entails having heaven built up within us during the course of our life here on earth. And the heaven that is established within us, as it descends into our conscious feelings and thoughts, is what the Writings mean by the Lord's church. The church is, above all, the spiritual community of all those men and women in whom heaven, or the life of heaven, is growing. Yet it is also the natural organization that seeks to promote the growth of this spiritual community here on earth, especially among its members.
     And so it is vitally important that those in the organized church learn to work together as brethren, dwelling together in unity.
     We know that the Lord taught that those of His church should not be like the gentiles who have princes and rulers who exercise dominion and authority over them. "It shall not be so among you, but whosoever will be great among you, let him be your minister; and whosoever will be chief among you, let him be your servant. Even as the Son of Man came not to be ministered unto but to minister and to give His life a ransom for many" (Matt. 20:25-28). And He later said, "Be ye not called Rabbi, for one is your master, even Christ; and all ye are brethren" (Matt. 23:8).
     We might wonder from this teaching whether there needs to be an organized priesthood within the church that is to teach and lead to the good of life.
     Throughout the history of the Christian Church many have taken these passages from the gospel of Matthew and inferred from them that there should be no leaders of other men in the church, that there should be no priesthood or ministry set aside for the work of salvation. And we might come to the same conclusion if we did not understand the idea of representation and use, now revealed to us in the Writings.
     The Lord alone teaches and leads His church. At the same time, leaders are important in the church, for they are to represent or make visible those qualities of the Lord that are necessary for teaching and leading us, so that we can come into and grow in spiritual life, as individuals and even as a group. In many ways a pastor is like a gentle and patient coach or choir director, making visible the Lord's continual gentle and patient work of salvation.
     We need to be clear that it is not the personality of the leader which represents; it is the office as it functions that represents. This is true whether the leaders are pastors in the church, teachers at school, or parents at home.


For there are many, many offices here on earth that are to represent or make visible the qualities of the Lord. In the church, the office of the priesthood represents or shows the Lord's work of salvation by means of His Word.
     Having leaders in the church, however, does not mean that we should blindly follow them. We are told, "But, my friend, do not put your faith in any councils, but in the Word of God, which is above all councils" (TCR 489; 177:4). Here the Writings warn us against putting faith or trusting in councils of church leaders. They are referring to the great church councils, such as the Council of Nicea, the Council of Trent, and the Council of Dort. And so we are warned not to be bound by or to give allegiance to the doctrinal conclusions of others, but rather to go to the Word itself.
     This warning might seem antagonistic to the idea of people working together in unity and harmony. Yet it is not. The warning is not to accept blindly the thoughts and ideas of others. Each one of us needs to go to the Word for himself to see what the Lord is teaching us and where He is leading us. And as pastors and as lay people we need to do this together, but in a way that never violates the freedom and rationality of others.
     The whole basis of heaven is derived from the idea of free and rational consent on the part of every individual who is in heaven. Every choir that exists as a society in heaven arises from free and rational consent, too. And this must be so in the church on earth. There must be a consent that looks to unity-a consent from having seen together in the Word what truths of doctrine the Lord is teaching and to what uses of life He is leading.
     Consent, however, does not imply conformity and sameness. The natural tendency of human society is to expect conformity and sameness. And this is because, as individuals, we tend to expect-or at least want-others to think and feel about things the same way we do.
     But the Lord seeks for variety. In fact, there cannot be a one or a heaven unless there is variety. Variety is essential for any human society to become perfect. And we need to respect the variety from the Lord that we find in others, whether it is in our marriage, in our family, in our community, in our nation, or even within the church itself. It is especially in the church that we respect the freedom and reason of the other individuals who make up our societies, trusting that the Lord in His Word is teaching and leading them also, but perhaps in ways different from ourselves.
     We are taught that the heavens are vast, and there are "places" in heaven that will never be filled. There are people who are at one end of heaven, and others at a far distant end.


This means that the good delights that they have are not shared very much. In the other world, people who share the same delights come into the same societies; they dwell together in apparent close proximity. Yet there are those in heaven who are at the opposite ends of heaven. What they delight in is not the same thing entirely. There must be the essential heavenly delight of all in heaven in being taught and led by the Lord, in harmony with others, but the specific delights of their specific uses must vary. We need to realize that in the church here on earth. We are seeking for each person to become prepared for a specific use-his or her own "place" in a society somewhere in heaven-and therefore the delight of others may vary from the delight we have. We should never strive to have a rigid conformity in the church as to what is delightful or enjoyable.
     So we have another warning: not to expect or demand conformity of affection. We might feel that, this being the case, we are left all alone, or that there can be no unity or harmony if everyone is free to do as he pleases. Insofar as any do so from proprium there cannot be unity or harmony. But insofar as each of us turns to the Word, and we mutually learn what the Lord has revealed there and are inspired with the affections that are there; insofar as each of us looks to that primary commandment the Lord has given us, "that ye love one another; as I have loved you, that ye also love one another" (John 13:34); insofar as we strive to fulfill that commandment by looking to the common good, beyond our individual good, and seeking together the betterment of others; insofar as we have that as our goal, trying in our own heart to follow the teachings of the Word not from the dictate or authority of others but from what we can see for ourselves, then there will be unity and harmony-unity and harmony that is from the Lord.
     The heavens-that vast multitude of individuals who receive life from the Lord-are drawn together into a oneness of form-the human form, the form of human society-by means of the mutual love that they have from the Lord. This love grows in each of them as they in their freedom and rationality turn to the Word, learn the truths revealed there and apply them to life.
     Within this mutual love is the Lord's infinite power of attraction-the endeavoring of His Divine love to draw all to Himself and to bring people together so that they will work in harmony and unity in the uses of life. Thus in mutual love is the real origin of all harmony and unity!
     Here is the Lord's real goal. Here is what He seeks to provide in all levels of human society. Whether it is in our own family, in the local community in which we live, in the country in which we abide, in the Lord's church here on earth, or in His universal kingdom in the heavens, the goal is that mutual love may prevail and that people work together in harmony and unity.


     The idea is repeated again and again throughout the Word for the New Church: the idea of harmony, concord, agreement, and working together in unity. Those who are not willing to work with other people are not able to enter heaven, for they would not enjoy the delights of eternal life there.
     The delight that will last forever is from the Lord in mutual love. "Behold, how good and how pleasant it is for brethren to dwell together in unity!" Amen.

     LESSONS: Psalm 132:1-14, 133:1-3; John 13:1-5, 12-17, 34, 35; AC 3350 (portion)

WHICH SELF?       Rev. GEOFFREY S. CHILDS       1982

     A Search for the True Human



     The Intermediate Self

     There are "apparent goods" in childhood (AC 1661), and "mediate goods" in adult life (AC 4063:2,3) that have within them the love of self. This is the hereditary love of self in each case, and therefore in itself from evil tendencies. Yet in each case the love of self is appropriate to the state, and necessary as an intermediate quality. And its evil nature is so hidden by ignorance and innocence that it is not to be condemned, but rather permitted! It is a necessary love of self, a stepping-stone state. The term "intermediate self" is used in this study to include both the apparent good of childhood and the mediate good of adult states.
     Concerning apparent good we read: ". . . the goods of infancy . . . although they appear good, are not good so long as hereditary evil contaminates them. That which is inherent and which adheres is from the love of self and the love of the world. Whatever is of the love of self and of the love of the world then appears as good, but is not good; but still it is to be called good so long as it is in an infant or a child who does not yet know what is truly good. The ignorance excuses, and the innocence makes it appear as good" (AC 1667:2-italics added).


Little children cannot help feeling an innocent sense of merit. The power of gold stars and "sticky-licky" awards testifies to this! How great a child feels when he is praised for real and heartfelt effort. And this is right: the whole context of the Arcana Coelestia treatment of Genesis chapter fourteen (AC 1651-1756) makes this so clear. The feelings of merit are a necessary stepping-stone state-and so in the innocent love of self within the sense of merit. In the Lord's first temptations (combats that came in His childhood but with all others only in adult life) He fought from a sense of merit! And it was appropriate. "The Lord was introduced . . . into the most grievous combats against evils and falsities . . . in His earliest childhood; neither could He at that time suppose otherwise" than that these goods and truths were His own. In exactly the same or parallel spiritual state, man places "self merit" in victory (See AC 1661:4, 5).
     Later in the beginning of adult life with man, there is also present and valid to the state a strong sense of merit: an innocent love of self.

Every man when he first begins to combat supposes that the goods and truths from which he combats are his own; that is, he attributes them to himself, and at the same time attributes to himself the power by which he resists . . . . When man is in such a state . . . then the goods and truths from which he combats against evils and falsities are not goods and truths, although they appear so. . .there is what is his own in them, and he places self-merit in victory, . . . when yet it is the Lord alone who combats and overcomes (AC 1661:3, 4).

In adult regeneration, the broad term for goods in which love of self is present (in innocence) is "mediate good."

When a man is being regenerated, he is kept by the Lord in a kind of mediate good. This good serves for introducing genuine goods and truths; but after these have been introduced, it is separated from them . . . . The new [spiritual] man is altogether different and diverse from the [proprial]. In order that a man may be brought from the state of the [proprial] man to that of the new, the concupiscences of the world must be put off, and the affections of heaven must be put on. This is effected by innumerable means, . . . it is not done in a moment, as some believe, but through a course of years; nay, during the man's whole life, even to its end; . . . it must needs be that he is long kept in a kind of mediate good; that is, in a good which partakes both of the affections of the world and of the affections of heaven. And unless he is kept in this mediate good, he in no wise admits heavenly goods and truths (AC 4063:2,3).

In intermediate states of rebirth-intermediate between the hereditary love of self before reformation and the regenerate states to come-there are these mediate goods.


These are goods with which evils can be mingled; and these evils include, amazingly, a strong love of self.

If anyone loves himself more than others, and from this love studies to excel others in moral and civic life, in memory-knowledges and doctrinal things, and to be exalted to dignities and wealth in preeminence to others, and yet acknowledges and adores God, performs kind offices to his neighbor from the heart, and does what is just and fair from conscience, the evil of this love of self is one with which good and truth can be mingled; for it is an evil that is man's own, and that is born hereditarily, and to take it away from him suddenly would be to extinguish the fire of his first life. But the man who loves himself above others, and from this love despises others in comparison with himself, and hates those who do not honor and as it were adore him, and therefore feels a consequent delight of hatred in revenge and cruelty, the evil of such a love as this is one with which good and truth cannot be mingled, for they are contraries (AC 3993:9).

     The nature of intermediate good is a study in itself. But reflection on the teachings about it lead to the conclusion that a type of love of self is necessary in rebirth. Because of the sheer force of hereditary evil present unconsciously with man, the "fire of his first life" (Ibid) requires love of self. In the carefully defined contexts of AC 3993, and with children AC 1667, the hereditary love of self is inevitably and appropriately present. It was not so with the Most Ancient Church. But it is so now, and will be until hereditary evil tendencies are replaced with hereditary good tendencies! So merit is justly linked with honest idealism in childhood-with a deepest sense of chivalry. And ambition in early adult life is linked with idealism also-with a real effort to serve the Lord and others (AC 3993:9). How wonderful is the mercy of the Lord!

Note: For references on this subject see: "Mediate Good," NEW CHURCH LIFE. 1960, pp. 222, 270. And the study by Rev. Dandridge Pendleton given to the Council of the Clergy in 1978 entitled: "From the Call of Abraham to Jacob's Reconciliation with Esau a Doctrinal Study and Correlation of Apparent Good Collateral Good and Mediate Good."

     A time comes when the evil love of self within merit is seen. And then it is no longer excusable, but is to be rejected.(See Genesis 31:2 and AC 2219, 2222, 4066, and pp. 226 to 230 in the " Mediate Good" article in NCL in 1960). In the end, when intermediate states are over, merit is an obstacle to heaven.

Such spirits as have confirmed themselves during their life in the world in the belief that the good they do and the truth they believe is from themselves, or is appropriated to them as their own (which is the belief of all who place merit in good actions and claim righteousness to themselves) are not received into heaven. Angels avoid them.


They look upon them as stupid and as thieves; as stupid because they continually have themselves in view and not the Divine; and as thieves because they steal from the Lord what is His" (HH 10).

The Subordinate Love of Self

     There has been a school of thought-and it has been around for a long time-that you should love yourself first, and then you can love others. Many stress how important it is to have a strong self-love: Neitzsche, Rand, Ringer ("Looking Out for Number One"), etc. With a slight re-adjustment, the letter of the Word could be quoted in this context: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Matt. 22:39). Such strong self love, which means putting yourself first, is not what the Writings teach concerning the orderly love of self, or the subordinated love of self. The hereditary love of self certainly puts self first, and all others are regarded with contempt (AC 3993:9). Such love if confirmed is evil, and leads to eternity in hell.
     There is an initial love of self in mediate good that has innocence, and is proper in its place-and that often puts self first. But this stepping-stone quality is left behind if regeneration advances. Of this attitude we read:

. . . man is born into . . . hereditary evil . . . This nature is that which must be rooted out while the man lives in the world, which cannot possibly be done except by the Lord through regeneration . . . in order that this may be effected, the man must first of all be reborn as a little child, and must learn what is evil and false, and also what is good and true . . . To this end, such knowledges are insinuated into him as are not altogether contrary to those which he had before; as that all love begins from self; that self is to be taken care of first and then others. . .These and other such knowledges are those of the infancy of his new life, and are of such a nature that while they derive somewhat from his former life. . .they also derive somewhat from his new life . . . These are the lowest goods and truths, from which those who are being regenerated commence (AC 3701:24).

Actually, these are only apparent goods and truths. For after regeneration is over, man can look back on these first truths and see that they were inverted-in themselves in a wrong order of priority.

. . . the man then sees that the truths of his infancy (of rebirth) were relatively inverted, and that the same had been by little and little brought back into a different order, namely, to be inversely subordinate, so that those which at first were in the prior place are now in the posterior place; thus that by those truths which were the truths of infancy and childhood, the angels of God had ascended as by a ladder from the earth to heaven; but afterwards, by the truths of his adult age, the angels of God descended as by a ladder from heaven to earth (AC 3701:7).


     The orderly and subordinate love of self, fashioned by the Lord Himself in man's creation, is treated of fully in TCR 394 to 405 inclusive. The heading of the first section is: "There are Three Universal Loves-the Love of Heaven, the Love of the World, and the Love of Self." And the next chapter states: "These Three Loves, When Rightly Subordinated, Perfect Man, but When Not Rightly Subordinated, They Pervert and Invert Him" (TCR 403).

These three are the universal and fundamental of all loves, and . . . charity has something in common with each of them . . . . Charity has something in common with each of these three loves because viewed in itself charity is the love of uses . . . the love of heaven looking to spiritual uses, the love of the world to natural uses, which may be called civil, and the love of self to corporeal uses, which may also be called domestic uses, that have regard to oneself and one's own (TCR 394).

These three loves reside in every man from creation, and therefore from birth, and when rightly subordinated they perfect him" (TCR 395. 403). These three loves are rightly subordinated when the love of heaven forms the head, the love of the world the breast and abdomen, and the love of self the feet and their soles (TCR 395).

In the man in whom these three loves are rightly subordinated, they are . . . coordinated thus: The highest love, which is the love of heaven, is inwardly in the second, which is the love of the world, and through this in the third or lowest, which is the love of self; and the love that is within directs at its will that which is without (TCR 395:3).

These two chapters are rich in material on the subordinated love of self, with explanations and illustrations: an invaluable section of Divine doctrine.
     To ever say or teach that the love of self should be in the first place spiritually is a straight falsity. It does appeal to the wrong self love! It is the ruling principle in hell. Actually, the subordinated love of self, although a deep and full love, is in the last place!

Man has been so created that he can look upward, or above himself; and can also look downward, or below himself. To look above himself is to look to his neighbor, to his country, to the church, to heaven, especially to the Lord; but to look below himself is to look to the earth, to the world, and especially to himself . . . .


To look above one's self is to be uplifted by the Lord; for no one can look above himself unless he is uplifted by Him Who is above . . . . Man looks below himself when he turns the influx of truth and good from the Lord to himself (AC 78 i4-7-Italics added).

By looking above self and below self is meant to have as the end, or to love above all things . . . . The man who is in the good of charity and faith loves also himself and the world, but no otherwise than as the means to an end are loved. The love of self with him looks to love to the Lord, for he loves himself as a means to the end that he may serve the Lord (AC 78 18-9-Italics added).

     A key quote on the subordinated love of self, and its position in the hierarchy of good loves, is this: "It is a common saying that everyone is neighbor to himself, that is, that one should take care of himself first of all. The doctrine of charity teaches how the case herein is. Everyone is neighbor to himself, not in the first but in the last place. In a prior place are others who are in good; in a still prior place is a society of many; in a place still prior is our country; in a place still prior is the church; in a place still prior is the Lord's kingdom; and above all men and all things is the Lord" (AC 6933-Italics added).
     A more doctrinal analysis of the same teaching is given in AC 9096, where the subject of internal bonds is unfolded: "Internal bonds in man are affections of truth and of good . . . . But external bonds are the affections of the love of self and of the love of the world, for these lead man in external things. If the latter [external] affections descend from the internal bonds, which are affections of truth and of good, they are good, for the man then loves himself and the world not for the sake of self and the world but for the sake of good uses from himself and the world. But if the affections of the love of self and of the love of the world do not descend from internal bonds, the affections are evil, and are called 'cupidities'; for then the man loves himself for the sake of himself" (AC 9096:1-Italics added).
     The teachings in the Writings on successive and simultaneous order apply to the love of self and the loves within and higher to that lowest love. True and subordinated love of self has higher spiritual loves within (AC 9096, TCR 395:3). But the love of self without the higher spiritual loves within is evil. It is the subordinated love of self meant by the commandment: "You shall love your neighbor as yourself" (Matt. 22:39). It is this same self reflected in Nebuchadnezzar's wakening after his pride cost him his throne and he had lived as a wild animal for seven seasons. "He was driven from men, and did eat grass as oxen, and his body was wet with the dew of heaven, till his hairs were grown like eagles' feathers, and his nails like birds' claws.


