PREVIOUS PAGES

151                REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

in correspondences and representations, the Writings therefore cannot be the Word. As it was then not yet seen that and in what way the Writings are written in correspondences and representations, it was therefore comprehensible and a sign of discernment that Bishop W. F. Pendleton with respect to the question of what is and what is not the Word, laid stress not on the external things, the letter, but on the internal things, that is, the spirit. He therefore very rightly said: "It is not the thing which corresponds, or the thing which represents, that is the Word, but that to which it corresponds, and that which is represented; and that thing is the Divine Word or Divine Truth in heaven" (N. CH. L. 1900 : 326). Over against the false reasoning of CONVENTION this explanation was sufficient, and those who loved the truth that the Writings are the Word, rightly contented themselves with this. But the matter becomes different now that the question of the essence of the letter of the Latin Word itself is raised. Over against the attacks from CONVENTION it was sufficient that Bishop W. F. Pendleton pointed to the proper essence of the Word, as being not in the letter, but in Heaven. 

The fact that he then believed that the Latin Word has not been written in correspondences and representations, and that he then believed "that the Word or Divine Truth in heaven cannot be  fully expressed or written out in a natural language" (although he was acquainted with the fact that Divine Truth in the letter is in its fullness), and that he therefore said: "It is not contended that the Writings are the Word such as it is in heaven in its entirety or fullness" (1900 : 115), can only be appreciated as to its significance when one takes into consideration the final end in view. But now that the core of the problem has been transferred to the proper essence of the letter itself of the Latin Word, Bishop W. F. Pendleton's conception with regard to that letter becomes untenable, and those who would wish to use this conception as a witness of Bishop W. F. Pendleton against the Writings as being the Word where Divine Truth in correspondences is in its fullness, would thereby deviate from the proper spirit from which this conception came forth. For that spirit was only directed towards showing that the Writings, on the strength of their interior essence are the Word: the problem of the essence of their

152              REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

letter  thereby  remained  in the background. When now, however, the essence of the letter of the Latin Word is presented as a problem by itself, then one sees that the Divine Truth in the letter of the Latin Word is in its fullness, and that therefore in that letter all Divine, celestial, spiritual, and natural truths are simultaneously present; that therefore in that letter "the Divine Truth in Heaven is  completely  expressed  or  written  out  in  a  Divine Natural language", and that "the Writings are the Word as it is in Heaven in its entirety and fullness". Bishop W. F. Pendleton, however, added to his conception "that the Word or Divine Truth in heaven cannot be completely expressed or written out in natural language" these words: "For even the world itself could not contain the books that should be written (John 21 : 25)"; from which it appears that at that time they were not aware of the fact of the difference  between  the  Word  and the Doctrine of the Church out of the Word; for in the internal sense of these words in JOHN the Doctrine out of the Word is treated of. The "world" signifies the Church, and "that the world could not contain the books" signifies that the Church unto eternity will ever draw new Doctrine out of the letter of the Latin Word, and that while the entire Latin Word is contained in a certain number of books, the number of books which the New Church will write on the basis of that Word is innumerable, and will ever increase.

  Page 6.  Dr. Alfred Acton. Here the same thing applies that has been said above respecting Rev. W. H. Acton, namely that the fact of the difference between exterior-natural-rational, interior-natural-rational, spiritual-rational, and celestial-rational ideas, and that they stand in relation to each other only by correspondence, is not yet seen. From the words "... to those who would receive", it appears that it is not realized that the reception depends on regeneration and is different according to the degrees of regeneration.

  Page 7.  Rev. C. Th. Odhner. Rev. C. Th. Odhner had a general perception that the Writings must be written in correspondences; but he remained in the dark as to the particular consequences of this truth. Therefore he said on the one side: "The Writings are written according to the law of correspondence, and have within them an internal

153            REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

sense; were this not the case they would be an exception to all writing", and "Every Divine Revelation is correspondential and has an internal sense and internal senses one within the other even unto the Divine itself"; therefore internal senses distinguished in discrete degrees. If then already it had been possible to support this theory by a real exegesis of those internal senses, one would have had to come to see that the orderly means are the Science of Correspondences,  the  Doctrine  of  genuine  Truth,  and Enlightenment from the Lord. But seeing such an exegesis is impossible, unless  first the Doctrine  of the Church is born in the Church and the Church is raised from the interior-natural state to the exterior-rational or spiritual state, Rev. C. Th. Odhner on the other side arrived at the conception "that any attempt to translate the Writings into a discretely interior sense ... is bound to meet with failure" (N. CH. L. 1915: 200); and in order to reconcile the contradictions in which he saw himself involved, he said: We do not claim "that the Writings have an internal sense in the same way as the Word in the letter. . . . The doctrine of discrete degrees applies to the science of correspondences as to all other things". From these words it appears that Rev. C. Th. Odhner did not see the Writings as the letter of the Word.

By the words "the doctrine of discrete degrees applies to the science of correspondence", he evidently means the three "discrete" degrees of the three different literal senses of the Three Testaments, and he wishes to say that in the case of the two lower degrees, namely the literal senses of the Old and the New Testament, the letter can be translated into a discretely interior sense, but not in the case of the third degree, that is, not in the case of the literal sense of the Writings; and thereby he then extinguishes the profound truth of which he had first received a general perception, namely that "the Writings are written according to the law of correspondence and have within them an internal sense". And this was because he mistook  the non-essential correspondences existing between the literal senses of the three Testaments for the properly essential correspondences between the literal sense of each of the three Testaments and the spiritual realities in the Heavens. See concerning the non-essential correspondences here above, page 136.  Non-essential they are called

154                  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

because they are correspondences between things which both are in the natural, thus both on the same plane. That one can entertain a thought concerning the internal sense without knowing where it really is, appears from the following passage in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "It is wholly unknown that there is anything internal in the Word; and those who nevertheless think that it is there, still do not know where it is" (n. 10400). So of recent years there were many who in NEW CHURCH LIFE gave expression to their faith in an internal sense in the Writings. They had a general perception of this truth, while their remarks at the same time indicate that they did not see what that internal sense really is and how it can be brought to light. How great was Rev. C. Th. Odhner's uncertainty respecting the essence of the Writings appears from the following passage in NEW CHURCH LIFE of the same year: "Though the Writings are 'the Word of God', they are not, and are not to be called, 'THE Word'. The Word in the heavens is surely '-the Word of God', and yet it is not the Word, in which the Divine Truth resides in its fullness, in its holiness, and in its power. The Writings, being the revelation of the Word, such as it is in the Heavens, are not 'the Word' in the same sense that the Letter of the Word is the Word, being as dependent upon the latter as the soul is dependent upon the body in this world" (1912 : 164).

