Imagini ale paginilor
PDF
ePub

spirit, life, ghost, &c. are found. He contended that these passages were susceptible of different interpretations. That one class of texts applied to mere animal life, such as the lower order of animals possess in common with man; and that another class referred to a higher order of life, applicable to spirits or immortal beings; that one class of passages which treated of the body, related merely to his material body, while another class treated of his substantial or spiritual body, or the man himself, as continuing to exist in the full exercise of all his faculties and organs immediately after the death of his material body. As a collateral evidence of these views, he asserted that the senses, so called, were, strictly speaking, the faculties or perceptions of the inner or spiritual man; that the material organism was the mere instrumentality through which the real man perceived material things; and, consequently, that the material body was merely to adapt man to this natural world; and that, when this body was laid aside at death, the man himself emerged into spiritual life, in the spiritual world, a perfect man, in the full and perfect possession of all his perceptible faculties.

"The two last lectures of the course were on the Resurrection of the Lord. In these lectures, as in the two former, he confined himself to the meaning of the passage in the original. In respect to those passages which mentioned the appearances at our Lord's resurrection-as the appearance of the angels at the sepulchre, the appearance of the Lord to many of the brethren during the forty days previous to his final ascension from the Mount of Olives, &c., he endeavoured to prove that` the original Greek denoted spiritual vision; that is, the same kind of vision that was given to the prophets, and to the apostle John in the Apocalypse. In explaining these passages, and in accounting for the appearances recorded in the Evangelists— as where our Lord appeared to his disciples, the doors being shut-his being known in breaking of bread at Emmaus, with others of a similar character, he argued, that these events could be reconciled with no received theory of the present church; that difficulties insurmountable hedged up our path whatever course we took; and that the opening of the spiritual vision, such as man enjoys after the dissolution of the material body, was the only rational solution. He contrasted these passages with those in the original which denoted simple vision, or the perception of material things, and endeavoured to convince the sceptical, that he stood on a basis which could not be moved without doing violence to the rules of language. So confident did he appear to feel, that he invited the combined criticisms of the whole learned world, to point out a more fair and rational interpretation.

"Throughout the discussion, he carefully avoided any allusion to Swedenborg or the New Church, although he often made use of many expressions and figures which are found no where else but in the writings of Swedenborg, and which were not probably recognized by any present, except those who were familiar with his writings yet his lectures were listened to with the most serious attention and respect. After he had finished his last lecture, [in accordance with the wishes of several friends in the city] he announced his determination of giving a public lecture on the Wednesday evening of the present week, on the character and life of Swedenborg. He prefaced this announcement by observing, that as far as he had consulted Swedenborg, he was satisfied he was not only a great, but a good man; indeed, that he was a messenger from heaven; and the time had passed when his name was to be associated with all that was dreamy and visionary among men; that he was one of those great and good men whom heaven had from time to time chosen as a medium

of truth to the world. He also read some extracts from one or two popular literary periodicals of the London press, where Swedenborg's name had been recently noticed in the most honorable manner."

H.

ON THE FALLACIES OF THE SENSES.

(From Swedenborg's Arcana Cœlestia.)

INASMUCH as few know what the fallacies of the senses are, and few believe that they induce so great a shade in things rational, and most especially in the spiritual things of faith, so as to extinguish them, principally when man at the same time is in the delights of lusts grounded in self-love and the love of the world, it may be expedient to illustrate the subject by cases, shewing first what the fallacies of the senses are, which are merely natural, or in those things which are in nature, and next treating of the fallacies of the senses in spiritual things. I. It is a fallacy of sense merely natural, or which is in nature, that it is believed that the sun revolves once every day round about this earth, and at the same time also the firmament, with all the stars; and although it be said, that it is incredible because impossible, that so great an ocean of fire as the sun is, and not only the sun but also innumerable stars, without any change of place from each other, should every day perform such revolution together-and although it be added, that it may be seen from the case of the planets, that the earth performs a diurnal and annual motion by circumrotations and circumgyrations, inasmuch as the planets also are earths, and that some of them likewise have moons revolving around them, and that it hath been observed that they, in like manner as our earth, perform such motion, viz., diurnal and annual;-still with the generality the fallacy of sense prevails, that it is so as the eye sees. II. It is a fallacy of sense merely natural. or in nature, that there is only one single atmosphere, and that it is distinguished merely by the successive purity of its parts, and that where it ceases, there is a vacuum; such is the apprehension of the external sensual principle of man, when it alone is consulted. III. It is a fallacy of sense merely natural, that from first creation there hath been impressed on seeds a quality of growing up into trees and flowers, and of rendering themselve prolific, and that hence all things have their existence and subsistence; and if it be urged, that it is not possible for anything to subsist unless it perpetually exists, according to the established maxim, that subsistence is perpetual existence; also that every thing, which is not in connection with somewhat prior to itself,