And at the end of the days I Nebuchadnezzar lifted up mine eyes unto heaven, and mine understanding returned unto me, and I blessed the most High" (Dan. 4:33, 34). Later he writes: "My reason returned unto me"-the reason resting upon genuine, subordinated self-love!
     But an even clearer illustration of this is in the story of the prodigal son. After he had left home with his inheritance, he "took his journey into a far country, and there wasted his substance in riotous living. And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him. And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me as one of thy hired servants" (Luke 15:13-19-italics added).     
     The humility present in genuine love of self is seen in the teaching that "when a man has been regenerated, consequently, when he has as the end to love the neighbor and to love the Lord, he then has as means the loving of himself and the world. When man is of this character, then when he looks to the Lord he accounts himself as nothing . . . and if he regards himself as anything, it is that he may be able to serve the Lord" (AC 8995:4).
     "Moreover when those who are in the affection of truth from the good of genuine charity hear that love toward the neighbor does nor begin from self, but from the Lord, they rejoice; whereas they who are in the affection of truth from the love of self and of the world do not receive this truth, but sharply maintain that this love begins from themselves. Thus they do not know what it is to love the neighbor as one's self" (AC 4368:4-Italics added).

LOVE OF SELF              1982

     The love of self consists in willing well to ourselves alone, and not to others except for the sake of ourselves, not even to the church, to our country, to any human society, or to a fellow citizen.
     New Jerusalem and Its Heavenly Doctrine 65


RESURRECTION SERVICE for Rev. B. David Holm 1982

RESURRECTION SERVICE for Rev. B. David Holm       Rev. Kurt H. Asplundh       1982

     April 22, 1982, in Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania

     The Word records the last conversation between the Lord and His disciple Simon Peter. "Simon, son of Jonas, do you love Me more than these?" the Lord asked. Simon answered, "Yea, Lord . . . He said unto him, Feed My lambs." Again, the Lord asked, "Do you love Me?" Again, Simon answered, "Yea, Lord; Thou knowest that I love Thee." He said unto him, "Tend My sheep." The Lord asked a third time: "Do you love Me?" Peter was grieved because He said it a third time, and he said, "Lord, Thou knowest all things; Thou knowest that I love Thee." Jesus said to him: "Feed My sheep" (John 21:15-17).
     This was the Lord's charge to Peter. What was Peter to do? What were all the disciples to do now that the Lord's life on earth was finished and He was about to ascend into heaven? The Lord's answer was clear: "Feed My lambs; watch over My sheep; feed My sheep."
     They knew what He meant. He had called His followers lambs and sheep. He had called Himself their shepherd. Now Peter and the others were to be the shepherds of the church, even as the Lord had promised in the book of Jeremiah: "I will give you pastors according to mine heart, who shall feed you with knowledge and understanding" (Jer. 3:15). The word "pastor" means a shepherd. It has come to mean a spiritual shepherd.
     "A priest loves the church, the country, society, the citizen, and thus the neighbor, if he teaches and leads his hearers from zeal for their salvation" (D. Love XIII:2).
     It is this love that makes the pastoral use such a special and vital use for the life of the church. We love our faithful priests, our good shepherds, and when, in the Lord's providence, a priest of the New Church is taken to the spiritual world it is an opportunity for us to think about this use and remember why we treasure it.
     What is the pastoral function? What are the qualities of the priestly office which lead us to esteem and respect those who serve in it worthily?
     "As regards priests," the Writings teach, "they must teach men the way to heaven, and must also lead them . . .


Priests who teach truths and by means of them lead to the good of life, and thus to the Lord, are." we are told, "good shepherds of the sheep . . ." (AC 10794).
     As a shepherd feeds and tends his flock, so a pastor is called to teach and lead the church. The true pastor is affected by truths "because by means of them he leads souls to heaven. . ." Therefore, we read, "it is . . . his love diligently to teach truths from the Word. . ." (D. Love XIII: 2).
     He will pray for the enlightenment not only to see the truth but to see how he may use it to meet the needs of his people. The truth he seeks is not to satisfy his own intellectual curiosity but what will touch the hearts of his flock. "Feed My sheep," the Lord said; "Feed My lambs." The worthy pastor will never believe he knows it all, realizing that human need is ever various, ever changing, and that his flock is ever hungry for the new truth that comes only from a sincere and fresh study of the Word.
     A true pastor must have patience and a deep faith in the Lord's providence, for he "must not compel anyone" (AC 10793). "No one can be compelled to believe contrary to what he thinks in his heart to be true" (Ibid) Instead, the priest must be zealous for the freedom of a man to choose to follow the Lord or not, and must guard the integrity of another man's conscience. His success as a pastor cannot come from forcing his will upon others, demanding compliance, or taking responsibility for the work that must be done by another. Spiritual freedom is precious in the sight of the Lord.
     Today, we think of the qualities and abilities of a worthy pastor in our remembrance of the lifetime of service of the Rev. David Holm as a priest and teacher of the New Church. While we may not judge a man's spiritual state or his eternal destiny, we may say that to all outward appearances at least, David Holm has served the Lord as a good and faithful servant. He has been a sincere and dedicated priest and has gained the respect and affection of many, many people of the church. His thirty years of service have taken a variety of forms, yet in everything that he was called upon to do, David was first and foremost a pastor. He has been a shepherd who has watched over his sheep, fed them, bound up their wounds, chased after them, scolded them, and loved them.
     Since his inauguration into the priesthood in 1952, he has served the General Church in South Africa, as pastor in Ohio, as religion teacher in the Academy and Bryn Athyn Church schools, as Assistant Dean of the Bryn Athyn Church, and, most recently, as instructor in religion and chaplain in the Academy high schools. Over the years he has also held a number of important General Church responsibilities.


But where he served and what he accomplished is less important than how he served. Whatever his assignment, he served energetically and enthusiastically to further the salvation of souls by means of his work. He was totally sincere in his work in the church. He placed truth before person and was not afraid to speak up for the truth. Though strong in defense of principle, he was, as pastor, a gentle, approachable and sympathetic priest. He did not condone disorders and believed the priest should be a watchman to protect the church from whatever threatened it, yet he did not shrink from facing troubled souls, reaching out to the lost sheep and offering the Lord's mercy and truth. Anyone who needed help was welcome in his office and would not hear simply theoretical abstractions but sound practical teachings.
     He could be impatient with what he regarded as non-essential traditions of the church or inflexible ultimates, though never trying to compromise the doctrine. He wanted the church to be for everyone, whatever their states of life. In this he especially sought to follow the example of the Lord, Who had taught: "I am come not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance" (Matt. 9:13).
     Because of this interest in a wide range of the states that exist within the church, he was inventive in trying to reach out. He felt the church had to be able to meet a variety of needs. "You can't pull everybody through the same knothole," he would say. His concern for these "other sheep" which the Lord also wants to bring into the fold resulted in the establishment of special accommodated services and special classes, as well as other activities and committees to bring people into the life of the church.
     His teaching of doctrine was an inspiration to many, especially in small class groups and informal discussions. He had a special gift of making the teachings come alive for people. He conveyed such a beautiful picture of the reality and wonder of the spiritual world in his teaching that those who heard it could no longer fear death, but could only see their entrance into the spiritual world as a wonderful new beginning of life.
     Perhaps his greatest work in the church and his greatest joy was working with young people of high school age, the precious lambs of the flock. While he sometimes called them goats instead of lambs, he loved them for what they could be and because they are the future generation of the church. With understanding, frankness, and a keen sense of humor, he engaged their affections as well as their attention. He respected their minds and they respected his dedication. They knew he stood for something. It was important to him and they felt it should be important also to them.


     During his years as priest, David was something of a pioneer. He started many new uses, saw their great importance and potential, and then found himself forced to turn them over to others through reassignment or his own failing health. Many times he spoke of his reluctance in giving up uses he had started, but soon he would be involved in something new with his special enthusiasm and infectious energy.
     So, now, the Lord has reassigned a beloved pastor and teacher to another flock. No doubt he has laid down his work with reluctance; no doubt he will take up new work with vigor. If he is inwardly in the love which he manifested in externals in this world, that is, the love of saving souls, an important use awaits him in the spiritual world where he is now just awakening. There are priests in heaven. The Writings teach that "those are concerned with ecclesiastical affairs in heaven who in the world loved the Word and eagerly sought in it for truths, not with honor or gain as an end but uses of life both for themselves and for others . . ." These, we are told, "minister in the preaching office . . ." (HH 393). The Writings also teach that there are "masters" in the spiritual world who have the use of educating boys and young men who have died and have come into spiritual life before reaching adult age. The work of these men is described in the Writings, showing how they instruct their students in spiritual truths (AR 611, 839). Can we not imagine Mr. Holm finding a classroom in some society of the other world filled with boys who have been waiting for their religion teacher? He would step up to the front of the room, tell them all to be quiet, and start teaching.
     Let us not think of our loss today. Let us think of the gain in the spiritual world of a priest of the New Church. He is not here; he is risen.
     When he knew his hour was come, David was given peace by the Lord. "Peace has in it confidence in the Lord," we are told, confidence "that He directs all things, and provides all things, and that We leads to a good end. When a man is in this faith," we are told further, "he is in peace, for he then fears nothing, and no anxious concern about things to come disquiets him" (AC 8455). May this sense of peace be something we can all share at this time as we think of the Lord's welcoming words to this shepherd of the sheep: "Well done, thou good and faithful servant; thou hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over many things: enter thou into the joy of thy Lord" (Matt. 25:21). Amen.


     [photo of Rev. B. David Holm]

ANNOUNCEMENT       Rev. Louis B. King       1982

     Mr. Neil Buss has been elected by the respective Board of Directors of the Academy of the New Church and the General Church of the New Jerusalem to succeed Mr. Leonard Gyllenhaal as Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer of both institutions. Mr. Buss will commence employment on July 19, 1982, assuming the title of Treasurer and Chief Financial Officer on September 1, 1982.
     Mr. Leonard Gyllenhaal will succeed Dr. Charles Ebert as Development Officer of the Academy of the New Church, effective September 1, 1982. Because of Mr. Gyllenhaal's distinguished service as Treasurer of the General Church, he has been elected as its Development Officer, assuming that title on September 1, 1982. In recognition of his extensive background in and dedication to the business and financial affairs of the Academy, his previous title of Vice-President will be retained and modified to that of Vice-President-Development.
     The Rt. Rev. Louis B. King,
          Bishop of the General Church of the New Jerusalem,
          Chancellor of the Academy of the New Church





     For the year ending December 31, 1981


     During the year 1981 the number of persons comprising the membership of the Corporation increased to 523. The changes in membership consisted of:

     27 New Members:
Abele, John A.                McClarren, Ralph G.
Alden, Mark E.                McQueen, Ronald K.
Bostock, Braden                Morley, Nathan J.
Carswell, Eric H.           Norman, David
Cole, Michael S.                Rhodes, Peter
Cooper, Thomas R.           Simons, Edward A.
Doering, Alan N.                Simons, Jeremy F.
Dristy, Forrest               Smith, A. Carter
Echols, Alonzo M., III           Smith, Lawson M.
Edmonds, Justin D.           Synnestvedt, Louis D.
Gyllenhaal, Kurt P.           Walter, Malcolm S.
Lewis, Dalton W.                Wille, Ivan
Lockhart, Michael G.           Zeigler, David W.
McCardell, Craig A.

     4 Deaths of Members:
Alfelt, Lennart                Fitzpatrick, Donald C., Sr.
Appleton, Alwyne J.           Odhner, Sanfrid E.


     The by-laws of the Corporation provide for election of thirty directors, ten of whom are elected each year for terms of three years. The board presently consists of thirty directors. At the 1981 annual meeting, ten directors were elected for terms expiring in 1984. The present directors, with the dates their terms expire, are as follows:


1983 Asplundh, Edward K.           1984 Johns, Hyland R., Jr.
1982 Asplundh, Robert H.           1983 Junge, James F.
1984 Blair, Brian G.                1983 King, Louis B.
1982 Bradin, Robert W.                1984 Leeper, Thomas N.
1983 Brickman, Theodore W., Jr.      1984 Lynch, Christopher W.
1983 Bruser, Henry B., Jr.           1984 Mayer, Paul C. P.
1984 Buss, Neil M.                1983 Parker, Richard M.
1982 Childs, Alan D.                1982 Pitcairn, Garth
1984 Cole, Michael S.                1983 Pitcairn, Stephen
1984 Cooper, Geoffrey                1982 Rose, John W.
1984 Cooper, George M.                1983 Schnarr, Maurice G.
1984 Fuller, Kent B.                1982 Scott, Ivan R.
1982 Gyllenhaal, Leonard E.           1982 Synnestvedt, Ralph, Jr.
1983 Horigan, W. Lee                1982 Walter, Robert E.
1982 Hyatt, Wynne S.                1983 Waters, Philip A.

     Lifetime honorary members of the board:
de Charms, George
Pendleton, Willard D.


     The Corporation has five officers, each of whom is elected yearly for a term of one year. Those elected at the board meeting of March 6, 1981, were:
President                          King, Louis B.
Vice President                    Pendleton, Willard D.
Secretary                          Pitcairn, Stephen
Treasurer                          Gyllenhaal, Leonard E.
Assistant Treasurer                Fuller, Bruce A.


     The 1981 annual Corporation meeting was held at Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, on March 6, this being the only Corporation meeting held during the year. The president, Bishop King, presided, and there were 104 members in attendance. Reports were received from the nominating committee, the treasurer, and the secretary; the election for directors was held.
     Bishop King reviewed six recommendations of a committee appointed to consider admission of women to the Corporation of the General Church and the following action was taken:


     1. The waiting period for membership in the Corporation following admission into the General Church unincorporated was reduced from five years to three years.
     2. The committee's recommendation that the age required for membership in the General Church unincorporated be fixed at age twenty for men and women was favorably endorsed.
     3. The Bishop was requested to appoint a Bishop's Council, comprised of General Church women and men, to counsel him in all matters pertaining to the General Church and its uses.
     4. The committee's recommendations that (l) women be admitted to the Corporation, and (2) women should not be nominated for the Board of Directors of the Corporation until existing doubt on the matter is dispelled were deferred until the recommendations could be considered at the next General Assembly.


     The Board of Directors held four meetings during 1981, the president presiding at all of them. The average attendance of directors was 19 with a maximum of 24 and a minimum of 12.
     The regular board of directors meeting and the organization meeting of the board were held in March, followed later in the year by board meetings in May and October.
     In a report to the board, Bishop King discussed the system of bishop's representatives assisting him in the episcopal office. He said the four representatives not only saved a considerable amount of money over a full-time assistant bishop but permitted a great deal of flexibility by serving more than one area at the same time. There are now tentative plans for a General Assembly in 1987 and Bishop King said he hoped at that time the Council of the Clergy and the Joint Council would have for the church the name of an executive assistant bishop.
     Considerable time in the four board meetings was devoted to reports and discussions of reorganization of the financial and business office, computerization of the accounting and reporting system and changing the space layout in Pitcairn Hall to accommodate the reorganization and computer system. The reorganization, in addition, consolidates the business and financial affairs of both the General Church and the Academy. In line with the reorganization, Bruce Fuller was elected as assistant treasurer and Ian Henderson elected as controller. William Zeitz was appointed Business Manager.
     The problem of adequate housing at an affordable price for ministers in San Francisco, Los Angeles and Florida was discussed at several meetings.