  Page 7.  Dr. Cranch. In contradistinction to Rev. C. Th. Odhner who regarded the Writings as the Word as it is in the Heavens, and not as the letter of the Word, Dr. Cranch gives expression to the conception that the Writings are the Third Testament of the letter of the Word, in which the Divine is present in its fullness, in its holiness, and in its power, and that as a literal form of the Word they make one with the real angelic Word by correspondence. This is in fact a surprisingly clear description of what the Writings really are; but it clearly appears that this expression was founded only on a general perception and that Dr. Cranch was not aware of the consequences thereof. For otherwise he would have come to see also that by direct cognizance of the letter of the Writings one cannot possibly arrive at the internal sense, but only by the Science of Correspondences, the Doctrine of genuine Truth, and Enlightenment from the Lord.

155                  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

  Page 8.  Rev. C. Th. Odhner. To this also applies what has been said above respecting Rev. W. H. Acton and Dr. Alfred Acton, namely that the fact of the difference was not seen between the exterior-natural-rational, the interior-natural-rational,  the spiritual-rational  and  the celestial-rational, therefore not the essence of that difference either; nor that they stand in relation to each other only through correspondence; that therefore for the exegesis of the internal sense of the Latin Word not only the Doctrine of genuine Truth and Enlightenment from the Lord, but also the Science of Correspondences is indispensable.

  Page 8.  Dr. Alfred Acton. Respecting this see here above p. 139, where it has been shown that Dr. Acton as it were with one hand writes down the truth that the New Church must draw the Doctrine from the Writings, and with the other hand that it need draw no Doctrine from the Writings.

  Page 8.  Rev. Albert Bjorck. If the natural language of Swedenborg were the literal sense of the Writings, then certainly these would not be the Third Testament of the World of God or the Divine Truth in ultimates, in its fullness, in its holiness, and in its power. Nothing else than the Divine-Natural language of the Lord Himself is the literal sense of the Latin Word. It appears that the "internal rational sight" of which Rev. Bjorck there speaks, is nothing else than the rationality of the interior-natural, and that the difference is not seen between the exterior-natural-rational, the interior-natural-rational, the spiritual-rational, and the celestial-rational. Such a reflection as Rev. Bjorck there describes leads to the natural Doctrine of the interior-natural  Church;  the spiritual Doctrine  is thereby not touched at all, still less the celestial Doctrine.

  Page 9.  Contrast with the above the assertions made by DE HEMELSCHE LEER with respect to past students of the subject . . . Here follow the quotations from DE HEMELSCHE LEER which apparently gave occasion to the reviewer for the reproach of "a lack of information concerning the positions that have been held in the past with regard to the Writings as the Word" (page 4). The passages quoted from NEW CHURCH LIFE by the reviewer were not unknown to us, and none of these passages, including those from NEW CHURCH TIDINGS is in the least in disagreement with what

156                  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

has been said in DE HEMELSCHE LEER concerning the former positions held in the Church. The passage on page 71 of DE HEMELSCHE LEER to which the reviewer takes exception, has been incompletely quoted by him, and in reality reads "that perhaps this Doctrine might be fully applied to the Writings". That the essence of the Writings as the Word cannot be understood before the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE is applied to them without reserve, is one of the fundamental principles of DE HEMELSCHE LEER. On the first page of DE HEMELSCHE LEER it is said that the crowning thesis of the belief that the Writings are the Word, is that the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied to these Writings. In. the beginning of his review (p. 3, line 17) Dr. Acton seems to wish to belittle this fundamental truth, the entire review is directed against it, and the passages quoted from NEW CHURCH LIFE clearly prove that the truth that the Doctrine concerning the essence of the Writings as the Word is identical with the DOCTRINE OF THE NEW JERUSALEM CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE, was not seen in the Church. ? The second passage too. that they  have had the curious idea ... is an incorrect quotation. In reality the passage reads: "There has been the curious idea that the Lord in an almost arbitrary fashion has written the Word of the Old and the New Testament in correspondences as something quite exceptional . . .". That this, now still, is the ordinary mode of thought of the large majority of the members of the Church, may be known to everyone. It is not said there that nobody previously had thought of the possibility of applying the law of correspondences to the Writings.

That some, such as Rev. C. Th. Odhner, have expressed similar thoughts was well known to the writer. It has, however, been shown above (page 153) that the idea which these writers formed themselves of correspondences, was determined by the mistaking of the non-essential correspondences between the three literal senses for the essential correspondences between the spiritual and the natural. ? That they have mistaken the natural ideas of the Writings for genuine rational truths. It has been shown in the above discussion of the passages quoted by the reviewer from NEW CHURCH LIFE that none of the writers using the concept of the rational in their

157            REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON  157

considerations were conscious of the fact of the difference between the exterior-natural-rational, the interior-natural-rational, the spiritual-rational, and the celestial-rational, let alone of the essence of this difference. The exterior- and the interior-natural-rational, however, are not the genuine rational, but as to their essence they are purely natural. Even the spiritual-rational is not the genuine rational. but only the celestial-rational. The reviewer himself in all the particulars of his review gives evidence that he still "mistakes merely natural ideas for genuine rational truths", which we shall further show in what follows. ? . . . their literal sense  for the precious  things within them. This is a quotation from THE TRUE CHRISTIAN RELIGION; that it applies to the Third Testament has been shown in DE HEMELSCHE LEER. It clearly appears from the passages that have been quoted from NEW CHURCH LIFE that even those who had a g-eneral perception of the truth that there is an internal sense in the Writings, nevertheless did not see the proper essence of the internal sense, nor the difference between the letter and the internal sense and therefore like all others in reality continued to regard the literal sense as the precious things within.

  Page 9, line 13.  The new element .. . It is here represented by the reviewer as if the conception "that the Writings have been written in correspondences and therefore have an internal sense", has long been accepted in the Church,  and  he  gives  one  the  impression. from  his words that he himself also favors this conception. If the Writings have an internal sense because they have been written in correspondences, then the difference between the internal sense and its external sense is the same as between the soul and its body, or between the, spiritual and its natural with which it clothes itself. The internal sense then is spiritual, and the external sense natural, the spiritual sense for the spiritual man, the natural sense for the natural man; the distance there between is immeasurable, as between the earth and the firmament, and the internal sense can never be found except if, besides the other means, also the science of correspondences is used. But although the words of the reviewer here create the impression, as if he and with him the Church in general have always favored the conception "that the Writings have been written in correspon-

158                  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

dences and therefore have an internal sense", vet, in other places of his review, he clearly shows that he does not accept the thought of an internal sense on the strength of the law of correspondence. For on page 19 he says: "That we must enter more interiorly into the understanding of the Writings, has always been acknowledged. In the past, moreover, this deeper understanding has sometimes been called the spiritual or internal sense of the Writings. As a definition, however, this term is not only vague and lacking in the element of nice discrimination, but it is also open to serious misinterpretation. ... We would therefore ... use the expression the deeper or more interior understanding of the Writings, rather than their spiritual or internal sense". For by the concept of "deeper or more interior understanding", according to the reviewer's conception, not the acquiring of an internal sense is meant, which corresponds to the external sense, such as the spiritual to the natural, where the 'distance between those senses is immeasurable, and where there exists absolutely no relation there between but that of correspondence. For this entering more interiorly remains on the sa.me plane always, namely on the plane of the natural-rational of the' literal sense. One may enter into this plane of the literal sense as deeply as one will, and still always remain on the same natural-rational plane.