falls into nothing; still the sensual principle of the body, and the thought grounded in that sensual principle, doth not apprehend it, nor that all and singular things subsist as they existed, viz., by influx from the spiritual world, that is, through the spiritual world from the divine [being or principle]. IV. Hence it is a fallacy of sense merely natural, that there are simple substances, such as monads and atoms, for whatsoever is within the external sensual principle, this the natural man believes, that it is such a thing or nothing. V. It is a fallacy of sense merely natural, that all things are of nature and from nature, and that indeed in purer or interior nature there is something which is not apprehended; but if it be said, that within or above nature there is a spiritual and celestial principle, this is rejected, and it is believed that unless it be a natural principle, it is nothing. VI. It is a fallacy of sense, that the body alone lives, and that its life perishes when it dies; the sensual principle doth not apprehend, that the internal man is in the minutest things of the external, and that he is within nature in the spiritual world; hence neither doth he believe, because he doth not apprehend, that he shall live after death, unless he be again clothed with the [material] body. VII. Hence it is a fallacy of sense, that man can no more live after death than the beasts, by reason that these also have a life in many respects similar to the life of man, only that man is a more perfect animal; the sensual principle doth not apprehend, that is, the man who thinks and concludes from the sensual principle, that man is above the beasts, and hath a superior life, in this respect because he can think, not only concerning, the causes of things, but also concerning the divine [being or principle], and by faith and love be conjoined with the divine [being or principle], and also receive influx thence, and appropriate it to himself, so that in man, inasmuch as there is given a reciprocal principle, there is given reception, which is in no wise the case with the beasts. VIII. It is a fallacy hence derived, that the living principle itself appertaining to man, which is called the soul, is only somewhat etherial, or some principle of flame, which is dissipated when man dies; and that it resides either in the heart, or in the brain, or in some part thereof, and that hence it rules the body as a machine; that the internal man is in singular the things of the external, that the eye doth not see of itself but from that internal man, nor the ear hear of itself but from the same principle, the sensual man doth not apprehend. IX. It is a IX. It is a fallacy of sense, that light cannot be given other source than from the sun or elementary fire, nor heat other source than from the same; that there is light in which is intelligence, and heat in which is celestial love, and that all the angels are in that light and in that heat, the sensual principle doth not appre

from any from any

hend. X. It is a fallacy of sense, that man believes that he lives of himself, or that life is put into him [so as to be self-dependent], for it doth not appear in any other way to the sensual principle; that it is the divine [principle] alone which hath life of itself, and thus that there is only one life, and that the lives in the world are only recipient forms, is altogether inconceivable by the sensual principle. XI. The sensual man from fallacy believes that adulteries are allowable, for from the sensual principle he concludes, that marriages are contracted only with a view to order for the sake of the education of the offspring, and in case that order is not destroyed, that it is a matter of indifference from what [father] the offspring comes; also that what is conjugal differs from other lasciviousness only in the circumstance of its being allowed; and thus, that it would not be contrary to order to marry more wives than one, if the Christian world did not prohibit it on the authority of the Sacred Scripture; if it be urged, that there is a correspondence between the heavenly marriage and marriages on earth, aud that no one can have in himself the conjugal principle, unless he be in spiritual truth and good, also that the genuine conjugal principle cannot be given between a husband and more wives than one, and hence that marriages are in themselves holy, these things the sensual man rejects as of no account. XII. It is a fallacy of sense, that the Lord's kingdom, or heaven, is of a quality resembling an earthly kingdom in this, that the joy and happiness therein consist in one being greater than another, and hence in being exalted in glory above another; for the sensual principle doth not at all comprehend what is meant by the least being greatest, or the last being first; if it be urged, that joy in heaven, or such as the angels have, consists in serving others by doing them good, without any regard to merit and retribution-this, to the sensual man, presents an idea of sadness. XIII. It is a fallacy of sense, that good works are meritorious; and that to do good to any one with a view to self is a good work. XIV. It is also a fallacy of sense, that man is saved by faith alone; and that faith can exist where there is no charity; also that faith, not the life, remains after death. The case is similar in many other instances; wherefore when the sensual principle bears rule in man, then the rational principle, illustrated from the divine, sees nothing, and is in thick darkness, in which case it is believed, that every thing is rational, which is concluded from the sensual principle. 5084.

REVIEWER REVIEWED;

66

BEING STRICTURES ON A REVIEW OF THE ALLOA CHRISTIAN TRACT FOR THE TIMES. ALLOA: ALEXANDER WINGATT."

(Concluded from page 225.)

THE Tractarian,-now, we firmly believe, in one of the many mansions of our Redeeming Lord's Kingdom,―never denied that Christ both lived and died to save HIS people FROM THEIR SINS: but he most emphatically denied that he either lived or died to save his people IN their sins, or in spite of their sins. And here we will bear testimony to one truth that has pierced through the cloud of human inventions. The Reviewer says, (page 9) "When man falls into sin, he suffers the consequence of it, and this suffering admonishes him to repent and reform. If he do so, it is well. If not, then the suffering must continue, and nobody can help him. He must suffer until he repent; it is a dispute between him and his God, and no third party may interfere." This is perfectly correct. Sin is a question between the sinner and his God, and no third party can interfere. But the Reviewer's "orthodoxy" does not appear satisfied, for it asks,—“What, then, has Christ to do in the matter?" A very great deal, we would reply. But the Reviewer imagines that on our scheme of salvation, there was "no necessity for Christ coming into the world;" and he appears sorely puzzled to understand “ why the Captain of our salvation should be made perfect through suffering." It has puzzled many equally wise heads, and we should like to see him account for it on the orthodox scheme.

Was the death of Christ the sacrifice for sin or not? If it were, there needed only his death to free the sinner! Why, then, did he suffer so grievously throughout his whole life in the flesh? We advise the Reviewer not to turn away impatiently, but to consider the question and answer it. The death of Christ, and the death only, is said to be a "sacrifice for sin;" why, then, before his death, did he say "he sanctified himself?" Could he who was perfectly holy in every iota, "sanctify himself;" that is, make himself more holy? Oh, orthodoxy, orthodoxy! Well mayest thou wrap mystery round thee as a shroud!*

* The Reviewer, in a note, (page 9) quotes-"The Tractarian observes (not a word of proof) that the Lord's human nature possessed that hereditary tendency to evil, which exists in every son and daughter of Adam." This statement is rather too important to be admitted on his dictum. He makes it for the purpose of explaining why Christ suffered, without having sinned; altogether forgetting his former doctrine, that "suffering can be only experienced as a consequence of sin, not as a temptation to it."

« ÎnapoiContinuă »