Temporarily, in these three areas, rental housing is being used but the monthly rent is out of reach of our ministers and has to be subsidized. Solutions for the longer term are being studied.
     The San Diego society made application to the church for approval to commence an elementary school in September and for a grant to help in the support of one teacher for the first year. The board approved the establishment of the school and the support as requested.
     During the year the new General Church Pension Plan was adopted and Mr. Bruce Fuller was appointed Director of Employee Benefits. The Pension Plan is administered by a Joint Pensions Committee and a Retirement Board. Pension requests for three ministers were reviewed and approved.
     In October, Bishop King was requested to appoint a Personnel Advisory Committee to the bishop to counsel the bishop and the bishop's representatives in the area of setting up systems for evaluation that will help in the screening of ministerial candidates, the feasibility of ministerial placements and in performance and evaluation reviews of both ministers and teachers. The committee would also assist in career adjustments for ministers and teachers who are not successful in their chosen fields.
     Mr. Gyllenhaal reviewed the progress of the five-year plan developed for the South African Mission in 1977. The plan had been progressing well; however, some problems have arisen. The board agreed to extend the plan by two years as recommended by the South African Mission Council.
     A recent appeal for support of General Church missionary work received very poor response and it was suggested that transfers from the Helda Hager Fund in the Academy (established for General Church Extension Missionary Work) be made to the General Church. The board approved the suggestion and authorized the establishment of a General Church Missionary Endowment Fund with the income to be used for General Church missionary work. The endowment fund would become active upon the approval of the Academy Board.
     The board approved a new plan for tuition rebates, and reports from the Budget, Pension, Mortgage, Loan and Printing Press Committees. Reports from the treasurer on the financial condition of the General Church as a whole, and its societies, circles and districts were considered and action taken where necessary.
     Respectfully submitted,
          Stephen Pitcairn, Secretary



     The financial events of 1981 were unparalleled in the history of the General Church Corporation.
     Effective on the first of January 1981, the Pension and Investment Savings Plans of the Academy of the New Church were combined with those of the General Church and assets valued at $3,117,587 were transferred to the respective General Church funds. Additionally, the construction of Cairnwood Village during the year required large financial transactions involving contributions, loans, and expenditures for construction. All of these programs had a major impact on the financial structure of the General Church.
     The accompanying balance sheet, as of December 31, 1981, shows an increase in assets of $3,598,200. As a result it is difficult to properly interpret the actual financial results for 1981.
     As a part of normal operations for the year, however, gifts to General Church capital were received from the following:

     Glencairn Foundation          $100,000
     Cairncrest Foundation          100,000
     Pitcairn Families               76,733
     Others                    4,400

     During the year a special trust was established known as the Robert I. Coulter and Elizabeth H. Coulter Unitrust by a gift of stock valued at $247,750 from Bob and Betty Coulter of Laguna Beach, California. The purpose of the trust is to support and further the ecclesiastical missionary and educational activities of the General Church and its local church organization in the state of California.
     Of special importance are the results of the operating budget for the year which unfortunately were disappointing.
     Operating revenues continued to increase by $116,666, or 11% over the previous year, and $12,000 over the budgeted amount. For part of this we are grateful to our members who contributed directly $32,000 more than the previous year. This represented an encouraging increase of 110 contributors who gave according to the following pattern:


                    1981                1980
Category          No.      Amount      No.      Amount
$1-$ 99           442      $14,386      351      $8,688
$100-$ 499           173      32,315      159      26,990
$500-% 999           28      18,695      24      15,645
Total           643      65,396      534      51,323
$1,000-$4,999      40      89,315      42      93,200
$5,000 and over      20      190,266      17      167,982
Gorand Total      703      $344,977      593      $312,505

     The balance came largely from special contributions and endowment income. Due to a loan of $300,000 from endowment to Cairnwood Village, Inc., endowment income during 1981 was slightly lower than anticipated.
     Expenditures on the other hand increased by a whopping $253,000 or 277-nearly $60,000 above our best estimates. Most of the increase came from the following sources:

- The devastating effect of inflation on salaries of ministers and teachers (13% increase in 1981)
- The incredible cost of moving pastors
- The high cost of housing pastors
- The decline in the proportion of local support to carry these uses
- The effect of the new policy on tuition rebates for teachers

     As a result, this year and next, reduced appropriations to the Development Fund will curtail some of the anticipated development projects.
     These, and other factors, will force a major change in our plans that will involve new thinking and planning throughout the church.
     It is no longer business as usual. But, with the help of each society and circle in developing new long-range plans for the church, we stand to benefit from this year's experience.
     L. E. Gyllenhaal,

     See the next two pages for the financial statement.



     Statement of General Fund Revenues, Expenditures, and Other Changes
Years ended December 31, 1981 and 1980

                    1981                     1980
Gifts and Grants
Regular                $344,977                $312,505
Special                60,373      $ 405,350      41,947      $354,452
Investment Income                    699,998               639,385
Printing and Publishing               10,823               9,592
Other Income                         31,048                    27,124
Total Revenues                     $1,147,219               $1,030,553

Pastoral and Educational
Salary Support           $274,093                $209,138
Travel and Office      62,747                    39,315
South African Mission      35,650      $372,490      38,345      $286,798
Facilities                         61,525                    65,912
Services and Information
New Church Life           50,452                    41,378
Printing and Publishing     37,463                    30,413
Moving                66,625                    10,222
Travel to Meetings      15,543                    28,957
Translation           37,671                    39,389
Miscellaneous           35,557      243,331      17,597      167,956

Episcopal Office           77,756                    66,468
Secretary's Office      18,622                    16,761
Financial and Corporate
     Affairs           91,640      188,018      77,441      160,670

     Employee Benefits
Pension Plan           62,565                    62,131
Health Plan           95,696                    56,371
Investment Savings      53,700                    47,681
Social Security           27,234                    22,374
Deferred Compensation      3,859                    6,989
Workmen's Compensation      5,481                    6,291
Tuition Rebates           9,422      257,957     -          201,837
Church Extension                    50,672                    46,739
Other Expenditures                16,627                    7,704
Total Expenditures                $1,190,620                937,676

Transfers (to) Development Fund     $(30.000)                $(60,000)
Transfers from Clergy Travel Fund     15,543                    18,717

Transfer (to) from Reserve for
Moving                              (60,500)               (35,000)
Transfer (to) from Other Funds      --                    (12,000)
Net Increase from Operations      $2,642                $4,654



Balance Sheet
December 31, 1981 and 1980
                         Expendable      Nonexpend-                Total
Assets                    Funds      able Funds           1981           1980
Cash                     $1,156,059      $(235,239)           $920,820      $810,425
Accounts receivable          288,898          -           288,898      256,709
Inventory                    67,853      -                67,853      70,951
Prepaid expenses               21,527          -           21,527      9,844
Loans to societies and employees 1,041,684 300,000           1,341,684      806,341
Investments                    6,492,981      8,806,164           15,299,145 12,441,339
Land, buildings, and equipment,
net of accumulated depreciation 239,801     -                239,801      192,849
Other assets                9,496     -                9,496      2,563
Total assets               $9,318.299      $8,870,925           $18.189,224     $14,591,021

Liabilities and fund balances
Accounts payable           $125,705     -                $125,705      $71,600
Loans payable               800,000     -                800,000          -
Agency funds               236,082     -                236,082      100,488
Total liabilities               $1,161,787     -                $1,161,787      172.088

Fund balances:
available for current operations 1,042,518     -           1,042,518      1,014,828
Restricted-available          170,950     -                170,950      205,229
designated for specific purposes 6,943,044 -                6,943,044      4,741,839
Endowment                    -           8,870,925           8,870,925      8,457,037
Total fund balances               8,156,512      8,870,925           17,027,437      14,418,933
Total fund balances and liabilities $9,318,299      $8,870,925      $18,189,224      $14,591,021



GENERAL CHURCH TRANSLATION COMMITTEE       Rev. N. Bruce Rogers       1982

     ANNUAL REPORT, 1981

     Our principal project continued to be the preparation of a new edition of Experientiae Spirituales (formerly Diarium Spirituale). In addition we have carried forward several other lesser undertakings, which nevertheless may be expected to have lasting importance and value. All these efforts have been very much needed in the church, and it is a great satisfaction to see their gradual advancement.
      Experientiae Spirituales. Production of a new Latin edition of this lengthy work continued under the capable editorship of Dr. J. Durban Odhner. Miss Lisa Hyatt also continued as consultant until August, when she left for Dickinson College to pursue further course work in Latin. In addition, Dr. Odhner once again had the assistance of Mr. Jonathan Rose, and also of Miss Chara Cooper and Miss Freya Heinrichs. Mr. Rose and Miss Cooper were assigned to the project through the summer, and on a part-time basis thereafter, in order to compensate for the loss of Miss Hyatt. Miss Heinrichs was engaged part-time in the fall for a similar reason, to be trained as still another part-time consultant, now that a full-time consultant was no longer available.
     Thanks to all these excellent laborers, the work continued to see steady progress. The first volume is in process of publication by the Academy of the New Church through the General Church Press, and we now have galley proofs for about half of the pages. These will in turn require thorough proofreading, correcting, and preparation for actual printing-an enormous task-but we still have hope of this volume appearing in 1982. We have found an excellent typesetter in Mr. Jeremy Rose, and his efforts have been speeded by the help of Mr. Jonathan Rose and Mrs. Richard Bostock.
     It should be noted that the material projected in last year's report to fill three volumes is now being planned for publication in two volumes. The seven-volume arrangement originally proposed has thus been abandoned in favor of six proposed volumes. The first volume will now contain material extracted from Explicatio in Verbum Veteris Testamenti (The Word Explained), as indicated by Swedenborg's index to Experientiae Spirituales; a reconstruction of the missing numbers 1-148, made from the index; the "Bath Fragment" (considered to be part of the missing numbers 28 and 29); three statements from the beginning of Swedenborg's Bible Index of Isaiah and Jeremiah; and numbers 149-972, plus an unnumbered paragraph (972 1/2).


The second volume will then include numbers 973 to 3427. Much of the editorial work has been done on this latter material as well, though much still remains to be completed before it can appear in print.
     Preparation of this new edition has proven an immense undertaking, as we have observed before. Problems have arisen that were unforeseen, and now new difficulties are being encountered in seeing it through the press. Yet, despite the occasional setbacks and the recurring need to invent solutions, the experience has turned out to be a profitable one. We have learned things we could not have otherwise learned, on both scholarly and practical levels. And each new insight, each new solution, equips us better to go forward, prepared for surprises and more ready to respond to them knowledgeably. One important result is the high quality of the work that has already been done on Experientiae Spirituales-work that far exceeds in accuracy and insight anything that has been practicably possible with this material before.
     De Verbo. A new Latin edition of De Scriptura Sacra seu Verbo Domini has now been completed, including a preface in both Latin and English. The editor, Rev. N. Bruce Rogers, devoted several weeks this past summer to carrying on his English translation of it, and the translation is about half done. Mr. Rogers expects to continue to invite the criticism of a number of readers and consultants in developing his translation.
     It is as yet undecided when and in what form these versions will be published. Since De Verbo is a relatively short work, it presently seems sensible to postpone publication of this material until it can be bound with new versions of De Ultimo Judicio (post)/Last Judgment (posthumous)-the two works having been written by Swedenborg in the same coder at about the same time.
     De Ultimo Judicio (post mortem auctoris editum). A new Latin edition of this companion piece to De Verbo is all but complete. Several people have contributed to its preparation, now finally edited by Mr. Prescott A. Rogers, with Mr. B. Erikson Odhner as his most recent consultant. All that remains is a little polishing and a decision on how to present those passages in the text of the manuscript which do not appear to belong properly to the work itself. The next step will be to prepare an English translation of this new edition.
     The Old and New Testaments in Latin according to the Writings.


Briefly, the goal of this project is to complete a compilation of scriptural passages as they are quoted in the Writings, with variants noted, to serve as an aid to future translators of the Word and to other New Church students. (For a fuller description, see our reports for 1979 and 1980).
     This past summer, Mr. Richard Goerwitz once again carried on with the work, focusing on completing the collection for the New Testament. It is exciting to see the gradual perfection of this compilation, whose beginning goes back over a century to the initial conception and efforts of Mr. Le Boys des Guays. This compilation will not provide us with a new Bible, but it will serve as an aid to our understanding of the one we have.
     Parallel Passages in the Writings. Miss Marcia Smith has now finished a revised listing of parallel passages in the Writings to numbers in the Spiritual Diary, Last Judgment, Continuation of the Last Judgment, and Last Judgment (Posthumous). Numbers of people have contributed to this effort. The listing has been accepted for publication by the Academy of the New Church, and it may be expected to appear in 1982.
     It is our hope that this listing will become the first of several installments. Eventually we hope to compile a complete listing for every work of the Writings. To this end, we have already embarked on searching out parallels to interchapter material in Arcana Coelestia. a project that is currently being carried on by Cathy Schnarr (Mrs. Grant Schnarr), with the contributions of still other researchers made last summer.
     Production of a complete list will be a lengthy task, but one that has been wanted for a long time. Because of its potential usefulness, we have opted to publish it in installments and not keep the church waiting longer.
     "Translator's Corner." Dr. J. Durban Odhner continued as editor of this feature appearing in The New Philosophy, though its publication was seriously interrupted by the passing of the general editor, our beloved colleague Mr. Lennart Alfelt. We note here our profound regret at the loss of Mr. Alfelt's able and thoughtful contributions to our task, both as Director of the Swedenborgiana Library and as a member of the Translation Committee and its executive board.
     Dr. Odhner reports that he has made several studies during the past year suitable for publication in "Translator's Corner," one of which has already been submitted to the general, acting editor. These studies will begin appearing with the resumption of Publication of The New Philosophy. Again, other linguists of the church are invited to submit to Dr. Odhner their discoveries and insights, so that they, too, may find a public forum and permanent record for their ideas.


     Swedenborg Lexicon. Mr. Jonathan Rose continued to be employed on a part-time basis throughout the year to assist Dr. John Chadwick of England with his work in producing his Lexicon to the Latin Text of the Theological Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, sponsored by the Swedenborg Society. Mr. Rose reports that his verification of quotations and references proceeded through M, N, and O this year. Miss Lisa Hyatt also reports having contributed new items for the Lexicon. We are pleased with the rate of progress on this time-consuming but important work.
     Conclusion. The past year has been, again, a productive one. Several projects are reaching points of fruition, and we may begin to look forward to their appearance in print. Scholarly work is painstaking, and results do not come overnight. On the other hand, it is very satisfying work, particularly in the knowledge that what has been done well today may be expected to last long into the indefinite future.
     Rev. N. Bruce Rogers,


     NOTE: The Annual Reports will be continued in the August issue.

SERMON MAILINGS              1982

A use that was once under the care of Mrs. Raymond Pitcairn is now being continued by the General Church.
     Four hundred people have at their request been receiving weekly sermons by mail. The actual mailing is once a month (four sermons at a time). The use is sustained by voluntary contributions. Those who wish to be put on the mailing list should note that the cost is approximately $12.00 per year. Requests should go to The Secretary of the General Church, Cairncrest, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009.


Editorial Pages 1982

Editorial Pages       Editor       1982


     Your national allegiance generally depends on the circumstances of your birth. Of course if you happen to be born in one country but are brought up in another, you owe honor to the country that has nurtured you. "People should love their country, since it supports and protects them. . ." (TCR 305). But it is in the matter of birth and our native land that we invite attention to the following passage. It is an especially illuminating passage on the subject of Divine revelation, pointing out that "it has been necessary that of the Lord's Divine Providence some revelation should come into existence." The passage concludes as follows:

It is necessary that there should be heavenly truths somewhere, by which man may be instructed, because he was born for heavenly things, and, after the life of the body, ought to come among those who are heavenly; for the truths of faith are the laws of order in the kingdom in which he is to live forever. Arcana Coelestia 1775

     When the time comes for us to move from this world to the next it will be like making a journey to another country, whose laws we ought to know. Swedenborg had occasion to tell people who had recently died that just as it is important to know the laws of a land you visit, it is eminently important to know the laws of the heavenly kingdom which they were to enter-"this kingdom in which they are to live to eternity" (HH 406). But the Lord's kingdom is not a foreign country. Our birth took place physically in the natural world, but it was an event of the spiritual world. We were born for heavenly things-born that we might make our home in the Lord's heavenly kingdom. This brings us to the teaching that the spiritual world is man's "real dwelling place" and indeed "his native land."

     In the course of time man either opens heaven or opens hell to himself, and enters into societies, and becomes an inhabitant either of heaven or of hell even while he is in the world. Man becomes an inhabitant of the spiritual world because that is his real dwelling place, and as it is called, his native land, for there he is to live to eternity after he has lived some years in the natural world. Apocalypse Explained 1094:2


     During our few years in the natural world, does it diminish our love of country to know that our true native land is in the hereafter? The Lord said, "if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments" (Matt. 19:17). And He specifically mentioned the commandment: "Honor thy father and thy mother." But the Lord also said, "Call no man your father upon the earth: for one is your Father, which is in heaven" (Matt. 23:9). (See TCR 306.)
     One of the beautiful teachings the Lord has given is that those who love and serve their country in this life will love the Lord's kingdom after death "for then that is their country."

     One's country is the neighbor because it is like a parent; for one is born in it, and it has nourished him and continues to nourish him. and has protected and continues to protect him . . . It should be known that those who love their country and render good service to it from good will, after death love the Lord's kingdom, for then that is their country; and those who love the Lord's kingdom love the Lord Himself because the Lord is the all in all things of His kingdom. True Christian Religion 414 "WITH THE WHOLE BODY THAT HE HAD IN THE WORLD" 1982


Dear Editor:
     Rev. N. Bruce Rogers will not be surprised that I reply to his letter in your March issue. In the past he and I have had a number of conversations on the general subject that has now again been brought to the fore. On one central point we agree: that the Lord is visible even in regard to His body. However, it has never been quite clear to me as to whether we think of the nature of that body in the same way. Or would Mr. Rogers be prepared to say with me, unreservedly, that the Lord retained nothing whatever from Mary, nothing, nothing at all? I do not rule out that he would; yet some of his statements allow for a different reading. In the first paragraph of his letter he is concerned that the article in your December issue (which gave him reason to comment) "seemed to indicate that the Lord's material body was not really resurrected;" and on the last two pages (pp. 121 and 122) he apparently makes the resurrection body to be of "the same substance" as the material body, though "now with a new and different nature, with a new and different form" (p. 122).


A qualifying statement ("eventually the body, too, from being merely material, became likewise Divine-substantial," p. 122) does not seem very helpful either, because of the context; for this Divine-substantial is still, in the next paragraph, the resurrected physical body" (p. 122). (Italics are mine in all these quoted statements.)
     I wonder why Mr. Rogers insists that the Lord rose with His "material" or "physical" body. The Writings do not say that. They do indeed teach, as all the passages that he quotes and many others show, that the Lord rose "with the whole body that He had in the world." But I have never found any passage, anywhere, that calls that body "material" or "physical." "Divine-substantial" is the correct phrase (Mr. Rogers uses this phrase also, p. 122). "His body was now no longer material, but Divine-substantial" (Lord 35:10). But as to the question of what body it was with which He rose, I would like to discuss a little further on.
     With the indulgence of your readers, Mr. Editor, I would want to make two brief points relating to translation. Mr. Rogers, in giving his list of passages, makes his own translations (which is obviously perfectly legitimate). On two occasions, however, his rendering seems to suggest a subtle shift of meaning such as I do not think is intended in the original. In his quote from AC 5078:2 he gives, "The Lord made even the physical element in Himself Divine" for the Latin "Dominus ipsum corporeum in Se Divinum fecit" (the Lord made the very corporeal in Himself Divine; italics mine). I do not doubt that "physical" may at times be a proper translation of corporeus, but here "corporeal" seems to be called for in view of the context (which is the signification of the butler and baker in the story of Joseph-see summary in AC 5073), and especially in view of the definition of corpoveus in our number itself: "The exteriors of the natural are what are properly called corporeal things (corporea), or sensuous things of both kinds together with the receiving [vessels]. . ." (AC 5078:2). These things, therefore, were "the very corporeal" that the Lord made Divine in Himself. It was a process by Divine descent, until His body itself was made Divine also. The phrase, "made the physical element Divine," seems to suggest rising with the physical body.
     The other point has to do with the rendering of HH 316. Mr. Rogers translates, "the body became a likeness of the soul" for the original's "corpus factum est similitudo animae." Again, I am sure it is quite legitimate to give "became" for "factum est" in certain contexts. But "became" may suggest transmutation, which the Writings rule out (Lord 35: 1).