Only he who from the Lord by the orderly means, that is the Science of Correspondences, the Doctrine of Genuine Truth born in the Church, and Enlightenment from the Lord, is raised above this plane, comes for the first time into the actual spiritual sense. Only in this light does it become clear what the words signify "that the Latin Word has been written in correspondences and therefore has an internal sense". That the words "enter more 'deeply" as they are used in n. 961 of the APOCALYPSE REVEALED and in n. 26 of the TRUE CHRISTIAN RELIGION in reality signify an entering by correspondence, has been shown by the Rev. Theodore Pitcairn (see above p. 46). It is therefore not in agreement with the facts if it is represented by the reviewer that the conception that the Writings have been written in correspondences and therefore have an internal sense, had long been accepted in the Church. For the "internal sense" of which he speaks, is nothing but an entering more deeply on the same plane,

159                    REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

and it is possible to speak of an internal sense only on the strength of the correspondence between the spiritual and the natural.

  Page 9, line 27.  According to the view long held in the Church ... One would imagine, when reading this paragraph, that the Church, in practice, has for a long time already in the Writings also, made a difference between their literal sense and their internal sense; and that therefore the priests of the Church, since it is their acknowledged task to preach not the literal sense of the Word but the internal sense, in accordance with the nature of this special kind of correspondences with which the Word in the Writings is clothed, have always striven to rise above the literal sense of the Writings and to explain their internal sense to the people. In the work The Science of Exposition by Bishop W. F. Pendleton, which is acknowledged by the Church to be a standard work on the exposition of the Word, there is no mention of such a literal and internal sense of the Writings. From this work it clearly appears that the task of the priest is seen in the exposition of the internal sense of the Old and the New Testament; an internal sense of the Writings and the necessity of elucidating it according to the special kind of correspondences with which the Word in the Writings is clothed are not mentioned there. It is difficult to understand how the sporadic efforts of some of the writers in NEW CHURCH LIFE to prove the existence of an internal sense in the Writings would justify the saying that "the view was long held in the Church, ... that there is a difference in the mode whereby the internal sense in the Writings is to be elucidated". It is well known that even by leading priests in the Church the thought of an internal sense in the Writings is repudiated, and moreover the reviewer himself, as has been shown above, gives evidence that he not only does not accept the thought of an internal sense on the strength of correspondences, but also considers unsuitable the expression "internal or spiritual sense", as he has in view only an "entering more deeply" on the same plane (see pp. 19 and 158). Moreover, what is the actual practical result of this elucidation of the internal sense of the  Writings,  which  it  would certainly be possible to indicate in the books and periodicals of the Church? The

160  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

only example quoted' by the reviewer that can be mentioned as an effort to arrive at the actual spiritual sense is that of the internal sense of the Jews, as it has been remarked by Rev. Hyatt. It may be known to every one that (with the exception of Rev. Hyatt), in reality at the present day no more than formerly, neither priest nor layman ever thinks that in the Writings there is an internal sense to be elucidated. ? If one realizes what is the essence of genuine correspondences, namely that they are a relation between the spiritual and the natural, such as that of soul and body, it is clear that also in the Latin Word there is such a difference between the literal and the internal sense, and that the internal sense cannot be attained otherwise than by the Science of Correspondences, the Doctrine of Genuine Truth, and Enlightenment from the Lord.

  Page 9, line 33.  . . . to be seen shining out of the natural-rational truths . . . The natural-rational truths of the literal sense are representations of the spiritual sense. They correspond to each other as soul and body. One can indeed see the soul shining forth from the body, but in this way one perceives the things of the soul and of the spirit merely in a natural way, such as an interior-natural man or an Angel of the lowest Heaven thinks of these things. So one can see the spiritual truths shining out of the natural-rational truths, but one nevertheless always remains on the natural plane. In order to arrive at the proper spiritual sense it is necessary to altogether leave the natural plane; and this is possible only by the above-named orderly means.

  Page 9, line 35.  .. . in the same way as the Old and New Testaments are now elucidated from our pulpits. Here it clearly appears how greatly the reviewer has misunderstood the position of DE HEMELSCHE LEER. It has been shown above (pages 134?135, 142, 144) that before first of all the literal sense of the Third Testament has been opened, or what is the same, before the spiritual Doctrine of the Church has been born, all exposition of the internal sense of the Old and the New Testament, cannot possibly rise above the natural sense; and that the genuine spiritual sense of the Old and the New Testament is seen only then if first the true spiritual sense of the Third Testament is seen.

  Page 10, line 3.  Yet, in the actual expositions of the

161             REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

Writings, no use is made of this manifestly important distinction, and emphasis seems rather to be laid on ... Apparently the reviewer does not take into account the fact  that the essence of  correspondence,  in the Third Testament also, just as with all essential correspondences, consists in the relation between the spiritual cause and the natural effect.  The  application  of  the  science  of correspondences  by  which  one  arrives  from  sensual-natural  ideas  to  genuine  rational-natural  ideas,  for instance  from  heat and light to the genuine interior-natural idea of good and truth as it rules in the natural Heaven, is only a very first step; there is after that still an entirely different application of that science, namely to  arrive  from the  natural-rational  to  the  spiritual-rational, and still later even, from the spiritual-rational to the celestial-rational  ideas.  The great use of this application appears from this (as has been described in DE HEMELSCHE LEER, First Fasc., p. 119) that "the correspondences of the rational ideas which have been laid down in the natural by the higher degrees of the Doctrine of the Church, in the form of scientifics are one of the most important means of raising ever higher the unfolding of truth and of extending it ever further".

  Page 10, line 13.  The reader, therefore, will not be surprised ... These words are addressed to the readers of DE HEMELSCH.E LEER, who from the beginning and during several years have assisted in the development of our thought concerning the Writings as the Third Testament and concerning the Doctrine of the Church. Fully quoted the passage on page 72 (First Fasc.), to which the reviewer  takes  exception,  reads  thus:  "Only  in the measure in which the letter also of the Writings is seen as letter, one begins to realize that the spiritual and the celestial,  yea  even the  rational,  are never to be  found in the letter, but only in the essential Heaven itself, that is, in the living internal of man"-, and "it plainly appears that by the spiritual sense, which is within the natural sense, a letter such as that of the Writings can never be meant, but only the living perceptions in the spirit of Angels and of regenerated men" (p. 73).

  Page 10, line 32.  These positions have been arrived at as a logical consequence ... It has already been pointed

162                  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

out previously that DE HEMELSCHE LEER did not arrive by logical conclusions at its positions concerning the essence of the Third Testament. These positions of themselves flow forth from the truth that the Writings are the Divine Truth in ultimates, in its fullness, holiness and power. Only after the truth of those positions had appeared before the rational thought and been confirmed by the letter of the Latin Word, were they summarized in this one fundamental teaching, that the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied also to the Third Testament without difference or reserve. In the supposition of the reviewer the true train of thought of DE HEMELSCHE LEER has therefore just been reversed.

  Page 10, line 36.  Past students ... If one sees that also in the Third Testament the Divine Truth has been laid down in the natural, and that therefore there too, the distance to the spiritual is immeasurable, such as between the earth and the firmament, it clearly appears that there is no real difference as regards the means of the unfolding of the various literal senses. This is generally acknowledged with regard to the Old and the New Testament, where also the ultimates are different; for different means or methods are never used there. The conclusion of the reviewer is based on the supposition that in the Third Testament one can arrive at the internal sense by an "entering more deeply" into the literal sense, therefore on the same plane, while in this way one never rises above the interior-natural, and always remains a discrete degree below the spiritual sense.

  Page II, line 23.  ... and since the Writings are written on the plane of natural-rational truths, that every particular truth therein so corresponds. This is a truth which perfectly agrees with the conception of DE HEMELSCHE LEER; but in the conception of the reviewer the la.w of correspondence is not taken into account. For by the idea of entering more deeply into the literal sense, the necessity is done away with of going over from the natural plane to the spiritual plane on the strength of the law of correspondence; however deeply one enters into the letter, one yet always remains on the same natural plane. According to the conception of DE HEMELSCHE LEER, however, in the letter of the Third Testament all Divine,

163            REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

celestial, and spiritual truths have been laid down in the natural, so that the Lord sees that letter in a Divine way, the celestial Angel and the celestial man in a celestial way, the spiritual Angel and the spiritual man in a spiritual way, the natural Angel and the interior-natural man in a natural way. All according to the difference of degrees, these being discrete, they therefore see entirely different truths in  that same letter,  and  there is no relation there between but that of essential correspondence.

  Page II, line 29.  ... can surely not be said of the Writings . . . Whoever is conscious of the infinite contents of  the Word  will  have  no  difficulty  in  understanding that the places quoted by the reviewer (A.C. 10441, 6839, 9025, etc.) must be applied  to the letter of the Third Testament, without difference and reserve.

  Page II, line 35.  Moreover, unreservedly to apply to the Writings the literal statements ... Such a procedure is entirely in disagreement with the mode of thought of DE HEMELSCHE LEER. According to DE HEMELSCHE LEER one must leave the literal sense entirely, in order to arrive  at  the  genuine Doctrine.  With  regard to the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE this applies as well to the Third Testament, as to the Old and the New Testament. If the Church remains in the literal sense of the Third Testament, one can never see that the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied to the Third Testament.

  Page 11, line 41.  I have already  presented some specimens ... Here we have a summary of the results of the elucidation of the internal sense, such as it has long been  accepted in  the  Church.  The  specimen of the progress in the understanding of the doctrines ? (all the other  examples  are taken  from Rev.  Hyatt) ?  has reference to the development of the natural Doctrine of the Church. The characteristic of this Doctrine is that "to man in this state it is entirely impossible to see the spiritual,  let  alone  the  celestial, in its proper essence (A.C. 1911); as regards his own internal things he is in the thickest darkness, yea, he has no idea whatever of them, so that for instance, in the Latin Word he identifies  the  spiritual  rational  with  the  rational-natural scientific  (A.C.  1904),  while  in  reality  he only just

164                  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

participates in the natural rational and with. him there is as yet no question at all of the spiritual rational. It is inherent to the merely natural essence of this state that man ascribes good and truth to himself, that he does not realize the necessity of the Doctrine of the Church, and even, that he at first indignantly rejects the truth of the Divine origin and the Divine essence of the Doctrine of the Church (A.C. 1911)" (see DE HEMELSCHE LEER, First Fasc., p. 114).

  Page 14, line 24.  Whether or not one agrees ... In the expositions quoted by the reviewer it has been shown that the elucidation of the title of the ARCANA COELESTIA, which has been given on page 3 of that work, in the internal sense contains a  complete description of the essence of the Word  and of the  Doctrine  of the Church, while this elucidation in the literal sense seems to be no more than an unimportant editorial annotation. If the exposition quoted is based on an orderly exegesis and these things are actually contained in the internal sense of the text of page 3 of the ARCANA COELESTIA, then a practical  proof  has  there been given  that the Latin Testament contains an  internal  sense  which must be unfolded with the orderly means of exegesis, and that the natural signification must there be put entirely aside, so that the literal sense as it were entirely disappears. Furthermore, if the exegesis of the concepts experience and text is based on reality, a proof has been given that the Doctrine of the Church is Divine, for it is shown that by the text the forms of the Doctrine of the Church are indicated, that these are spiritual out of celestial origin, and therefore of purely  Divine origin and of Divine essence.  It  is  therefore  surprising  that  the  reviewer considers it to be sufficient to say: "Whether or not one agrees with what is said in the above expositions". If he does not agree, and is of opinion that the expositions are not based on reality, then, to our mind, he ought not to have withdrawn from the duty of saying and showing this.

  Page 14, line 27.  There is nothing new ... in them ... The teaching that the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied to the Third Testament without difference and reserve, and that the

165                 REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

Doctrine of the Church is of Divine origin, of Divine essence, and of Divine authority, are in them.

 Page 14, line 28.  ... thoughts which might easily have teen gathered from a plain reading of the Writings ...  It is here said by the reviewer that the teachings that the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied to the Third Testament without difference and reserve, and that the Doctrine of the Church is of Divine origin, of Divine essence, and of Divine authority, are thoughts which might easily have been gathered from a plain reading of the Writings.

  Page 14, line 31. . - . that what DE HEMELSCHE LEER puts forth as elucidations is plainly taught in the Writings . . . The essential contents of these elucidations are the two above-named  teachings,  namely  that  the  DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied to the Third Testament without difference and reserve, and that the Doctrine of the Church is of Divine origin, of Divine essence, and of Divine authority. The reviewer here says that these things are plainly taught in the Writings.