Further, the same number uses the same word earlier on: "The Lord glorified His whole Human . . . that is, made it (fecit) Divine" (HH 316); and now: "The soul . . . was the Divine itself, and the body was made (factum est) a likeness of the soul" (ibid.). Again we have the descending Divine, glorifying as it descends.
     I am aware that these translation points may seem petty, but they are part of my argument; and so let me explain. The idea I want to convey is that there was no changing of the material into the Divine-substantial: no change, but exchange. The Lord totally put off, expelled, did away with the one, and put on the other. "The human that He derived from the mother . . . He utterly expelled, and put on in its place (loco ejus) the Human Divine (AC 2265).
     This leads me to Athanasian Creed 161 and 162, both of which numbers are added to Mr. Rogers' list, and also to nos. 188 and 192.
     As for that posthumous work itself, it is of course entirely correct that we do not have the manuscript in Swedenborg's own hand, and that it was never (I would say, in that form) intended for publication; nor, for that matter, did the copyist-a man assigned by A. Nordenskold-lend a very skillful hand. But neither was Charity (in that form) intended for publication, nor was the Spiritual Diary; yet, as I know Mr. Rogers would agree, all these works and others have been preserved for us by the will of the Lord's Providence.
     As for the Athanasian Creed, it is written entirely in the style of the Writings generally, and I know no reason why its essential authenticity could be doubted.
     But more specifically to the point. Mr. Rogers appears to question that the word "dissipated" occurs in Swedenborg's own manuscript; but he adds that even if it does, then nevertheless the reference is only to the maternal humanity, and not to the body.
     Let me here remind the reader that the words under discussion are: "The Lord in the sepulcher, thus by death, rejected all the human from the mother, and dissipated it"(Ath. 162; Ath. 161 also uses the word "dissipated"). Ath. 192 adds that "The Lord retained the infirm [human] while in the world, because in no other way could He be tempted, least of all on the cross; there the whole maternal was expelled" (i.e. there His battle ended). And Ath. 188, speaking of the Divine as soul and the Human as body, notes that there was union between them, and that therefore the human, the body, was Divine.
     I think the word "dissipated" can be safely accepted, if not on the strength of a second-hand manuscript, then on that of AC 6849:5-"What is not Divine would be utterly dissipated (dissiparetur).


To speak by comparison, what can be put into the solar fire, and not perish, unless it is of a solar nature?" Clearly this includes the material, physical body the Lord had from the mother. It could not withstand the Divine fire.
     Returning now to Ath. 162, Mr. Rogers, arguing that "the human quality from the mother" was expelled (P. 122), but apparently not the physical, material body, says: "And note well that this very number speaks of the Lord rising with something. With what did He rise? If it was all dissipated, He could not have risen with it." I don't think this argument has any backing in the number discussed, for that number itself tells what He rose with. Certainly He rose "with something," namely, with "a Human assumed from the Father. The statement is: ". . . thus that the Lord rose with a Human properly and clearly glorified" (Ath. 162). He did not rise with anything from Mary. "When the Lord glorified His Human He put off everything (omne) of His mother, and put on everything of the Father" (TCR 94). Also, recall again the language of AC 2265: "He utterly (prorsus) expelled, and put on in its place."
     There is no contradiction whatever between the "dissipation teachings" and the "resurrection teachings." So there is no question as to whether the Lord rose with the whole body that He had in the world; rather the question is, which body? Nor yet need we worry over the statement that what with ordinary men is "cast off and putrefies" was "in the Lord's case glorified and made Divine from the Divine in Him, and He rose with this;" rather we should ask, Was there then somehow a transmutation, or are we to see this passage too in the light of the universal teaching that the Lord put off everything from the mother and put on everything from the Divine? If not the latter, then He only put off almost everything, but not everything.
     I would here briefly reflect that I think the reason why the Writings so strongly insist that the Lord rose with His whole body (as also do the Gospels), is lest we lose sight of the Lord's immediate presence in the very ultimates of His kingdom. The disciples knew, because of the Lord's post-resurrection appearances, that He was as fully and as closely present with them as before His resurrection (and in a sense more so). We should know that too.
     But: Which body? There is a teaching about this. It is not in Mr. Rogers' list of passages, while Bishop de Charms in his December article, if briefly, refers to it (p. 614). I regard it as a crucial teaching, implied in innumerable passages in terms of putting off and putting on, but verbalized only a few times. It is given in AC 2628 as one of three arcana there mentioned, and reads: "The Lord's Divine Human was not only conceived but also born of Jehovah, and hence the Lord as to His Divine Human is called the 'Son of God' and the 'Only-begotten' " (see also AC 2649:2 and 2798:1, 2 and cf. AC 2093:3).


     "Born of Jehovah" is the crucial concept. This birth from the Divine within Him was a total birth. It could take place because of the previous conception from that Divine. The Divine descended through the process of glorification, expelling and replacing as it did so: first (but gradually) the heredity of men through Mary, and then finally the earthly body also in the tomb, after the maternal human had died.
     But the human mind is such that it also tends to ask, How? How was all the maternal, and in the end the maternal body also, dissipated? And how was it replaced?
     I think we can search for the answer to these questions on the basis of DLW 283. There is discussed the dilemma of many, who have seen that "all things have been created out of a Substance that is Substance in itself . . . and yet they have not dared to confirm it, fearing lest they might thereby be led to think that the created universe is God, because from God." The number concludes with the observation: "Yet there is nothing whatever in the created universe that is God (DLW 283).
     Here we might say that, as the Lord in creating vested Himself in finite things, without there ever being any commingling whatever, so in the world, and finally in the tomb, He divested Himself of all such things, retaining nothing, and again allowing no commingling of any kind with His Divine.
     Perhaps we might even find some assistance from modern science, especially after Einstein, in that it shows us the intimate relationship between energy and matter. The conversion of energy to matter has been observed in the formation of elementary particles. If then matter is from energy, can we not conceive of matter "returning" into energy, or of energy freeing itself from its imprisonment? And of the Divine life, which is substance itself, and which is within all energy and within all matter, divesting itself of all finite coverings, but without departing from the degree or plane of those coverings? Let us not forget that the Divine life is omnipresent in all created things (including of course the human mind), nor that it is Substance itself. The Divine is everywhere, but without commingling with anything; and the Lord's Divine Human is present, man being willing, in all things whatever of his mind, down to its very sensuous degree, but again without any commingling. As "there is nothing whatever in the created universe that is God," so there is nothing whatever in the Divine Human that is finite.


     The discussion of our present subject is not new in the New Church, nor was it unheard of in the Old. Ages ago the thought that the Lord was still, but invisibly, present in His maternal human, led to the doctrine of transubstantiation, by which it was believed that the bread and wine in the sacrament were mystically changed into the physical body and blood of Christ. In the New Church the question of the nature of the Lord's resurrection body first arose between John Clowes and Robert Hindmarsh-those great pioneers and groundbreakers in the early church-and Mr. Clowes then stood for the concept that the material of the Lord's body was retained, while Mr. Hindmarsh believed it was removed. Later the Rev. Messrs. Mason and Noble picked up the threads, when it turned out that Mr. Mason believed so fervently in the literal resurrection of the Lord's "flesh and bones," that he was prepared to form a separate society within the church for those who believed as he did. Still later we find Dr. E. E. Iungerich and with him Rev. Gilbert H. Smith on the scene, both of whom thought that the Lord had produced a sphere of finites, released en masse from His material body, and that it was through that sphere the Lord could be immediately present with the men of His church. And no doubt the discussion will go on, or rise up again (and I for one would welcome its continuation).
     In his article entitled "The Resurrection Body" (NEW CHURCH LIFE, April, 1968). Bishop Elmo Acton makes the cogent remark: "We must realize that the teaching concerning the Lord must of necessity appear ambiguous, for man cannot see the Infinite such as it is in itself' (p. 154). There is of course no actual ambiguity; but perhaps the appearance of it (when there is such) is permitted in the Lord's Providence, in order that basic ideas may first be established in the church.
     In this case the basic idea, I think, is that the Lord is as fully and as immediately present in His own Divine Human, in His own Divine Person, with the people of His church as ever He was during His sojourn on earth in a physical body-or more so. On this basic point we all agree.
     What we need to ponder further, however, is what is involved in the Lord's words to Mary at Cana in Galilee: "Woman, what is there between me and thee?" (John 2:4) He did not speak only to Mary, nor only at that time, but to us all and at all times.
          Hot Springs, South Dakota




Dear Editor:
     Something is brewing which may be of interest to some of your readers.
     At a recent society gathering, as part of a report on education in the church, Rev. Fred Schnarr noted a renewal of interest in teaching the doctrine of correspondences. This struck a responsive chord, as it came just a day or two after exposure to some enlightening passages in the Spiritual Diary, which we will quote shortly.
     Several years ago Mr. Robert Heinrichs arrived from Canada to teach at the Academy. From his own experiences and observations he had come to the conviction that there was a great need for formal instruction in that doctrine, and the hope that the Academy would give it a high priority.
     Now, suddenly, many references to wisdom and its importance to man, gleanings from recent sermons and classes, Mr. Schnarr's report and other material are coming together to bring the idea further into the limelight.
     The most obvious benefit would be the tremendous boost in what New Churchmen could derive from studying the Word. Included in the additional harvest is this: As the Second Advent is now accomplished, some New Churchmen could be prepared to join in the vital use performed until recently only by angels from the Most Ancient and Ancient Churches, as revealed in the following Diary passages:

5187: All the wisdom of the angels is given by means of the Word . . . But still it is necessary to be known that wisdom is given them mediately through angels from the Most Ancient and Ancient Churches, who were in the science and perception of representatives and correspondences. They were of such a description, when in the world, that they knew the internal arcana of the church, and correspondences. Through these, wisdom is communicated; and when it is communicated, it appears, with those who receive it, as if it were their own . . . and for this reason, angels from the Most Ancient Churches are scattered throughout the heavens, in order that the others may enjoy wisdom.

5189: . . . It was granted me to see one of the ancients, who was in a great angelic society, withdraw himself; and then, an appearance of darkness immediately overshadowed the society, and its wisdom was taken away. He, also, who was of the ancients, and who withdrew, was in the knowledges of wisdom; and hence the rest had wisdom by communication.
          Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania




To the Editor:
     "The Writings as Our Source"-This was the title Patricia Rose chose for her response to the series of letters published to comment on her article "Mercy." When I saw this title, it suddenly clarified in my mind why I am uncomfortable with articles showing unusual aspects of familiar teachings.
     Undeniably the Writings are the source of what we believe concerning our religion. However, I believe that there are few hard and fast, completely immovable and unshakable interpretations as to what the Writings mean. The Writings are just that-the source, the wellspring, the living truths which we can absorb into our lives. We search and delve into the Writings so that we can find answers to how the Lord wants us to live our lives.
     I am well aware that on some key teachings there are ministers who hold almost diametrically opposed views as to their meaning. I know that there are many differences of opinion among the laity as to what is to be believed, for instance, concerning abortion and divorce. The studies given by the ministry and the articles which result from the research of the laity are beacons for us to consider and appreciate in our search for our own answers individually. But eventually each one of us must come to the final decisions and answers for ourselves. We cannot take the historical faith of others and make it our own.
     I feel that many of us would consider mercy to consist of compassionate, warm and loving interaction of the Lord with us. When we are confronted with the possibility that mercy is properly based on judgment and punishment, we tend to feel confronted and to have anxiety at the denial of a familiar teaching. I am glad that Patricia Rose wrote her article on mercy. Mercy is not only compassion, but also, in some circumstances, must be considered from the more uncomfortable aspect of judgment and punishment. In our search for the true answers, there is always difficulty because our propriums stand in the way of seeing truths clearly when they conflict with what the proprium wants. If we welcome the searches of others even when they do not seem to support our beliefs, we can eventually allow what we want to believe to be bent toward what is really the truth, which will give us the guidelines for living our lives according to the Lord's order.
          Huntingdon Valley, Pennsylvania


Church News 1982

Church News       Various       1982


     It was with much regret that we accepted the resignation of Rev. A. L. Nicholson as our evangelization pastor. However, we have every sympathy with his desire to pursue his evangelization efforts in a fresh field. Our deep affection and appreciation of their splendid work go with Pat and Al in their new life in Bath, Maine.
     When faced with the loss of our evangelization director, the society, by a unanimous vote, called Rev. A. W. Schnarr to fill the post.
     Our pastor acts as the bishop's representative for Canada and as a considerable amount of time is required for these duties, it was decided, at our annual meeting on September 30th, to call an assistant pastor. Two weeks later, at a special meeting, the society unanimously called Rev. Louis Synnestvedt to this use. We are presently looking forward to warmly welcoming the Synnestvedt family.
     Four weddings, four baptisms and four engagements reflect the healthy growth which is taking place in the Olivet society. Our weddings were: Sharon Parker to Malcolm Acton, Cathy Snelgrove to Craig Anderson, Jondre Crampton to Barry Gilbert and Amy Crampton to Gerard Jutras. Engagements bring the promise of more weddings and four happy announcements were made when Sharene Crampton became engaged to Denis Young, Susan Scott to Timothy Montgomery, Gwenda Parker to Michael Cowley and Anne Jutras to Gilbert Crampton. Three little babies were brought before the Lord for baptism: Christie Louise Garbett, Travis John Bailey and Ryan Timothy Gilbert. Lovely and moving as are baptisms of infants, there is something added to the sphere when the sacrament is performed for an adult. On April 18th our friend Shirley Young presented herself for baptism into the Lord's New Church. It was a very happy occasion for us all and was suitably celebrated after church with toasts to the church and to Shirley.
     An innovation this year has been the establishment of Sunday evening services conducted by Rev. Schnarr. These are of a more informal nature and have met the needs of a number of our members.
     Next fall will see a change in the Olivet Day School when the school will open its doors to a certain number of children whose parents are not members of the church but who desire a Christian school and are in accord with our principles. We are looking forward to this new venture, not only to increase the size of our school but as a means of making the church better known throughout the neighborhood. Gwen Craigie


     Surely one of the greatest surprises to the General Church this year would have to be the formation this February of the Sacramento (California) General Church circle. It was certainly a happy surprise to our members, who were contacted individually and organized into a first meeting for class and worship in August, 1981, under the enthusiastic leadership of the new resident minister to the San Francisco/Bay Area circle. Rev. Wendel R. Barnett. As a result of the tireless efforts of Mr. Barnett and Mrs. Michael (Lynne Horigan) Pendleton. as acting secretary, 36 adults and 14 children were identified and contacted as prospective members of our group.


     24 adults and 14 children of whom were able to attend our first church meeting. Many of those attending had previously believed they were the only New Churchmen or readers of the Writings in the area, so the excitement at this historic occasion was something that will remain a special memory to all of us.
     Since our first business meeting that hot afternoon in August, we have established a regular monthly "church weekend," with Mr. Barnett to our great delight-continuing to act as our visiting minister. The weekend consists of a doctrinal class Saturday night, and worship service Sunday morning followed by a potluck luncheon and business meeting. Both events take place in our homes on a rotating basis. As some of our members travel great distances to attend, our first committee was a housing committee, headed by Mr. Robert Ripley (916-782-7837-visitors welcome!). In January we had our first Sunday school class, and formed a committee under the leadership of Mrs. Michael (Angela) Calhoun to work with Mr. Barnett in developing a program for our many young children, as well as to schedule teachers and nursery attendants on a rotating basis. In addition to these committees, we have a chancel/usher committee headed by Mr. Jared
Odhner; extension efforts headed by Mr. Michael Calhoun (an authorized distributor for the Swedenborg Foundation); an interim treasurer, Mrs. Robert (Dorothy) Kipley; and interim secretary, Mrs. Courtney (Pat Street) Scott. In February we were able to enjoy the initiation of "live music" for our worship services, replacing taped music with a piano accompaniment by Mr. Bertil Larsson. We look forward in the very near future to establishing our by-laws, electing permanent officers, developing interim activities (between pastoral visits) and other lay uses.
     Our average attendance has been 9 at doctrinal class (with a high of 15), and 16 adults, 10 children at church (with highs of 24 and l4). We are a small but enthusiastic group, and fully expect to see rapid growth as we join our efforts and affections in promoting the many future uses of this infant General Church circle.
     Patricia Street Scott,
          Interim Secretary


     On Monday evening, May 3, 1982, the Swedenborg Scientific Association held its eighty-fifth annual meeting in the auditorium of Benade Hall, the Academy of the New Church, Bryn Athyn, PA. After a short business meeting in which Professor Charles S. Cole, Jr. was re-elected president, Dr. Forrest Dristy, professor of mathematics at the State University of New York, Oswego Campus, presented an address entitled, "What's Wrong with Academic Scholarship?"
     Professor Dristy obtained his Ph.D. from Florida State University in 1962 and has held faculty positions at Eckard College, Clarkson College of Technology and has recently been temporarily affiliated with the University of California at Irvine. As well as these positions, he was awarded a faculty fellowship at Princeton University and has participated in a variety of colloquia including a history of science seminar at Yale University. Dr. Dristy is a life member of the Swedenborg Foundation and the Swedenborg Society. He has been a reader of the Writings for over thirty years.
     The complete text of Dr. Dristy's address will appear in a forthcoming issue of The New Philosophy, the official publication of the Swedenborg Scientific Association.


A synopsis is as follows:

     Published information is being produced at an enormous and ever-increasing rate. Much of this material, including a large portion of the results of academic scholarship, is of little or no value. The publish-or-perish tradition in academe, frequently augmented by unwise governmental incentives, encourages academic scholars to have printed as much material as possible without regard to readership or usefulness. The recurrence of short-lived academic fads and the growing problem of falsified research data are symptomatic of the current unwholesome situation.
     From a spiritual point of view, academic scholarship is not well because it fails to acknowledge the Divine and it is motivated by desire for gain and reputation. Consequently its methods are restricted to reasoning from the senses, even when it ventures into subjects intimately involved with the human spirit. As the Writings show, such reasoning is fallacious and leads to insanity rather than intelligence.
     In the future, academic scholarship will be reformed, it is hoped, by consideration of the Divine, by seeking the connection of all things to Him, by rising above the sensual plane, by purifying its motives, and in general by adopting principles which students of the Writings have already tried to follow.
     Jerome V. Sellner

NEWS FROM BENADE       R. R. G       1982

     What do our teachers and administrators tell our theological candidates when the fledgling ministers are about to leave the nest? I don't know-but this is what Bishop Benade told E. S. Price when the latter was about to try his wings one summer in Allentown (Price had asked for instructions):


     1.      Ascertain as well as possible the state and degree of knowledge of the doctrines of the church among the people, and then determine what subject needs to be introduced by way of preliminary instruction.
     2.      Be guided in your selection also by the wishes of the people, whose minds must be supposed to be open to any subject [on] which they seek . . . information.
     3.      Follow the rule of first presenting generals, and afterwards particulars of doctrine.
     4.      Having commenced with the Doctrine of the Lord, finish the work.


     5.      Before taking up the Doctrine of the Sacred Scripture, read such portions of Heaven and Hell as will establish in the minds of your hearers a general but somewhat clear idea of the spiritual world, of heaven and its opposite, hell, and of the world of spirits as the intermediate state in which all men are before they are fixed in the life of heaven or of hell, according to their real life in this world. Dwell on this intermediate state so as to enable your hearers to comprehend how they can be associated with the angels by means of the Word, and its spiritual and natural senses. This will also help them to see and realize to some extent their own relations to the spiritual and natural worlds, to angels and good spirits on the one hand, and to devils and satans on the other hand.
     6.      After such preparation, read the Doctrine of the Sacred Scripture, not omitting any of the confirming illustrations from the Word. N.B. In reading the Doctrine of the Lord, some of the illustrations from the Word may be omitted in your first or general lessons.
     7.      Before taking up the Doctrine of Faith, read the introduction to the TCR, H. Doctr. [TCR was often referred to as Heavenly Doctrine] 1-27, 108-119; then let the D. of F. follow.
     8.      Let HD 28-33 and 123-147, also, something of the Last Judgment precede the Doctrine of Life.
     9.      It is not requisite in the first general course of public instruction that all the numbers of the work in hand be read. Make a judicious selection, preserving continuity of thought and keeping alive the interest by allowing much freedom in the asking of questions and expression of opinions. Encourage and cultivate the desire of reading the Writings. If asked in regard to the internal sense of any passage of the Word, read what you can find in the Writings on the subject [this was shortly before the publication of Potts' Concordance], but be cautious not to give that sense without careful study. Before reading-pray to the Lord.

     Price found himself at one point competing for attention with a popular evangelist who had come to town. Benade advised that he ignore the competition, but offer classes in New Church doctrine for members and non-members of the church. He wrote:

This class work will be found to be the true method of evangelizing. Your scholars take in connected ideas, which are retained because they cohere and form something of a whole that remains such in the memory. There is a satisfaction in getting hold of a complete idea, and this satisfaction or delight, being of the affections, makes a place in the life fro what is learnt, and forms a living remnant . . . .


That the revival meeting prevents the delivery of missionary lectures must be regarded as a providential indication that such lectures ought not to be delivered where you are. Your classes will do ten-fold more good. Those who can receive the truth will attend the classes; the others had better not. (W. H. Benade to Enoch S. Price, Aug. 17, 1886.)
     R. R. G.

RESULTS OF THE RADIO SPOT              1982

     In May we presented the wording of a radio advertisement sponsored by the Bryn Athyn Epsilon Society. Listeners were invited to write for a free sermon. A total of 192 people did send in requests.
     Since January the number of people receiving monthly sermons has increased by 61. At least a third of these came from the 192 people who responded to the radio spot.

LOOK NOW TOWARD HEAVEN              1982

     When a man who is looking at internal things from external ones sees the heavens, he does not think at all of the starry heaven, but of the angelic heaven. And when he sees the sun, he does not think of the sun, but of the Lord, as being the Sun of heaven. So too when he sees the moon and the stars also. And when he sees the immeasurable and infinite power of the Lord (AC 1807).



ORDINATIONS              1982

     Alden-At Cleveland, Ohio, May 16, 1982, Rev. Kenneth J. Alden into the second degree of the priesthood, Rt. Rev. Louis B. King officiating.

     Odhner-At Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, May 9, 1982, Rev. Grant Hugo Odhner into the second degree of the priesthood, Rt. Rev. Louis B. King officiating.

ANNOUNCEMENT              1982

     Rev. Grant H. Odhner has been called to serve as resident pastor of the Massachusetts circle of the General Church, effective July 1, 1982.


     The Academy maintains a list of individuals interested in being considered for employment in the college or secondary schools. If you are interested in applying for a position at the Academy, or would like to recommend someone, please write the president's office:
The Rev. Alfred Acton, President,
The Academy of the New Church,
P. O. Box 278, Bryn Athyn, PA 19009




     Have you ever wished you had a short paper or sermon to read that would answer your questions about education, marriage, life after death, etc.? Most people are not aware of what valuable material they have stored in their basement, attic, or garage. Many years of research and wisdom are compiled in the volumes of NEW CHURCH LIFE. But how do you find what you need? Order an


     papers, reviews, reports, and sermons all alphabetized by topic and author. Order your

1900-1950               $5.00
1951-1970               $11.00

     from the General Church Book Center.

     GENERAL CHURCH BOOK CENTER                    
Hours: 9 to 12
Monday thru Friday
Phone: (215) 947-3920


Notes on This Issue 1982

Notes on This Issue       Editor       1982

Vol. CII     August, 1982          No. 8


     Rev. Bjorn Boyesen spoke to the Council of the Clergy on "the problem that has increasingly troubled the church, especially as regards whether it is appropriate or not for women to serve on the councils and boards and incorporated bodies of the church." You will see at the end of his first article "An Help Meet for Him" that this was not originally intended for publication. "A variety of thought on this subject" is called for, and we hope soon to publish contrasting views.
     How do you handle it when ministers disagree on a subject? Ruth Wyland answered that question well last month (p. 320), and in the present issue a quote from Cairns Henderson applies to instances when we feel strongly about something having been published (p. 363). We hope later to speak editorially about differences of view. Two ministers who are really in close agreement on the important aspects of the doctrine of the visible God are Bruce Rogers and Erik Sandstrom. We are aware that their "letters" are long enough to be classed as major articles. What we have here is more than a re-run of debates from years gone by. There is new thought here, which will be welcomed by our more studious readers.
     Is self-pity a frequent problem in everyday life? We thank the reader who urged us to print the sermon on this subject by the late B. David Holm.
     Among the facts in the Annual Reports in this issue is that it cost more than sixteen thousand dollars to make tapes and distribute them throughout the church last year (p. 360).
     A baker's dozen of wedding reports have come to us for this issue. The twenty-five baptism reports have come our way from Sweden, South Africa, Canada, and in the United States from California, Colorado, Georgia, Illinois, North Carolina, Pennsylvania, Texas and Washington.


     You must see and hold in your hand the new publication of Heaven and Hell in large print. The Swedenborg Foundation is to be congratulated for producing this handsome volume of 850 pages so useful for those with visual limitations.
     An international journal devoted to the study of near-death experiences has recently included a comprehensive article by Leon Rhodes on Swedenborg and the teachings of the Writings.



TAKING OF OFFENSE       Rev. B. DAVID HOLM       1982

     "Hold not Thy, peace, O God of my praise; For the mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me with a lying tongue. They compassed me about also with words of hatred, and sought against me without a cause . . . . And they have rewarded me evil or good, and hatred for my love"(Psalm 109:1, 2, 3, and 5).

     The whole of the 109th Psalm, in its highest or celestial sense, signifies the extreme of temptation which the Lord, while on earth, suffered from the hands of the hells. The full extent of these temptations is unable to be understood by man and even by the angels, nor is it able to be described, for the hells rose up in all their diabolical power against the Lord-attempting to defeat the Divine purpose of His Advent-attempting to retain their hold upon man's spirit. Truly the mouth of the evil and of the deceitful were opened against the Lord. They compassed Him about with words of hatred. And they rewarded Him evil for good, and hatred for His love.
     In this highest sense the form that the psalm takes is a prayer of the Lord that the hells might be completely subdued and brought into order, and that His Human might receive strength and aid from the Divine that was within Him. For it is said, "When he shall be judged, let him be condemned . . . Let his days be few . . . let his posterity be cut off; and in the generation following let their name be blotted out . . . . But do Thou for me, O God the Lord, for Thy name's sake: because Thy mercy is good, deliver Thou me. For I am poor and needy, and my heart is wounded within me."
     And the psalm ends on a note of thanksgiving and confidence significative of the Lord's state of glorification after victory: "I will greatly praise the Lord with my mouth; yea, I will praise Him among the multitude. For He shall stand at the right hand of the poor, to save him from those that condemn his soul."
     Besides signifying the Lord's conflict with the hells, this psalm also represents the rejection which the Lord received from the Jewish Church. That this church utterly refused to accept the Lord as their Messiah, but pointed Him out as an imposter and blasphemer can be seen from the part which states, "I became also a reproach unto them: when they looked upon me they shaked their heads. Help me, O Lord my God: O save me according to Thy mercy: That they may know that this is Thy hand; that Thou, Lord, hast done it."


     In the spiritual sense the psalm from which our text is taken treats of each man who strives to fight against the influences of hell. In it is described his despair when temptations seem to overwhelm him completely, his prayer that the evils aroused within him may be condemned to the hell from which they arose, and his thanksgiving when victory is given him by the Lord.
     But there is a negative or opposite meaning contained in this psalm in the literal sense. And in this literal sense, the psalm being considered portrays a threefold evil that is as common as it is grievous among men the combined evil of self pity, hatred of others and revenge. Self pity acts as the fuel upon which the other two evils feed and are nourished. When for example we do not receive the amount of praise we feel is our due, when we are not given the degree of attention or appreciation we expect, when we are rebuked for our acts, or when our failings are pointed out to us, our first proprial action is to take offense-to feel sorry for and pity ourselves. If not checked, self pity changes into anger and even hatred, which if allowed, readily turns into thoughts of revenge.
     When we are in the grip of pitying ourselves we are incapable of genuine analysis either of ourselves or of others. All that resembles good we see as if in ourselves, while all that seems to be evil and disorderly appears to be in the offender-in the person or even situation which has caused the hurt-the injury to our feelings. In our anger we say in our heart even though we may not say it aloud: "The mouth of the wicked and the mouth of the deceitful are opened against me: they have spoken against me with a lying tongue. They compassed me about also with words of hatred; and fought against me without a cause. For my love they are my adversaries; but I give myself unto prayer. And they have rewarded me evil for good, and hatred for my prayer."
     At such times we lose the ability to see truth as truth, and in our hurt and anger we feel that it would be perfectly just if our offenders were punished. And we may begin to desire that evil befall them. So it is that when offense is taken, the self pity that follows turns into anger and hatred, and this into the lust for revenge.
     Self pity which follows the taking of offense is nothing else than a form of self love, and the reason for this is that at such times our thoughts are restricted to self and self only. This is true even if the hurt that was given us is completely unjust. Even then we have no right to take offense or pity ourselves, for at such times our thoughts-our zeal should not be of self but for what is good and true-for what is of use.


     Thus when criticism or lack of appreciation comes our way we should strive not to regard this from self, but rather from the good and the truth and the use that is involved. This means that we should consider the criticism, and analyze the non-appreciation, to see if they do not after all point out some failure or shortcoming. If they do, then we should welcome them instead of feeling resentment, and we should try to make use of them. We can "turn the other cheek."
     Whether or not the criticism, rebuke or omission of praise was given tactfully or in a spirit of charity is relatively unimportant as far as we are concerned; we are still able to make good use of them and that is what should be of most importance to us. The mode, manner and attitude with which something adverse is presented to us is the primary concern of the giver and not the receiver. If the criticism was given to us harshly, then we can learn not to do the same to others and so hurt and offend them.
     On the other hand, if after careful consideration we honestly feel that what is received is not just and does not apply to us or the performance of our use, then instead of taking offense because of it, we should lay it aside, not letting it bother or worry us.
     If this rule of conduct be followed sincerely and faithfully then we place a strong guard around ourselves-a guard against the taking of offense from which arises morbid self pity, anger and thoughts of revenge. And we will find if we cultivate such an attitude that we have placed a guard for ourselves against any unjust or uncharitable word or act which we might experience from the hands of others, for we will find that they do not harm us. Occasionally we will be forced to defend ourselves and our uses, but even then not from the love of self but from the zeal of protecting the use we are striving to promote, together with the means by which that use is performed.
     We may feel that such an attitude is very hard to develop, and so it is. Our whole proprial nature works against it. Yet by regeneration we are to become forms of charity and forgiveness. Let this be our goal.
     When we regard the things from which we as individuals take offense we can see how petty most of them are. Surely we can find more valuable ways of spending our time than that of allowing our feelings to be repeatedly hurt. And if we look closely and honestly we will be forced to admit that most of the things of commission and omission which we allow to hurt us so deeply are not so intended, but are merely the result of tactlessness, lack of thought, or impatience and at worst momentary anger. It is not often that a person will deliberately set out to hurt another, and this both for good and evil reasons.


     The consistent or habitual taking of offense is an evil, and therefore it is hellish and must be guarded against. Most of us are prone to it, for self love is deep-rooted within us all. But the fact that its presence in the human heart is understandable does not make it excusable.
     All of us at times become puffed up with our own importance-with self righteousness magnifying beyond all proportion our small accomplishments. Any person or incident that forcibly calls us back to normalcy is heartily resented, for we would remain in our illusions which raise us above the common herd and at the same time covers up our failings with an attractive veneer of egotism. It is vital to our spiritual welfare that such fantasy be dissolved. And it is of the Providence of the Lord that it be dissolved as often as need be, and this is done by the truth.
     We often say that the truth hurts, and so it does, but it only hurts that which is evil or false within us. By heredity we love that which is evil and false, and when they are exposed for what they are we feel wounded, and even as if our very life were at stake-and so it is-our life of evil. Our first reaction is to feel sorry for ourselves and then to strike back in some form or other in anger and in revenge. For let us not deceive ourselves, anger and revenge lie within any offense that is taken.
     And it is this, together with uncharitable acts, that arouses such emotions, that destroys the spirit of harmony, cooperation, and the mutual working for use. It is this habitual taking of offense and deliberate giving of offense that causes the spirit of resentment and grudge to exist among individuals, families, organizations, and even nations. It is from hell and it is destructive of spiritual life. And when this exists within the Lord's church on earth this is doubly true, for then the life of the church is at stake-and with this the whole salvation of mankind. Let us then resolve to root out any spirit of grudge and revenge from among ourselves that might exist from past hurts and slights to self love, and thus make room for the spirit of mutual love, of comradely use to enter in and take its place. If we strive to do this we will have made one decisive step in helping to establish the Lord's kingdom on earth. It is not an easy thing to accomplish, yet it is our duty to do this, and our privilege, for it is of the Divine command which we read as the Gospel this morning: "When ye stand praying, forgive, if ye have aught against any; that your Father also, Who is in heaven, may forgive you your trespasses." Amen.

     LESSONS: Psalm 109, Matt. 18:21-35, AC 7366-7372





     We read in the Word concerning Jehovah or the Lord "hating," as in Zechariah:

     Let none of you think evil in your heart of his neighbor; and love no lying oath; for all these are things that I hate, saith Jehovah (viii:17). . .

"hatred" predicated . . . of the Lord, in the internal sense is not hatred, but mercy . . . The Israelitish people were such that as soon as they observed anything unfriendly, even in their associates, they believed it to be lawful to treat them cruelly . . . Because of this they could not believe otherwise than that Jehovah also entertained hatred, was angry, wrathful and furious, and for this reason it is so expressed in the Word according to the appearance; for such as is man's quality, such the Lord appears to him (see n. 1838, 1861,2706). But what the quality of hatred is with those who are in love and charity, that is, who are in good, is evident from the words of the Lord in Matthew:

Ye have heard that it has been said, Thou shalt love thy neighbor and hate thine enemy; but I say unto you, Love your enemies, bless them that curse you, do good to them that hate you, and pray for them that injure and persecute you, that ye may be the sons of your Father who is in the heavens (v. 43-45).
     Arcana Coelestia 3605:3, 4

     I would like to begin my talk this morning by telling you a story which, although probably not historically accurate, illustrates quite well a thought I would like to present.
     Once upon a time, the story goes, Benjamin Franklin was standing at the gates to old Philadelphia when a stranger approaching the city on horseback came galloping up to him, and asked, "Tell me, sir, how are the people in Philadelphia?"
     "That depends," said Ben. "How are the people back where you came from?"
     "Unfortunately," said the stranger, "the people where I came from are all fools; they treat each other abominably-they steal, they cheat, they are cruel. I'm certainly glad to be rid of that place."
     "I'm sad to tell you," said old Ben, "that the people in Philadelphia are the same way."