  Page 14, line 38.  Here we note ... The Doctrine or the internal sense is to be confirmed by the literal sense (S.S.  53).  It is  entirely incomprehensible why this  is reproached as a fault to DE  HEMELSCHE  LEER.  But although DE HEMELSCHE LEER has continually confirmed its Doctrine according to order by the literal sense,  yet its  thought  is  not  in  the  literal  sense.  This  has  been elucidated  above  (page  163)  on  the  strength  of  the example that if the Church remains in the literal sense of the Third Testament, one can never see that the DOCTRINE CONCERNING THE SACRED SCRIPTURE must be applied to the Third Testament without difference and reserve.

  Page 14, line 41.  . . . yet, according to DE HEMELSCHE LEER the "natural signification" of the Writings "must be put entirely aside", if we would arrive at its spiritual teaching. In the exposition of. page 3 of the ARCANA COELESTIA, as it has been given in the articles Arcana una cum Mirabilibus in DE HEMELSCHE LEER, the intent of which was to arrive at the spiritual teaching of that text,  the natural  signification  has  been  put  entirely aside. But the confirmation of that exposition had to be

166  REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

given according to order through the literal sense of the Word, not through the internal sense. "An appeal to their internal sense", as the reviewer says, would be contrary to order.

  Page 14, line 37.  ... but what is the internal sense of the teaching itself? The Doctrine, that is the internal sense, must be confirmed through the literal sense. The question of the reviewer is therefore not directed against DE HEMELSCHE LEER, but against the Latin Word itself, where this apparently paradoxical truth is clearly taught. The core of the reviewer's question is, "how can the internal sense be confirmed by the literal sense, in view of the fact that the literal sense must be left, if one will see the internal sense?" This is possible because in the literal sense of the Latin Word the Divine Truth is in its  fullness,  and  because therefore  all  Divine,  celestial, and spiritual truths have there been laid down in the natural.  If a man  opens the literal  sense of a given passage according to order, he will see that the internal sense which then appears before him, is taught clearly in many other places in the letter. By this he sees the internal sense confirmed through the literal sense. But only he who has thus been raised to the internal sense will be able to see this, since he now sees out of the celestial, or out of good; he now sees those confirmatory passages of the letter from within, or out of the celestial, or out of good. About this seeing from within we read in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "Those who when reading the Word are in enlightenment, see it from within, for their internal is open, and when the internal is open it is in the light of Heaven; this light flows in and enlightens" (n.  10551). However, he who remains in the letter with regard to the passage to be expounded, remains entirely in the natural also  with  regard to the confirmatory passages, for he does not see them from within, but from without. Therefore, even there where the internal sense of the passage to be expounded is clearly taught in the letter,  he  sees  nothing whatever  of  the  internal  sense, but he remains in merely natural ideas. It is therefore not in agreement with the facts if the reviewer says that the teaching that the truth of a higher degree becomes the good of the next lower ... is given as the internal

167                 REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

sense of the words "experience" and "text". First, this teaching is not in direct connection with the explicatio or unfolding of the truth, of which the ideas "experience" and "text" are shown as essential elements, but with the folding of truth or with the descent of Divine Truth along the discrete degrees into ultimates;  and  second, this teaching is not given as the internal sense of the ideas "folding" and "unfolding", but by the exegesis of the  concepts  "folding"  and "unfolding"  the internal sense of that teaching has been brought to the light for the first time, so that it can be quoted as a literal teaching in confirmation,  but only  on the strength of its internal sense. That that literal teaching for any one who takes direct cognizance of it, has a merely natural significance,  and that then  the internal  sense  remains hidden  deeply within,  and  in  its turn would  first have to be found by the orderly means, can be clear to any one; for the literal sense of the Latin Word, even with regard to the Divine, celestial, and spiritual things that are taught therein, at direct cognizance consists of mere scientifics. That any one can take cognizance of a teaching, spiritual in itself (such as the teaching here that the truth of a higher degree becomes the good of  the  next  lower)  without  seeing  the  least  of  the internal sense, may appear from the following passage in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "Be it known that all perception about the external is from the internal, for that which is in the external can be seen from the internal; but not from the external what is in itself; and still less from the external what is in the internal.

From this it is that those who are in external things without what is internal do not acknowledge internal things, because they do not feel and see them; and also that some deny them, and together with them, the things celestial and Divine" (n. 10468). By the external the external or literal sense of the Word is meant (see n. 10397, 10401, 10402, 10460); in the New Church the literal sense of the Latin Word. By the internal the genuine spiritual and celestial things born in the human mind and living there, are meant. That the man of the New Church may to all appearance be well informed in the letter of the Latin Word, and yet have no part in the living spiritual and celestial things, is clear.

168          REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

  Page 15, line 1.  Moreover, why should truths be thus concealed in the Writings? In the letter of the Word, being the Word in lasts, Divine Truth has been laid down in the natural. The distance between the natural and the spiritual, or between the literal sense and the genuine spiritual truths of the Church is immeasurable, and there is no relation there between but that of correspondence.

  Page 15, line 7,  ... we cannot imagine that Swedenborg was ignorant of the "spiritual sense" . . . DE HEMELSCHE LEER contains no single word that could give occasion to such a strange thought as that Swedenborg was ignorant of the spiritual sense, or that he, knowing it, sought to hide it.

  Page 15, line 19.  Would it not be clouds that have come? We read that the Son of Man will come "in the clouds of Heaven with great glory and power" (Matt. 24 : 30), and in REVELATION, chapter I, verse 7: "Behold, He cometh with clouds" (cf. here above, page 116). From the question of the reviewer it seems one would have to conclude that he has not made himself acquainted with ?the address by H. D. G. Groeneveld, on the Coming of the Lord in the Doctrine of the Church (First Fasc., pp 38? 43). It needs no argument, that if one has not entered into what has been laid down in this address, one cannot understand the view of DE HEMELSCHE LEER.