     Sadly the stranger turned around and left the city to try another place.
     A little while later another stranger approached and asked the same question: "Tell me, sir, how are the people in Philadelphia?"
     "That depends," repeated Ben. "How are the people back where you came from?"
     "Marvelous," smiled the stranger, "the people where I came from are happy, friendly and generous. They love one another and want nothing more than to serve each other's needs. It was with reluctance that I have had to leave that place."
     "I'm happy to tell you," said wise old Ben, "that the people in Philadelphia are the same way.
     Happily the stranger entered the city to live there.
     This little story dramatically illustrates an interesting and perhaps curious fact that in the conduct of our lives we frequently ascribe to others attributes which we really possess ourselves. This propensity is sometimes called "projection." And it deeply affects our relationships with other people-our parents, our teachers, our friends, the person who reads the electric meter, and, most importantly, it also affects our relationship with the Lord.
     In the lessons which were read this morning, the Writings tell us that the Jewish and Israelitish people were of such a character that as soon as they observed anything unfriendly, even in their associates, they believed that they were justified in treating them cruelly. And so they also believed that Jehovah, the God of heaven and earth, entertained anger against them, hatred against their enemies, and so on. (See AC 3605 and 5798.)
     And just as it applied then, three thousand years ago, it applies today. The anthropologist Ruth Benedict studied primitive cultures in this century and classified them according to whether they were mutually cooperative and friendly (these she called a "secure" society) or uncooperative and hostile to one another (which she called "insecure"). The god or gods in a secure society tended to be rather benevolent, helpful and friendly; while those in the insecure society were uniformly ruthless and terrifying.*
     * Maslow, A. H., The Farther Reaches of Human Nature, p. 206
     Even closer to home, back in the forties, several dozen students, like yourselves, from Brooklyn College were tested. They were first classified according to whether they were "secure" or "insecure," just as the primitive cultures were. Then they were asked the following question: "Suppose you woke up out of your sleep and found somehow that God was either in the room or looking in on you; how would you feel?" The answers revealed that the secure student felt comforted and protected while the insecure student felt (you guessed it) terrified.*
     * Ibid.


     We see in the world around us that some people live reasonably interesting, useful, and rewarding lives while others are struggling, often a victim of circumstances which befall them, time and again. Could it really be that the difference stems largely from our attitudes? Can our mental view of the world about us affect us so deeply? Listen to what the Writings say about this. In Divine Providence, number 14, we are taught:

Everyone is affected by what is external according to his own internal, and a truth, by whatever mouth it is uttered, enters into another's hearing and is taken up by the mind according to the stale and quality, of that mind.

     Again, in Divine Providence, number 53:

. . . One can look to another only from what is his own in himself: He that loves another looks to him from his own love in himself; and he that is wise looks to another from his own wisdom in himself. He may see that the other loves him or does not love him, and is wise or not wise, but this he sees from the love and wisdom in himself. . .

     So we can clearly see that attitudes strongly color our view of what others are like. But doesn't the environment have a great deal to do with how we live? How can one be held responsible for succeeding in the face of difficult circumstances? Well, it is true that environment is a factor, but listen to what some workers in the area of student education have discovered: "Environment seems to have far less influence than is generally assumed . . . . It's not the environment but the attitude of the persons toward their surroundings that determines their ideals and their behavior.*
     * Gobel. F. G., The Third Force, H. Mayer quoted, p. 172 (number changed to plural)
     ". . . Blaming their failures [on external causes] are dead ends for two reasons: (1) it removes personal responsibility for failure, and (2) it does not recognize that success is potentially open to all young people."*
     * Ibid., W. Glasser quoted, p. 162
     In a way, these realizations are difficult to accept, because they put more of the responsibility of what happens to us squarely on our own shoulders. Sometimes we are like a person sitting in a house lined with mirrors. Whenever we look, we think we see the world through the glass, whereas, as often as not, we are actually seeing only reflections of ourselves.*
     * Perls, F. S., Ego, Hunger, and Aggression, p. 158 (paraphrased)
     The time you have spent at the Academy has no doubt supplied you with a great amount of information; but more important than that, it has given you a perspective of life attitudes about yourself and others which are more significant than mere data.


It is now your turn to develop your own perspectives-those basic, often unverbalized, assumptions from which you will conduct all your daily affairs. To an extent which will surprise you, you do indeed have a choice.
     In this busy day, I would be happy if I could leave you with just one thought. Remember the story of Benjamin Franklin. Remember it particularly when things go wrong, when you feel you have been badly treated, or when "fate" seems to have it in for you. You will find that the times you need it most are the times you will find it hardest to remember.
     How do you view the world about you? How do you view your friends, your acquaintances, a stranger? How do you view the Lord? I mean really view the Lord in your heart? Is He loving and merciful, always looking out for your best eternal interest and happiness, even (and especially) at those times when you cannot understand it? Or is He a harsh task-master, exacting behavior which you can only see as taking away your freedom and your happiness?
     Take a moment some time, after the hustle and bustle of commencement is over, and reflect on it. This may tell you a surprising amount about how you will live your life after today.


     "To him who is glad at heart, all things that he hears and sees appear smiling and joyful; but to him who is sad at heart, all things that he sees and hears appear sad and sorrowful; and so in other cases. For the general affection is in all the particulars, and causes them to be seen in the general affection, while all other things do not even appear, bur are as if absent or of no account."
     Arcana Coelestia 920



WHICH SELF?       Rev. GEOFFREY S. CHILDS       1982

     (A Search for the True Human)


The Mentally Healthy Self

     This article might be titled "The Distorted Self." This is an effort to define the self that needs healing. We refer in this to mental or emotional illness, where the emotions and conscience are crippled, and healthy spiritual influx and reception are not possible. There is that on the natural plane of the mind (DP 141) that distorts the reception of remains. What are the states involved? The Writings explain:

No one is reformed in unhealthy mental states, because these take away rationality, and consequently the freedom to act in accordance with reason. For the mind may be sick and unsound; and while a sound mind is rational, a sick mind is not. Such unhealthy mental states are: melancholy, a spurious or false conscience, hallucinations of various kinds, grief of mind from misfortunes, and anxieties and mental suffering from a vitiated condition of the body. These are sometimes regarded as temptations, but they are not. For genuine temptations have as their objects things spiritual, and in these the mind is wise; but these states have as their objects natural things, and in these the mind is unhealthy (DP 141).

Careful reading of this number gives a clear impression of two causes of mental illness: one cause, undefined, on the mental/emotional level of the natural mind, and the other on the same plane of the mind but caused by a "vitiated condition of the body" (Ibid). This seems to allow for both of the two major causes of mental illness that are given by experts in the field of psychiatry. These are an unloving environment in childhood and bio-chemical or bodily infirmities.
     As a further definition from the Writings, there is a number that allows for a simultaneous degree of spiritual wellness and mental illness. This is vital in seeking analysis of states and treatment. For if one is either sane or insane, well or mentally ill, the issue is rather clear cut. But there is this teaching:


     Inasmuch as at this day few undergo spiritual temptations, and consequently it is not known how the case is with temptations, I may say something further on the subject. There are spiritual temptations and there are natural temptations. Spiritual temptations belong to the internal man, but natural ones to the external man. Spiritual temptations sometimes arise without natural temptations, sometimes with them. Natural temptations exist when a man suffers as to the body, as to honors, as to wealth, in a word, as to the natural life, as is the case in diseases, misfortunes, persecutions, punishments and the like. The anxieties which then arise are what are meant by 'natural temptations' . . . . But spiritual temptations belong to the internal man, and assault his spiritual life. In this case the anxieties are not on account of any loss of natural life, but on account of the loss of faith and charity, and consequently of salvation. . . .There is also a third kind [of temptation], namely, melancholy anxiety, the cause of which is for the most part to be found in an infirm state of the body or of the lower mind. In this anxiety there may be something of spiritual temptation, or there may he nothing of it (AC 8164-Emphasis added).

This number again gives two causes for mental illness: 1) "an infirm state of the body" or 2) "an infirm state of the lower mind" (Ibid). Again, what is the origin of the infirm state of the lower mind is not explained. And of course the other point made is that the melancholy anxiety of mental illness may come entirely apart from spiritual temptations, or "there may be something of spiritual temptation." From this and DP 141 it would seem that extreme cases of mental illness are on the natural plane of the mind only, and cannot therefore involve reformation during the continuation of the illness (DP 141); whereas milder forms of mental illness can be endured during the course of reformation (AC 8164).
     There have been well-meaning and dedicated New Church men who have felt that the Writings alone will give healing and answers to all problems, all sickness of mind or spirit. And this very affirmative attitude has a real truth within it: for all natural things do have spiritual causes, and in general all spiritual causes are given treatment in the New Word. "He shall guide you into all truth" (John 16:13). However, the Word of Divine truth gives spiritual or Divine doctrines and teachings for the sake of rebirth of reformation and regeneration of salvation. The Writings do not give treatments per se of natural or scientific truths. This is an area man may study and develop in freedom and creativity, and in a way that both worlds of truth may combine (see SD 5709).


     Thus the Writings do not give explanations of natural medicines for natural or physical diseases. Nor do the Writings treat of that part of mental/emotional illness that is on the natural plane (DP 141). One would not expect them to do this. But certainly spiritual principles concerning causes and permissions will be given in the Writings that will shed light on the devastation of mental illness, and on the distorted self of this illness. DP 141 and AC 8164 start this, by defining the parameters of mental illness, listing the emotional states involved, and giving key indicators as to what mental outlooks may be present: e.g., a "spurious or false conscience," "deep melancholy," etc.
     Mental or emotional illness is not a happy subject. The mind instinctively resists recognizing its possible reality, and puts up defenses about honestly appraising its nature. We would rather it just went away, especially with its threats to equanimity. And certainly for all of our spiritual needs we look to the Lord alone and the peace and deliverance of His Word. But no minister-pastor can long ignore the reality of emotional illness, for he must learn to face and help handle the terrible devastations it causes among some of his congregation. The most obvious example of this is suicide: its reality, or the threat of it, or actual attempts that fail. The terrible states of fear and self-rejection that accompany suicide attempts must be dealt with not only by psychiatrists but by pastors also.
     I recall vividly one case of a person who was so disturbed mentally that she could not see any hope in life at all. She literally lay down to die. The psychiatrist I contacted to help with this defined it as a specific type of psychotic illness. The person received psychotherapy, first in a hospital setting, and is now happy and well. But the reality of her illness was inescapable.
     And so it is also with those who experience the feared NBD-"nervous break-down." That is a misnomer. The nerves don't break down at all. If anything, they are put on a tight string. Consistently in the case of those experiencing mental illness on the milder levels there are patterns of symptoms, which very often include anxiety and a false conscience, even as DP 141 teaches.
     What is happening in mental illness? What are the causes, and why does the Lord permit such illnesses? These are big questions! Answers, since they are not given in the Writings, will have to be through thorough and careful professional study and experience. And then they will still involve a lot of guessing. But professional help is obviously needed, for this is an illness on the natural plane that needs as much study, research and scientific enquiry as physical illnesses do. Cures are desperately needed.


     It has been said, at last reading, that there are at least 33 schools of psychotherapy! By now there are probably 10 more. This makes clear that the final causes, the etiology of the neuroses or psychoses, have not been clearly and finally discovered. And we as New Church men do not have to sit passively, at the mercy of one school of psychiatry or another. There are those schools of mental healing that are antagonistic to genuine religion, and the theories of these, as they deny the Lord and His omniscience and compassion, must be understood and rejected. And there are schools of psychiatry in deep harmony with religion-genuine religion.
     Gradually the sciences of psychiatry and psychology, now in their infancy, will reveal pathways in sure harmony with revealed Divine truth. Gradually, delineations will be made between the "spurious and false conscience" of mental illness (DP 141), and the spurious and false conscience of the misguided spiritual man (AC 1033; cf SD 3847, 3848, AC 5386, and the sermon "The True Conscience and Mental Health," NCL, April, 1980, p. 133). And also, in the course of the study of healing in this field, we can search in the Writings for definitions, possible causes from a spiritual origin, and try to understand the Divine compassion within the permission of mental illness.*
     * An initial and essential study in this direction has been made by Rev. W. L. D. Heinrichs in his paper "Spirits: a Cause of Mental Disturbances." His paper is a basic pre-reference to this study. We note his statement about the state of man's mind or body as a prior determiner of influx (p. 20b, "New Church and the Mental Health Professions, Journal of the Symposium"). We would use this statement as a stepping-off place.
     It is evident that there is a self that is distorted, deeply wounded, in mental illness. The states involved, as defined in the Writings, are states of deep sadness ("melancholy"- AC 8164), anxiousness, and a distorted outlook ("spurious or false conscience"-DP 141). Obviously, the love of self given by the Lord in creation (TCR 394-405) is then sick-deeply unwell. Remains of childhood, that are the source of joy, spontaneity and balanced delight, are not being healthily received. Something very potent is blocking their reception. We would define that blocking element, tentatively, as "anti-remains." This is a strong term, especially for one that is derived! But the unwell emotions in mental illness do act against remains: they block their free influx. They are anti-remains. They are not anti-remains on a co-equal level, for hereditary evil tendencies are the negative that remains oppose.


In the equilibrium on the spiritual plane, remains are on the side of heaven and hereditary evil on the side of hell.
     The negative emotions in mental illness do however act as an anti-remains force. They block out the open influx of innocence, celestial love, charity from childhood affections. They distort that influx, producing a spurious or false conscience (DP 141).

The internal man cannot live a spiritual life unless the external man is in agreement . . . . It is the same with the external sight relatively to the internal sight. If the external sight has been injured, it cannot any longer serve the internal sight; for if the external sight distorts objects, the internal cannot see by means of it except with distortion . . . . It is the same in the case of the natural or external man relatively to the internal man: if the memory-truths in the external or natural man are perverted or extinguished, the internal man cannot see truth, thus cannot think and perceive except pervertedly or falsely (AC 9061). AC 9063 speaks of this distortion happening "when the external man has been injured."

Although this is speaking in terms of regeneration, the principle involved, I believe, would apply to the injuries on the natural plane in mental illness. Such injuries would distort clear perception and affection by the internal man. In severe mental illness, such distortion would impede and even stop reformation (DP 141), until the blockading conditions are removed. In less severe illness, progress could be made in rebirth, but with some blocking and distortion (AC 8164e).
     If this theory about anti-remains has any validity, what are the elements in the natural mind that block reception of remains? What are the negative states that oppose? A universal principle is given in HH 14: "The Divine in heaven which makes heaven is love, because love is spiritual conjunction . . . . Moreover, love is the very being [esse] of everyone's life; consequently, from love, both angels and men have life. Everyone who reflects can know that the inmost vitality of man is from love, since he grows warm from the presence of love and cold from its absence, and when deprived of it he dies" (Emphasis added). Love is the fire of life, and life itself is actually therefrom (see AC 4906, 5071, 6032, 6314).
     Remains of infancy and childhood are states of innocence and love, and in the early states this is primarily love instilled through the parents, through the mother and father, or surrogates for them (see AC 1906, 561, 3183:1, CL 405, etc; also "The Gifted Child," NCL, 1979, pp. 353, 386). Parents are a medium of instilling remains, through love.


Supposing parents fail to feel love toward their children? Or more likely, suppose they fail to express it adequately and tangibly? What is the effect on the child? How would the teaching in HH 14 apply to this condition: "he grows warm from the presence of love, and cold from its absence, and when deprived of it he dies"? Sometimes infants deprived of love, such as those in institutions where care is not given, actually physically do die. But in homes where loves are expressed only stintingly a child won't die. But something within him may "grow cold," or "die." What effect will this psychological "death" have on the mind, on the heart and thought?
     In defining mental illness, the Writings list: "anxiety" (AC 8164), "melancholy" and a "spurious or false conscience" (DP 141). Anxiety is a common denominator in mental illness. There is a continual "worry" quota, sometimes intense, sometimes less so. What is this anxiety really about? In worse states of mental illness, the core of anxiety emerges as fear, even horror; and with a sense of panic. Fear, horror and panic about what? Man "grows warm from the presence of love, and cold from its absence, and when deprived of it he dies" (HH 14). When the deepest love of infancy-love of one's parent(s), behind which, above consciousness, is love of the Lord-is apparently absent how does a child feel? The parent, usually the mother, is the center of his love at this stage: his very life. But if that love is gone, or withdrawn, would not anxiety, fear, and even hidden panic flow in? It seems possible, when one recalls that if deprived of love, man "dies" (HH 14).
     "Melancholy" as a technical term in mental illness (see AC 8164, DP 141) is now a bit of an old-fashioned word. But it is still accurate: there is a deep sadness in much of mental illness-a sadness that is often openly or obscurely tied in with death. There is very often a fear of the death of the body, and of sickness. There is a sadness in which hope is tenuous, almost gone. Death seems to be the obvious finale of life, and the end of all things. Could this come from a death of love early in childhood? If the deep remains of love are blocked off, would not sadness enter? In fact, would not the sadness in one of its origins be love grieving? Remains grieving for their tenuous life? In a derived analogy, it is as "Rachel weeping for her children, and would not be comforted because they are not" (Matt. 2: 18).
     If there is a danger of losing a parent's love, and that love is very life to a child, he or she will do almost anything to win back that love, or to give it a new life. He or she will be perfect if necessary-even as an angel on earth, to win that love.