  Page 15, line 22.  DE HEMELSCHE LEER criticizes those who call the Writings the internal sense of the Word. It is said in DE HEMELSCHE LEER: "Indeed the Third Testament is the revelation of the internal sense of the Word, but only if one regards the literal sense of that Word not from without, but from within or from the spiritual-rational" (First Fasc. pp. 43, 35, 129, 130). The places here quoted by the reviewer are just as many confirmations of this truth. In the APOCALYPSE EXPLAINED, n. 376, it is said in the sentence immediately preceding the words quoted by the reviewer: "No one is ever admitted into the spiritual sense unless he is in genuine truths out of good". In the second passage quoted by the reviewer, APOCALYPSE EXPLAINED, n. 950, it is said: "Divine Truth proceeding from the Lord is what appears before the eyes of the Angels as light, for the reason that Divine Truth enlightens their understanding; and what enlightens the under-

169             REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON  169

standing of the Angels is light to their eyes. Such is Divine Truth in Heaven, and such is the Word in its spiritual sense; while Divine Truth on the earth is such as the Word is in the sense of the letter, in which there are few genuine truths, but they are appearances of truths; the natural man receives no other". And just as clear are the very words quoted by the reviewer from this number: "That man may again be conjoined with Heaven". For the conjunction between man and Heaven is based, on the correspondence between the spiritual and the natural; where both are not present, the natural as well as the spiritual, and they do not make one by correspondence, there is no conjunction. And likewise the other places here quoted by the reviewer; they confirm the position of DE HEMELSCHE LEER.

  Page 16, line 1.  That this sense is there clothed in the language of rational thought is evident. Divine Truth has been laid down in the Third Testament in the rational-natural.  Rational  thoughts  the  celestial  Angels  and celestial men alone have (A.C. 6240). Here we have an example that the reviewer "mistakes merely natural ideas for genuine rational truths" (see here above, p. 157), in that he identifies the rational-natural with the rational.

  Page 16, line 6.  But surely it is not suggested . . . If it is such a self-evident truth that truth in the Writings is clothed with the things derived from the world, why then is the teaching not accepted that the truth must there first be stripped of its clothing, if one wishes to arrive at the naked, that is, the genuine truth? Moreover, it is a fact that even to-day the large majority of the members of the Church, and among them leading priests, regard the literal sense of the Writings such as it is taken up by direct cognizance  as  the  spiritual  sense  itself  and  as  the naked truth.

  Page 16, line 9.  "It is not contended (wrote Bishop W. F. Pendleton) . .." If the Writings were not the Word such as it is in Heaven in its entirety or fullness, they would not be the Word at all (see here above pp. 150-152). And, by the way, the reviewer is dealing with the question whether the truth in the Writings is naked or clothed, but Bishop W. F. Pendleton is dealing with the question whether the truth in the Writings has been given in its

170                 REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

entirety or only partially; these two concepts have nothing whatever to do with each other, which also is confirmed by the fact that Bishop W. F. Pendleton in the same paragraph adds the following words: "The Word in heaven is veiled or covered in the letter, but unveiled, laid open plainly to view, in the Writings" (NEW CHURCH LIFE 1900 : 216).

  Page 16, line 14.  We are taught ... What does the reviewer wish to prove by this passage? He has just said that the truth in the Writings is clothed with the things derived from the world. And now he quotes this passage in order to say that the spiritual sense, which is the truth stripped of the things of the world, is for men also. The complete passage reads as follows: "The spiritual sense of the Word is for the Angels, and also for those men who are spiritual" (A.E. 697). A man who is spiritual is only he who is as an Angel of the second Heaven. Such a man reads the Latin Word from within, or from the spiritual-rational; in all the natural things with which the truth in the letter of the Latin Word is clothed, he sees the abstract spiritual concepts of the good and the truth, with which those natural things correspond. The same is taught in the following places in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "The internal sense is for the Angels, and for those men who are angelic minds" (n. 3016); and "The internal sense is for those who are in Heaven; and also for those who are in the world, yet in so far as they are at the same time in Heaven (n. 8912).

  Page 16, line 15.  And what else do devout men see . . . This is another example of how the reviewer "mistakes merely natural ideas for genuine rational truths".

  Page 16, line 19.  "Through this revelation ..." The conjunction between the two worlds is based on the correspondence between the internal or spiritual and the external or natural sense of the Latin Word. There is an open communication with the Angels of Heaven only in the measure in which the minds of men have been opened into Heaven. There is communication of the interior-natural men with the Angels of the first Heaven; there is communication of the spiritual men with the Angels of the second Heaven; there is communication of the celestial men with the Angels of the third Heaven.  It is in the light of this

 171    REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

truth, namely that by this Revelation an open communication with the Angels of Heaven has been granted, that Mr. Groeneveld in his New Year's Address for 1930, realizing the great significance of the new state which will dawn for the Church by the birth of the Doctrine of the Church, said: "We shall be in the Heavens here on earth" (First Fasc., p. 18).

  Page 16, line 23.  . . . these correspondences are rational truths. For the celestial man they are rational truths (A.C. 6240). The scientifics of the letter are rational-natural ideas and correspond with the rational truths. There is no other possibility of arriving from the letter at those rational truths than the application of the Science of Correspondences, the Doctrine of Genuine Truth, and Enlightenment from the Lord.

  Page 16, line 24. .. . Swedenborg . .. It is self-evident that the truths of the Latin Word for Swedenborg were rational truths. DE HEMELSCHE LEER contains no single word that could give occasion to a different thought.

  Page 16, line 32.  . . . curiously enough . . . The correspondences between the sensual things of the Old Testament and the rational-natural ideas of the Third Testament are non-essential correspondences (see here above p. 136); essential correspondences exist only between the actual spiritual and celestial causes and the natural effects.

  Page 16, line 37.  Surely ... If we have to do with essential correspondences, then indeed the ideas of God, the Lord, etc., derived from the letter of the Writings, are entirely different from the interior ideas hidden therein, in the same way in which stone and wood differ from the things which they signify; and then the distance between the letter and the spiritual sense in the Third Testament proves to be just as great as in the Old and in the New Testament. This becomes clear if one realizes that an Angel of the First Heaven has a natural idea of God and the Lord as well as of stone and wood, while an Angel of the second Heaven has a spiritual idea of stone and wood as well as of God and the Lord; and the celestial Angel has a celestial idea of both. The necessity of applying also the science of correspondences to the Third Testament here clearly appears.                                                                                                 Page 17, line 3.  Against this, however, we have the

172              REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

teaching . . . The passage referred to in the INVITATION reads as follows: "The manifestation of the Lord in person and the introduction into the spiritual world from the Lord, both as to sight and as to hearing and speech, surpasses all miracles; for we do not read anywhere in history that such intercourse with the Angels and spirits has been granted from the creation of the world". DE HEMELSCIIE LEER contains no single word that could give rise to the thought that its view is not in agreement with this passage. According to DE HEMELSCHE LEER the Writings are the Rational Word,  the Word of the Holy Spirit, or the Word itself.

  Page 17, line 8. . . . the lifted veil, signifying "that now the Word is laid open" .. . It is said in the beginning of this number that the lifted veil signified that now the Word has been laid open; but that thereby is not meant that in the Third Testament the truths lie naked and open to day before the eyes of all men, clearly appears from what follows in that number, where it is further elucidated what is to be understood by the words NUNC LICET and by the lifted veil; namely that now the understanding of man can be raised more and more into the light of Heaven, that is, first into the light of the first Heaven, later into the light of the second Heaven, and finally into the light of the third Heaven. There is no other relation between these three degrees of light than that of correspondence. The lifted veil signifies, that it is now allowed to enter, which is possible only by regeneration, but not, that every man has already entered who takes direct cognizance of the letter of the Latin Word. That it is possible to take cognizance of the letter of the Latin Word, while the veil still remains,  history has abundantly demonstrated.

  Page 17, line 10.  "Now it is allowed . . ." Although it is now allowed to enter intellectually into the Word and to penetrate into all its arcana, yet the Church so far has been given to rise only above the exterior-natural of the Word. DE HEMELSCHE LEER has pointed out that the Church, if this is done according to order, may now rise above the natural and enter into the spiritual, and later even into the celestial arcana of the Word. This passage from THE TRUE CHRISTIAN RELIGION is a veritable foundation-stone of the concept of DE HEMELSCHE LEER, and

173                REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

it  is  here  quoted by  the  reviewer  to prove  that if  only one has entered into the Latin Word, one has then already entered  intellectually  into its properly  spiritual  and celestial arcana.

  Page 17, line 31.  This was not the case in the Old Testament or the New ... If the truths of the Old and the New Testament were not truths continuous from the Lord, truths that are uninterrupted in their descent from firsts to lasts, then the Old and the New Testament would not be the Word. How otherwise could there have been, with the well-disposed Israelites  and  with  the  well-disposed Christians, "conjunction with the Lord and association with the Angels through the sense of the letter of the Word" (S.S. 62)? If there was the affection of good and truth, then there was conjunction through each smallest word of that letter; the interruption of that conjunction, was caused not by the nature of that letter, but only and exclusively by the lack of the affection of good and truth, and especially by the affection of evil and falsity. We read concerning the Word as the uniting means between the earth and Heaven, in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "The Word has been given from the Lord to man and also to the Angels in order that through it they may be with Him; for the Word is  the  uniting  medium  of  the  earth  with  Heaven,  and through this with the Lord; it is its literal sense which unites man with the first Heaven; and as within the literal sense there is an internal sense which treats of the Kingdom of the Lord, and within this a supreme sense which treats of the Lord, and as these senses are in order one within the other, it is evident what is the nature of the union through the Word with the Lord" (n. 3476). 

That this passage must be applied to all three Testaments of the Word is clear. From this it also appears that the literal sense of the Latin Word conjoins man with the first Heaven. In the passage referred to in THE TRUE CHRISTIAN RELIGION (n. 508), where these "truths continuous from the Lord" are spoken of, the "doctrinal things of the New Church" are contrasted with the "dogmas in the present-day Christian churches"; of the former it is said that they are "truths continuous from the Lord revealed through the Word", but of the latter, that is, of the dogmas in the present-day Christian churches, it is said that they are

174              REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

"not out of the Word, but patched together out of self-intelligence and thence out of falsities, and also confirmed by some things out of the Word". From this passage -the reviewer arrives at the conclusion that the "revelation to the New Church is a revelation of truths continuous from the Lord, while this is not the case in the Old Testament or the New". That this passage does not mean to contrast the Old and the New Testament with the Third Testament, but to contrast the dogmas of the Christian church with the doctrinal things of the New Church appears from the literal words. Of the dogmas of the Christian church it is said that they are not out of the Word; of the doctrinal things of the New Church it is said that they are from the Lord revealed through the Word. That by this last mentioned Word the Third Testament is meant, and that the doctrinal things of the New Church are not the unopened letter of that Word, has been explained above, where it has been shown that the New Church is not out of the Old and the New Testament, but out of the Third Testament (pp.  124,  140), and that the truths of the letter of the Latin Testament are not the truths of the Doctrine of the New Church, but that they differ there-from (p. 115). In what follows, where we shall speak of the "mirrors of the Lord" this will be further elucidated.

  Page 17, line 36.  The Divine invitation ... "Enter henceforth - - .". It has been explained in DE HEMELSCHE LEER that as long as the Church remains in the literal

sense of the Latin Word, it cannot rise above the interior-natural, and that therefore as yet it accepts the Divine invitation to enter into the mysteries of the Word only in a very imperfect manner. The literal sense, also of the Third Testament, at direct cognizance, consists of mere scientifics,  and  there  is  no  other  possibility of thence arriving at genuine spiritual truths but the application of the revealed orderly means. That in this also the science of correspondences is indispensable, appears from the following passage in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "So far as the ideas of thought concerning spiritual things are formed independently of correspondences, so far they are formed either from the fallacies of the senses, or from what is inconsistent  with  such  things"  (n. 9300).  That  it is impossible by direct cognizance of the scientifics of the

175                     REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

Latin Word to enter into the mysteries of faith is described in the following passage in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "Making a king and not from Me, and making princes and I knew it not, denotes to hatch truth and primary truths out of one's own lumen and not from the Divine. . . . Making their silver and their gold into idols, denotes to pervert the scientifics of truth and good out of the sense of the letter of the Word . . . and still to worship them as holy, although, being out of their own intelligence, they are devoid of life. ... Outwardly they appear like truths, because they are taken out of the sense of the letter of the Word. . . . The subject treated of is the arrogance of those who wish to enter out of scientifics into the mysteries of faith; ... as such do not see anything out of the light of Heaven which is out of the Lord, but out of the lumen of nature which is out of the proprium, they seize on shadows instead of light, on fallacies instead of realities, in general on falsity instead of truth" (n. 9391). 

That these words must be applied to the Third Testament is clear; and this is also admitted by the reviewer when he says that "men may misinterpret and pervert those truths" (n. 18). But how otherwise is it possible not to misinterpret them than out of enlightenment from the Lord? And the reviewer says that the internal sense may there be seen without enlightenment (see above, p. 134). And how can the natural man in the letter of the Latin Word, where all Divine, celestial, spiritual, and natural truths are together, distinguish the spiritual truths from the natural, and even the celestial truths from the spiritual and from the natural? In order to be able to do this there must be "an influx of living light through the internal man from the Lord" (A.C. 9103). For "the Lord does not openly teach any one truths, but through good He leads to the thinking of what is true" (A.C. 5952). The reviewer points out to DE HEMELSCHE LEER the truth that now a Divine invitation has been extended to the man of the Church to enter into all the mysteries of the Word, while in reality DE HEMELSCHE LEER indicates the orderly means of rising above the natural things in order to eater also into the spiritual things.