Thus there is also present in mental illness a "spurious or false conscience." Perfectionism is a common characteristic of mental illness. A conscience that drives one on to over-work, to do everything perfectly if possible. If a parent does not love a child, somehow the child has failed the parent. He has to make up for it. He has to do things perfectly. And often in this syndrome there are rituals, repetitive patterns of habit, that are a part of being perfect. But they don't really make sense! They are a part of the mental illness perhaps a part of the desire to regain love-an almost fanatical need.
     So far the major factors listed in the Writings-anxiety, melancholy, and a spurious or false conscience-have a love-grieving aspect to them: or a love trying to make up for what is lost. There are also physical causes of mental illness, and certainly nutrition is one factor among others. Melancholy anxiety can come from an "infirm state of the body" (AC 8164), and anxieties and mental suffering can come from a "vitiated condition of the body" (DP 141). Efforts to remedy such physical causes embrace whole fields of medicine and psychiatry. There are those who say that physical and diet factors are the only causes of mental illness. But they are not the only causes the Writings list!
     The Writings specifically include an infirm state of the "lower mind" in distinction to the body (AC 8164). In the DP 141 number, two categories clearly emerge: mental illness from bodily causes and mental illness with a prior cause. Medicines play a vital and sometimes critical part in alleviating symptoms of mental illness. But one could ask in the last analysis: what is the cause of physical or biochemical infirmness? With mental illness at birth, especially insanity on the psychotic level, one cannot blame environmental causes. But beyond that, especially on the neuroses level of illness, what is the cause of the physical infirmness?
     The cause-and-effect relationship so prominent in the Writings-the fact that the Lord permits nothing except for the sake of spiritual and eternal ends- would lead one to think that causes of mental illness in most cases would be on the inner level of the natural mind, apart from the ultimate physical state of the body. It is in that inmost level of the natural mind that remains are implanted. And if the cause is on that inner plane, disorders there would act to cause imbalance in body chemistry. But since the Writings list both physical and natural mind disorders as the causes of mental illness, that is the universal. Both factors are present, sometimes with one taking the priority as cause, sometimes the other.


     Bodily disorders and deprivation of parental love as causes of mental illness are treated of in many, many books on psychology and psychiatry. A very partial list will be included in the next issue. The connection of these causes of mental illness with direct teachings in the Writings is direct in the case of bodily infirmness, and perhaps implicit in the cases of anxiety, melancholy and spurious conscience from deprivation of parental love.

     (In the next article, we will consider the factor of anger in mental illness.)

HELP MEET FOR HIM       Rev. BJORN A. H. BOYESEN       1982

     An Attempt at Analyzing the Man-Woman Relationship in the Church (First of Two Parts)

     (This paper was not originally intended for publication, but written in 1981 for the Council of the Clergy. It is now published at the request of the Bishop in order to present to the church a variety of thought on this subject. Please note that all emphasis is mine.)
     Many have spoken in this council before on the essential masculine and the essential feminine, as also on the male and female minds in their operations, and on conjugial love; and we are deeply indebted to them for penetrating and excellent presentations of the doctrine. But as Mr. Sandstrom Sr. says in his paper "The Feminine Mind": "To Understand the doctrines in theory is perhaps not so difficult. The challenge is to see them in practice." And surely this is the problem that has increasingly troubled the church, especially as regards whether it is appropriate or not appropriate for women to serve on the councils and boards and incorporated bodies of the church. And the practice in these respects must, of course, be determined in the light of the doctrines.
     In this context let me express my general agreement with and support of the memorandum of January 28th, 1981, sent out by the Committee Appointed by the Bishop to Consider the Admission of Women to the Corporation of the General Church.
     But this report does not preclude further consideration of the subject, since, by its own admission, the committee entertains certain doubts, as, for example, in recommending women to the Board of Directors of the Corporation of the General Church, while it-and I am glad of that-does not hesitate to recommend that they be invited to membership in the Corporation itself.


     If in the following pages I shall frequently refer to passages from the Writings, and to conclusions drawn from them, which are already very familiar to you, I ask your indulgence. My reason for doing so lies in the hope of being able to analyze them in a somewhat different way than has been done before. Yet, there are, of course, many things that we can all agree on.
     Surely one of these is that "good and truth are the universals of creation, and hence are in all created things; but that they are in the created subjects according to their form" (CL 84)-thus differently in males and females, and differently in men and women.
     Further, "there is no solitary good and no solitary truth, but they are everywhere conjoined" (CL 87); but the human being alone is responsible for their conjunction in him or in her, and men and women are responsible for their conjunction in their relations between them.
     I therefore draw the conclusion that everything in human life, and especially in the church, ought to be interpreted in the light of the all-embracing principle that good and truth, and consequently the will and the understanding in human beings and between them, are to be increasingly conjoined during life on earth, and in fullness as in a marriage, and that the parties involved are responsible for this conjunction.
     We can also without doubt agree that "both men and women enjoy understanding and will, although the understanding predominates with the man, while the will predominates with the woman" (HH 369). Yet the same number points out that "in heaven there is no predominance, for the will of the wife is also the husband's will, and the understanding of the husband is also the wife's understanding."
     I think a valid comment on this passage is that the wife thus obviously can understand precisely the same thing as her husband can understand, since that is what the number explicitly states. And presumably the same thing should intrinsically be possible on earth, since men and women do not change their essential nature by death; although, of course, it may be a rather rare thing for a husband and wife to will and think so closely the same thing, or so nearly the same thing, here on earth as husbands and wives do in heaven. Or, is it, really, so rare?


     If we consider the additional statement of the Writings, which is so familiar to us all, that "the intellectual of the man is the inmost of the woman," then, perhaps, this conclusion does not appear so strange. After all, is it not so that the very conjugial, which is inherent in a woman, consists just exactly in the love to feel and think as her husband feels and thinks? Thus in our marriage ceremony it is written that "the marriage of love truly conjugial is the union of two in thought and will, in truth and good; and they who are in it love to think and will each as the other, and thus to become as one man." What is more, not only does the wife have the ability, from love, to think as her husband thinks, but she has also the ability to penetrate into his very affections-or motivations-which cause him to think as he does, and also to modify these affections most prudently. I also believe that it is with these, by her moderated affections, that a wife conjoins herself "from within," and moderates them so subtly and conjoins herself with them so gently that the man is not at all aware of it. I presume he takes it so for granted that he does not reflect upon it. And I guess such is all truly genuine love. It does not draw attention to itself. And the Writings make it clear that it is pre-eminently this ability that constitutes the wife's wisdom. In its own way it is said "to far surpass the man's wisdom, in that it enters into his inclinations and affections, and sees, perceives, and feels them" (CL 208:2). And yet, it lakes no glory in it. Nor would I be surprised if it is also true that women in general, or at least good women in general, have some degree of this wisdom about men in general, for when Swedenborg asked the wives in heaven who told him of this: "Whence do you have this wisdom?" they answered: "it is implanted in us from creation, and thence from birth" (CL 208:3).
     At this time I would like to proceed for a while very much along the same lines as in a paper "The Human and the Rational," which I gave to the British Assembly and to an open meeting of the Bryn Athyn society in 1974, and which was subsequently printed in NEW CHURCH LIFE.
     I was there speaking of Abram and Hagar and their son Ishmael, and also of Abraham and Sarah and their son Isaac. I noted that Abraham in that context represented a celestial love with all its vital powers, which I take to mean the same as the masculine love of learning to know, to understand, and finally of becoming wise; and we might add here that only when that love reaches wisdom is it celestial. It is this love that conceives everything in man (see AC 2621). It is the conceptive life, the celestial itself.


The faculty of rationality, on the other hand, is the human ability to understand whatever the love intends, and contains all the intellectual affections or talents necessary to bring it forth. It is what gives birth. And this is Sarah-the spiritual itself (AC 1901).
     It is interesting that here on the inmost plane of the human being-that is, on the plane of the soul-the faculty of rationality, or the intellectual faculty, is represented by a woman. But this should not surprise us, since we have already noted that the intellectual of the man is the inmost of the woman. There is, of course, a difference between this faculty and actual rationality. In the Genesis story this is represented by the fact that both a human being's first actual rational and his later more mature actual rational is represented by boys or men-Ishmael and Isaac respectively.
     Moreover, it is noteworthy that these are products of the conjunction of the vitalizing love-represented by Abram and later Abraham-with some intellectual affection. Thus Ishmael, the first rational, was the son of Abram with Hagar-a rather external intellectual affection of truth-while Isaac, the true rational, was the son of Abraham and Sarah-an inmost affection of truth. Thus it would appear that the rational faculty, or the intellectual, as the mother of the true rational, is in its essence feminine-and this would seem to be true both in men and women. It would seem to be the ability to recognize truth, and, of course, this does not really make it any less rational than either the first actual rational or the later actual rational, represented by the boys or men, that is, by Ishmael and Isaac, respectively. The difference is that it is not actual, but potential, until it is conjoined with its husband; that is, it has its delight only in the love and light of its husband. Thus, too, I think that the indication seems to be that a woman's intelligence is barren as regards abstract ideas until it is conjoined with the intelligence of a man or men, whose intelligence can climb into abstract light, or until it is excited by some love of knowledge, understanding or wisdom. But, of course, conversely this love in men is impotent until it is conjoined with some intellectual affection and thus becomes capable of conceiving some actual spiritual or natural offspring in true order.
     The main difference, then, between the rational faculty and the two kinds of actual rationality is that the latter are products of the union of a love with intellectual affections that supply the means to their birth, that is, they are the result of conjunction, while Sarah is the intellectual or rational faculty itself that possesses the intuitive ability to recognize truth.


And without this faculty of being able to recognize truth so to speak instinctively or spontaneously, a human being cannot become rational at all. For it is this very faculty that makes a person able to see those very truths which are the postulates of all reasoning, and from which all intelligent discussions begin.
     This faculty even has the ability to penetrate into the very inclinations and affections which give rise to our reasonings, and to modify these with considerable prudence. Now, of course, some degree of this ability must reside within every human being-man or woman-or one could not rectify one's affections, and thus repent and reform. But I believe that women possess this ability to penetrate into the affections guiding the intellect in an especially high degree, and that they are not only able to moderate their own affections but also the affections of men and especially of their husbands. Indeed, this is the very special wisdom of a woman and wife-and with a good woman, and most especially with a good wife, it acts so subtly and so gently that it never forces the man's freedom, but simply helps him to improve as of himself: So, she is truly "an help, meet for him."
     It is worth noting, however, that this faculty seems to be able to operate in two ways-that is, both as a wife and as a sister to the love of knowing, understanding, and finally of being wise, as represented by Abraham. (See AC 2508, 2524.) When this intellectual faculty operates as a wife, it is deeply involved with the love. While it has the ability to see the truth itself intuitively, and while its highest allegiance undoubtedly is or at least should he to the truth itself, and especially to the good in it, yet it sees the truth-all truth-in the light of the husband's love and its own love for him. For it is this that characterizes a wife. That is what makes her, like Sarah, "a woman beautiful to look upon"; for so we read in the Writings, "celestial truth is the beautiful or beauty itself" (AC 1470). And this is surely the kind of truth that a good wife recognizes intuitively, and likes to see in her husband. For as a wife she wants to see the truth not merely as a matter of abstract knowledge or rational doctrine-not merely cleverly understood without any reference to a heavenly love-but as a part of her husband's wisdom. And the mere knowledge and understanding of truth, or of doctrine apart from any heavenly love of use, is not wisdom. In other words, a genuine wife wants her husband to be wise in such truths as are alive with a heavenly or celestial love or affection. In fact, this is exactly, I believe, what makes any truths the living truths of faith, full of charity and love, and not merely dead knowledges or a lifeless science.


     In the case of evil men and women this ability and attitude of a wife may, of course, lead to a perverted intuition, and thus to the production of a false rationality. But on the other hand, in the case of sincere men and women the same attitude makes the intuition of the rational faculty so much the more reliable. And this kind of intuitive understanding does not need to argue with its love in any of those things which may be called rational matters, for in these matters it is already interiorly conjoined with its love-spontaneously conjoined "from within." Therefore, where this inner conjugial relationship has already been established, wives for the most part simply sit still and listen when rational things are discussed by men, and they internally assent to and favor what is said by their husbands.
     On the other hand, the intellectual faculty can also operate as a sister, in which case it is not as yet so affectionately involved with any special celestial love-as represented by Abraham. It looks upon him more as a representative of a love of knowing and understanding of whose celestial or heavenly quality it is not as yet certain. It is still an intuitive ability to recognize truth, and intensely interested in the truth, but as yet apart from any particular allegiance to any special inner quality of love. Or maybe one should rather say that its interest is as yet somewhat different, in that it is an interest or affection arising from consanguinity-that is, from a sister-brother relationship-rather than from conjugial love. In the conjugial relationship the will and understanding faculties are already conjoined. The special will of good and the understanding of truth support each other. But in a brother-sister relationship the reason-that is, the boys-are still immature, and the affections of truth-the girls-have not as yet chosen their loves. A "sister" would therefore seem to represent a more or less general interest in truth as a knowledge or doctrine with men in general, rather than as an expression of a special love of good. And yet, if it is a genuine interest, it is looking for and searching for a special love of understanding and wisdom, to which it may give its whole devotion, and to which it may be of help in applying the doctrine wisely-"an help, meet for it." This is what may be called a virgin affection of truth, pure and clean; while an affection for truth which is willing to be conjoined with any love for truth-which may so easily be turned into a falsity-is classified as a "harlot." (See AC 620.) From this we may see why Sarai, as a "sister," is said to represent "truth that is to be conjoined with what is celestial" (AC 1496). That this means a truth-or rather an intellectual affection-searching for a celestial use, that is, a use in the Lord's service, seems obvious.


And this kind of pure affection, like the affection of a wife, undoubtedly has some ability to recognize truth, when the truth is presented or explained to it. Looking forward to becoming a wife, a virgin has already the beginnings of the conjugial in her, and it is for this reason that she most surely has some ability to recognize the truth intuitively, that is from within, although as yet not by herself alone As the Writings say, a young girl ought to consult with her parents, because they are more able than she is to look into things private and personal to her wooer, and to deliberate and thereafter counsel her from judgment, knowledge, and a love of her welfare, which she is not as yet able to do by herself. Wishing so earnestly to put her faculties to the service of the high ideals of conjugial love, a young girl is perhaps a little too impulsive and open to the blandishments of almost any young man. (See CL 298.) And it is very much the same with the budding intellectual faculty represented by "a sister." Only with the help of a more mature love and understanding than its own does it become capable of deliberating with itself, and make a wise choice among the loves of knowledge and understanding represented by "young men." But with that help it becomes itself "an help, meet for" a budding celestial wisdom.
     So it is that all good women-both sisters and wives-seem to represent an intellectual faculty that desires to put all its intuitive perception of men's knowledge, understanding, and wisdom into the service of some heavenly use. Perhaps this is the reason why the ancients, and also actually Swedenborg himself, knowing proper correspondences, represented the sciences, including philosophy and theology-or Perhaps rather the love of them-as women and particularly as virgins. But here we should perhaps note that there are differences between the scientific, rational, and intellectual truths that both men and women love, each in their own way. So-called scientific truth is simply a matter of knowledge. Anything, even theology, may be made simply into a science, but, if so, its real purpose is overlooked. Rational truth, we are told, is scientific truth confirmed by the reason. It has a little more authority in the human mind than mere knowledge. That is, one believes it a little more when one also understands it. But intellectual truth, the Writings say, "is conjoined with the inner perception that it is so" (AC 1496); and all scientific and rational truth ought to be subject to this perception. And this is "Sarai" as a "sister." And it is interesting that this intuitive perception of the truth of a matter, when that has been presented, must precede the realization of its use or good, for otherwise the good runs the risk of being violated. Because this "sisterly" affection of truth is as yet less clearly or definitely committed to a special heavenly purpose, it cannot so easily be interiorly assaulted by our hereditary evils and their specious arguments.


And the internal good toward which it looks-and which it already interiorly harbors-can thus be protected, even as Sarai, who was not only Abram's sister but also actually his wife, was protected from violation by the stratagem that this fact was withheld from Pharaoh and later on from Abimelech.
     The important point of this teaching would seem to be that there ought to be in every human mind-male or female- a period when the interest and affection for truth should be more or less uncommitted to any particular love, even while it looks around for, or perhaps rather, is susceptible to a heavenly love or use, to which it may later on wholly devote itself. But one wonders also if the fact that this as yet uncommitted interest in truth as represented by a sister does not also suggest the very special use of unmarried women to society and the church.

     (To be concluded)

ANGEL CHOIRS       Douglas Taylor       1982

     Angelic choirs were once celebrating the Lord together, and this from gladness of heart. Their celebration was sometimes heard as sweet singing; for among themselves spirits and angels are possessed of a sonorous voice, and are heard by each other as well as a man is heard by a man, but human singing is not to be compared with that for a sweetness and harmony which are celestial. From the variety of the sound perceived that there were many choirs.
     Arcana Coelestia 3893




     This committee of the General Church exists to research and publicize the teachings about evangelization (proclaiming "the good news") with a view to developing a coherent philosophy and motivating the church as a whole to deepen continually its commitment to this Divinely commanded use. Its activities include the preparation of the tools needed to accomplish this end, helping the local Epsilon Societies (evangelization committees in the local societies), giving advice where solicited, acting as a clearing-house for ideas and reports of activities, and, on a limited basis, subsidizing local efforts. This latter has to be on a limited basis because as yet our operating budget is comparatively small.
     Prominent examples of the "tools needed" are: a training course on answering questions about the church; graded literature on various subjects; and the Missionary Memo.

Training Course

     Once again this has been well received wherever presented this year-as in Sydney, Australia; Bryn Athyn; Caryndale, Ontario, Canada; Detroit, Michigan; Glenview, Illinois; Washington, D.C.; San Diego, California; and Seattle, Washington. The usual format is an all-day session, but greater benefits, such as increased confidence and decreased fear, accrue when it is given weekly over an extended period. To achieve these benefits the chairman, who until now has been conducting this course, is encouraging the local societies to take up this work. This has begun to bear fruit; the San Jose circle is already doing so, and active consideration is being given to it in at least three other societies.
     As an aid to this activity, a collection of Scripture passages on various subjects has been compiled and circulated in rough draft form wherever the course has been given. This material has also been circulated to all pastors with the request that they add to this compilation, so that in 1982 we should have a fairly complete booklet for use throughout the church.

Literature Sub-committee

     This year we distributed to every member of the church a copy of a new pamphlet by Rev. Peter Buss entitled "The New Church."


This does not try to tell everything about the church all at once; rather, like an appetizer, it aims at increasing the desire for more, and points out where the subject of interest may be pursued. There have been many very favorable comments on this pamphlet.
     At present we have in the printing press a series of pieces of literature of increasing difficulty on the subject of the spiritual sense of the Word. This is designed primarily to meet the needs of our members when they wish to give something appropriate to a friend who has shown interest in this particular subject. We have also begun work on a second series, on the subject of the life after death. Following that we will seek to fill the great need for a series answering such questions as, "Why are we here?", "Why is there so much evil in the world?", and "Is God really in charge?"

Missionary Memo

     In order to be a clearing-house for ideas, and to present news of evangelization efforts throughout the church, we have continued to produce this bi-monthly publication. The response to it has been very encouraging.


     Our efforts to help Ghanaians spread the New Church teachings in their own country were enhanced by the visit to Bryn Athyn of Pastor Garna, with whom we have been in contact for some years. A fund was begun for sending books to Ghana, an activity which still continues.


     This year the committee purchased from the Swedenborg Foundation two films: "Johnny Appleseed" and "Helen Keller." The latter is an interview on CBS TV with Dr. Alice Skinner of the Swedenborg Foundation in which she discusses Helen Keller's religion. These two films are available to local societies, and have already begun to be borrowed.

Phone Listings

     We have an ongoing project to list the Swedenborg Information phone number in Bryn Athyn in telephone directories in cities where we have no members. This is proceeding slowly owing to lack of funds.

Lennart Alfelt

     By Lennart's transition to the other world in March we lost not only a wise and congenial colleague but a valued member of the literature sub-committee.


In his position as Academy Archivist, and from his constant interest in evangelization, Lennart was an invaluable source of information for our work.

Sanfrid Odhner

     Another transition that occasioned a great sense of loss was that of Sanfrid Odhner. Sanfrid has been a most articulate advocate of evangelization for many years, being a foundation member of the committee when it was re-constituted in 1974. We are greatly indebted to him for his contribution of clear thought on organizational matters, for his considerable artistic talents and literary ability.

Board Committee

     The Bishop has appointed a committee on evangelization from the Board of Directors of the General Church to administer the Evangelization Endowment Fund, and to assist the work of evangelization by being a liaison between the board and this General Church committee.
     This year was characterized by very heartening developments in local societies and districts. More and more local societies are forming evangelization committees. The door-to-door visiting campaign initiated in Toronto is being followed in other societies. Most now have a brochure inviting the neighborhood to the church. This year there were special services for visitors in the Detroit, Washington, and Caryndale societies, in addition to those regularly held in Glenview, Toronto, and Bryn Athyn. Some societies now have a section in their monthly newsletter devoted to news of evangelization activities. Public lectures are being given more frequently, but probably the most widespread development is the increased awareness of the value of free publicity and of the many opportunities that are available. It can safely be asserted that there is a steadily building ground-swell of active interest in the work of evangelization, to which the Lord unmistakably calls us in the Writings.
     The membership of the committee at the end of 1981 was as follows: Rev. Douglas Taylor, Chairman; Rev. Messrs. Arne Bau-Madsen, Harold Cranch, Thomas Kline, Allison Nicholson, Donald Rose; Messrs. James E. Blair III, Theodore Brickman, Jr., Edward Cranch, Martin Klein and Leon Rhodes.
     Douglas Taylor,




     Since our last report the following changes have been made on this committee: Mr. Lennart Alfelt, deceased, has been replaced by Rev. Alfred Acton. Mrs. Clyde Smith has been replaced by Mrs. Ian Henderson as secretary. Mr. William Zeitz of the treasurer's office has replaced Mr. Bruce Fuller and Rev. Donald Rose has joined this committee.
     During the past year the committee has considered numerous manuscripts submitted for potential publication. Some of those considered and acted upon were: 1) An Heritage of the Lord-Selected Readings Concerning Infancy by Rev. Robert S. Junge. This manuscript is being prepared in the final draft for publication. This useful collection of numbers regarding children is designed by the author for daily reading from the time of the child's birth until baptism. 2) The reprinting of Papilio by Chauncey Giles. This lovely eight-page pamphlet describing the relationship of the transformation of a butterfly to man's resurrection has been out of print for some time. Five hundred copies were reproduced, one-half of which were purchased by Theta Alpha for their Easter festival lesson gift. 3) Discipline in the New Church School by Rev. Martin Pryke was referred to the Academy Publication Committee for consideration. 4) The Tabernacle of Israel by Bishop de Charms, which is currently out of print, is being investigated for possible reprinting by another publisher, since the original publisher no longer is in existence.
     Mrs. Henderson, manager of the General Church Book Center, pointed out to the committee other well-known titles that are out of print such as Life of the Lord, Invisible Police and others. A plea was made through the General Church Publication Committee soliciting second-hand copies of these works to be sent to the General Church Book Center for repairs and resale until funds are available for reprinting. Children's talks by General Church ministers are currently being transcribed from Sound Recording Committee tapes. After minor editing, these will be assembled under subject matter and made available through the General Church Book Center.
     An adaptation by Rev. John L. Odhner of the memorable relations from the beginning section of Conjugial Love was submitted for review and is currently being reviewed by a Latin consultant, Rev. Lawson Smith, prior to consideration for publication.


This manuscript is addressed to the elementary school child. A new format of Calendar Readings designed by Rev. Patrick A. Rose was submitted and is being considered for possible publication. it is designed to encourage reading of the Writings on a regular basis, by dividing the whole of the Writings into small portions. Authorization was given to reprint five hundred copies of this style of readings from the work True Christian Religion. They will soon be available through the General Church Book Center. A rendition of the Doctrine of Faith submitted by Dr. David Gladish is still being reviewed by the Translation Committee for publication. Meanwhile, Dr. Gladish has submitted two chapters of Conjugial Love which are also being considered by the committee for publication. A New Church Vocabulary by Rev. W. C. Henderson, originally printed in NEW CHURCH LIFE over a period of five years, was reproduced at General Church Press. This valuable collection of terms (33 pages plus index) is now available through the General Church Book Center.
     A collection of past articles appearing in church publications on the subject of marriage is currently being gathered for possible reproduction under separate cover. This is an attempt to meet a growing need due to marital problems within the church today.
     A Place of Habitation by Miss Edith Elphick, a delightful fiction story of a couple awakening in the next world, is being reviewed for publication. The committee is also considering a pamphlet on the subject of faith with passages from True Christian Religion, New Jerusalem and Its Heavenly Doctrines and from the Doctrine of Faith. For this pamphlet the committee is seeking the assistance of Dr. David Gladish who has demonstrated a remarkable ability to transfer ideas from the original Latin into readable English.
     The work Life of the Lord by Bishop de Charms has been out of print for a number of years. The committee has been investigating the reprinting of this fine work (perhaps without the expensive colored maps) if funds can be found. The pamphlet Order and Organization (of the General Church) is nearly out of stock. Bishop King is currently working on a revised draft which should be available this year.
     The Publication Committee again extends an invitation to authors to submit manuscripts for both young and old that might serve the church.




     For a history of the origin of this committee and its method of procedure, the reader is referred to our previous report, published in NEW CHURCH LIFE, Vol. CI, NO. 7 (July, 1981), pp. 363-365. The method of procedure finally adopted toward the end of 1980 seems to be working effectively, though due to the time commitment it requires of the chairman, we have not made as much progress as we would have liked.
     Nevertheless, a number of changes have been considered and adopted. Archaic spellings will be modernized (e.g. show rather than shew). Proper names will be standardized, and names of Old Testament persons will appear in the same form in the New Testament (e.g. Elijah rather than Elias). Poetic portions will be indented in poetic form. In prose passages, verses will be grouped in paragraph form. Section titles will be introduced to indicate the subject of the section. Some cross references will be footnoted, and also certain explanatory comments, mainly to give the meaning of Hebrew names in the text (e.g., Hel'Kath-Lazzurim, that is, the field of strong men).
     Other changes include: The replacement of corn with grain or some other word suitable to the context for American readers (and English readers); cattle or cows instead of kine; outside, out of doors, or outdoors in place of abroad in certain contexts; wonder rather than admiration; weapons, not artillery; wineskins for bottles when skins are clearly referred to; woman in place of wife where prescribed by AC 1907 and AC 3211; anxious, concerned worried, and the like, instead of careful; and so on.
     These are examples of the kinds of revisions we have been making. Though we have agreed to over 125 changes in addition to the categorical changes first listed above, hundreds of readings still remain that are or have become misleading or wrong by today's usage. Because of this, we have resigned ourselves to settling for less than the ideal in the near future. At the same time, we maintain our commitment to dogged prosecution of the task whenever time allows, in order to make what progress we can to a version of the Word that is at once pleasing in style and readily intelligible in meaning. In years to come, the goal must and will be realized.


     In conclusion, I should report the resignation of Rev. B. David Holm from the committee, partly because of changes in his teaching assignments and partly due to the pressure of his other duties. Other committee members remain-Rev. Messrs. Alfred Acton, Stephen D. Cole, Martin Pryke, Prederick L. Schnarr, Lorentz R. Soneson, Prof. Prescott A. Rogers, and the undersigned.


     Once again we can report a year of dedicated service by a host of volunteers throughout the church. The only paid employees are our office secretary, Mrs. Joseph McDonough, and her assistant, Mrs. Cedric Lee. All others who help to keep the church provided with tapes of sermons, doctrinal classes, special addresses, banquet programs, children's services, and other special occasions throughout the church are volunteers. This represents a sizable contribution of skill, time, energy, and plain hard work-not to mention a considerable sacrifice of leisure time. The volunteers include our office bearers: Mr. E. Boyd Asplundh, secretary; Miss Elizabeth Hayes, treasurer; and Mr. Norwin Synnestvedt, vice-chairman. Without this sustained love of the neighbor, we simply could not provide the service for the church that we have offered for thirty-three years.
     Such sustained love of the neighbor cannot be taken for granted. Giving generously on one particular occasion is comparatively easy; but continual giving over many Years requires real devotion.
     Not only do we depend upon volunteer workers but also upon volunteer contributors. We make no charge for borrowing tapes, relying on the good will of the Users and special contributors. It is pleasing to report that user contributions were up by $558.55 this year. There was likewise a most gratifying increase in special contributions. However, one of these-a very large one-will not be repeated. But we are encouraged by the fact that the number of contributors has markedly increased.
     Our treasurer's report revealed that it cost $16,283.56 this year to make these tapes and distribute them throughout the church.
     One notable change in our operation this year is that the church services are now being recorded in the Cathedral, eliminating the need for a line to the Field House, where the recording was formerly done. While progress has been made in overcoming the technical difficulties involved in this change, we are not completely satisfied yet.




     Mrs. Dan McQueen, who replaced Mrs. Leon Rhodes as chairman of the Religion Lessons Committee, has done an excellent job of organizing her counselors and teachers. Selecting and training volunteers to correspond and correct lessons sent to our isolated children throughout the world is a sizable assignment. (A list of these counselors, teachers and committee heads appeared in the January/February issue of New Church Home.) In addition to maintaining this mammoth program, the rewriting of the lessons themselves has continued at a slow but steady pace. A revision was made of the second grade lessons, and first grade lessons are currently being revised. Mrs. Edward Cranch has been asked to chair a committee to investigate compiling projects, such as crafts and artwork, that could be supplementary to the lessons. She is making a survey of a variety of parents, gathering useful information that will lead to an ultimate improvement of the program.
     Mrs. McQueen is supported by Mrs. Boyd Asplundh, who coordinates the pre-school program-a series of mailings, beginning with two-year-olds and continuing on until the children are eligible for the regular graded religion lessons, starting with kindergarten. There are over 210 children enrolled in this program at present, plus 125 families receiving instructional papers.
     Mrs. Douglas Taylor, chairman of the Music Committee, involved with cassette tapes for little children, produced another tape of songs. It is entitled, "Lori's Songs #2," sung by Lori Soneson Odhner. This professionally produced tape is available through the General Church Book Center, and it does much to encourage children's knowledge of the letter of the Word through the medium of song.
     Mrs. Leonard Gyllenhaal, who coordinates the Festival Lessons program sent out to families enrolled in the Religion Lessons, continues five times a year to come up with delightful art projects that accompany a children's talk and service from the director. These are sent out by Theta Alpha International.
     Mrs. Lawrence Glenn, who coordinates the reproduction of the creche figures through local chapters of Theta Alpha, reported supplying an increased number of recipients, with the help of an artistic and willing staff. Their deadline was met, to the enjoyment of many homes receiving religion lessons.


     The correspondence aspect of the school continues to receive adults in isolation interested in continuing their doctrinal instruction. Many have enrolled in such courses over the years, which include City of God, The New Jerusalem and its Heavenly Doctrine, Heaven and Hell and others. Anyone interested in receiving this General Church service is encouraged to write to the Director.

New Church Home

     This publication, addressed to isolated New Church families, has been reduced to a bi-monthly because of increased costs in printing and mailing. However, judging by the continued support through subscriptions and letters to the editor, it seemingly is meeting an important need in the church today. It is still one of the few ways of providing children's talks to our isolated families, other than the booklets available through the General Church Book Center. Some of the artwork, interviews, etc., have been reproduced by other church publications.
     Theta Alpha International sponsors the "Explorer" insert, featuring poems, drawings and little stories by children in isolation. Mrs. William Fehon, the editor, continues to seek material from parents to fill its pages.

Visual Education

     The availability of a sizable inventory of 35 mm. colored slides, mostly used by pastors and Sunday school teachers around the world, continue to circulate. A fine catalog has been prepared and is available upon request by writing to the Religion Lessons office in Bryn Athyn. Statistics describing circulation in recent years are as follows:

                               1979           1980           1981
Slide sets                          82           38           27
Total Slides                         1,412      2,377      642
Number of Borrowers                24           39           9

Sunday School

     A growing inventory of resource material and supplies is being collected and categorized by Mrs. Boyd Asplundh, an active volunteer in this committee. Sunday school projects that have proven useful are sent to our church Resource Center here at Cairncrest for reproduction and availability to other church centers. Pastors and Sunday school teachers have discovered this remarkable source of material available at cost, thus spreading creativity to a wider number of Sunday schools throughout the church.



     A most informative interview with Miss Alice Fritz was printed in the January/February issue of New Church Home. Miss Fritz recalls the beginnings of the Religion Lessons program and the many offshoots stimulated by the women of the church from its inception. Her historical review of the remarkable women of the past and her encouragement to those presently involved with the work is a glowing tribute. This program has changed considerably since its beginnings in 1440, and thanks to the continued support of talented volunteers, it is gradually being perfected. We are grateful to the laborers who faithfully work in this vineyard from year to year.


     The pursuit and solicitation of material was once a major part of the work of the editor of NEW CHURCH LIFE. Nowadays there is much more material coming in than can be published, and the work is more in handling this volume of material and explaining to disappointed writers our space limitations.
     A previous editor once lamented that letter writing was becoming a forgotten art. We seem to be observing a kind of renaissance in that department. And this brings us to the matter of differences of view.
     Sometimes strong differences of opinion and understanding have prompted comments to the effect that such and such a thing should not have been printed or that the editor should have "answered" it in the same issue. This is something that has been discussed over the years. The late Cairns Henderson put it as well as anyone. As editor he wrote: "it has been our quiet conviction that nothing printed in the magazine will open the gates of the infernal regions because it is not answered editorially or argued in footnotes in the same issue . . . . We have an intelligent readership, well grounded in the doctrines, and as capable of exercising liberty and rationality when they pick up the LIFE as when they do anything else."
     Opinions about the cover of this magazine vary so widely that one wonders if reconciliation is possible. Calling in experts is not as simple a solution as it seems. We will consider carefully suggestions for cover changes in the coming year, but we hesitate to promise to please everyone.


Part of the recommendation we are presently following is that the cover shall not be encumbered with extra print. This brings us to the matter of General Church addresses.
     Some readers say it is a waste of space to supply those addresses so frequently. They point out that society phone cards are put out only once (sometimes twice) per year. And they ask why the same information must be supplied every month. Others say that every issue should carry the material. When they travel they want to be able to "grab" any issue of the LIFE off the shelf for phone numbers and addresses. Phone numbers and addresses do change, and it is not safe policy to grab any issue. Up to now we have been supplying the information every other month.
     The editor owes thanks to people who do excellent work in producing this magazine each month, but we will not list their names in this report. It has been a pleasure to work with them in the carrying on of this important use.
     Our pages in the past two years have been used as follows:

                         1981      1980

Articles                     274      308
Sermons                    60      66
Reports                    77      58
Communications                59      30
Announcements                39      37
Church News                    31      25
Editorials                     43      47
Reviews                    13     0
Directories                26     9
Memorials                     8     14
Miscellaneous               30     4
Totals  &nbs