  Page 17, line 39.  Clearly ... In the foregoing the reviewer has said that the revelation to the New Church is a revelation of truths continuous from the Lord, truths

176              REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

that are uninterrupted in their descent from firsts to lasts, and that this was not the case in the Old Testament and the New. Now here the reviewer says that clearly "the mirrors of the Lord" of which mention is made in n. 508 of THE TRUE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, are the rational truths of the Writings, which form the last and ultimate link in the chain of truths continuous from the Lord. The reviewer therefore says that the truths of the Writings are mirrors of the Lord, but that the truths of the Old and the New Testament are no mirrors of the Lord. This is confirmed by him with the words "What would be the significance of the expression henceforth, if the Word, that is, the Writings, is still shut up behind a veil?" But the passage referred to in THE TRUE CHRISTIAN RELIGION, n. 508, here quoted by the reviewer in small capitals, reads as follows:  "Enter henceforth  into the  mysteries  of  the Word, ... for all its truths are so many mirrors of the Lord". Thus the truths of the Word are mirrors of the Lord. Just as has been shown above that all the truths also of the Old and the New Testament are truths continuous from the Lord, so it is here taught even literally that all truths of the Word, therefore also those of the Old and the New Testament, are mirrors of the Lord. That those truths for the Christian church no longer were mirrors of the Lord, does not lie in the nature of that Word but in the perverted state of man. This is expressly taught in the following passage of the same work: "For every one who has formed the state of his mind from God the Holy Scripture is like a mirror wherein he sees God; but every one in his own way. This mirror is made up of those truths that he learns out of the Word and that he appropriates by living in accordance with them" (n. 6). The reviewer thus says that the truths of the Old and the New Testament are no mirrors of the Lord, because there the mirrors are covered by a veil, a veil caused by the writers of the Old and the New Testament. The Word itself teaches that all truths of the Word are mirrors of God, for those who have formed their minds from God. DE HEMELSCHE LEER says that the truths also of the Third Testament are mirrors of the Lord only for those who have formed their minds from the Lord. For those who are regenerated in the third degree the singular truths of

177             REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

that Testament are such mirrors of the Lord that they see therein the Divine Human as do the celestial Angels; for those  who  are  regenerated  in  the  second  degree,  those truths are such mirrors of the Lord that they see therein spiritual truth as do the spiritual Angels; for those who are regenerated in the first degree, those truths are such mirrors that they see therein spiritual-natural truth as do the natural Angels.

  Page 17, line 40. . . . the rational truths of the Writings . . . The truths of the Third Testament are rational truths only for the celestial man. The last and ultimate link in the chain of truths continuous from the Lord is not formed by rational truths but by the rational-natural scientifics of the letter of the Third Testament.

  Page 18, line 1.  What would be the significance of the expression "henceforth" . . .? It is one of the leading principles of DE HEMELSCHE LEER that as long as the New Church remains merely in the literal sense of the Latin Word, it is only in natural truths with regard to all three Testaments, while the significance of the invitation "enter henceforth into the mysteries of the Word" is that it should enter also into the spiritual truths in order to get a step further on the road to its goal where it will be a celestial Church, for the first time the Bride of the Lamb.

  Page 18, line 8.  We note ... The Rev. Theodore Pitcairn has already shown that "to enter more deeply") as it is here  said, 'signifies entering  according to correspondences (see above, p. 46); this is expressly confirmed in the text itself by the words: "And then I told them that my natural thought about the trinity and unity of persons ... had come to me out of the doctrine o£ faith of the church which has its name from Athanasius" (T. C. R. 26; A.R. 961). The thought against which the Angels objected was therefore a purely natural thought; there was no other relation between it and the spiritual thought into which the Angels entered, than that of correspondence.

  Page 18, line 12.  DE HEMELSCHE LEER limits the application . . . Seeing the reviewer identifies the Doctrine of the Church with the letter of the Latin Word, it is comprehensible that he regards the truths which man derives from that letter by direct cognizance as the doctrinal things of the New Church. It has, however, already been

178              REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

pointed out above -that in the passage referred to the doctrinal things of the New Church are contrasted with the dogmas of the old church, and by no means the letter of the Third Testament with the letter of the Old and the New Testament. Of the dogmas of the old church it is said that they are "not out of the Word but out of self-intelligence", and of the doctrinal things of the New Church it is said that they are "from the Lord revealed through the Word". Since the reviewer acknowledges the Writings as the Word and favors the conception that the New Church must draw its Doctrine also out of this Word, one would believe he would see in this place too that by the Word also the Third Testament is meant. It would be easy to fill many pages with quotations from the Third Testament from which it appears that with regard to the unopened letter of the Word there can never be any question of doctrinal things, but that these arise only there where the Church takes up that letter and. opens it as to its contents. That this also applies to the New Church and to the Latin Word is self-evident; yea, it now applies more than ever before, for in the New Church it has for the first time been allowed "to enter intellectually and to penetrate into all the mysteries of the Word". The order of the arising of doctrinal things is described in the following passages in the ARCANA COELESTIA: "Scientifics and doctrinal things are distinct from each other in this, that out of scientifics are doctrinal things; these have respect to use, and are procured by reflection out of scientifics" (n. 3052); here it clearly appears that there never is any question of doctrinal things, unless by the activity of the human mind; all  doctrinal   things   are  ever  necessarily  preceded  by scientifics which are gained by direct cognizance. "Doctrinal things are conclusions from scientifics; for there flows in through the rational as it were a dictate that this is true, and this not true" (n. 3057); it is clearly described here how doctrinal things arise in the human mind. "Out of scientifics afterward may be learned and comprehended truths still more interior, which are called doctrinal things" (n. 3309). "From this it is that man ought to begin out of scientifics, which are the truths of the natural man, and afterward out of doctrinal things, which are the truths of the spiritual man in his natural, in order to be initiated

179                     REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

into the intelligence of wisdom" (n. 3726). "That they have their doctrinal things out of the Word does not make them to be Divine truths;  for out of the sense of the letter of the Word any doctrinal whatever may be hatched, ... but not so if the doctrinal is formed out of the internal sense" (n. 7233). "It is similar with those who remain in the mere literal sense of the Word and collect nothing doctrinal thence; for they are separated from the internal sense, inasmuch as the internal sense is the doctrinal itself" (n.  9380). From all these places it may be clear beyond doubt to every one that the unopened scientifics of the letter of the Third Testament are not the doctrinal things of the New Church; but that the New Church must gather those doctrinal things out of the letter of the Third Testament according to order in a state of enlightenment, which can only be done if they are formed out of the internal sense of that Testament.

  Page 18, line 25.  But a further consequence ... From the preceding remarks it is clear that if one regards the letter of the Latin Word from within, or out of the celestial of one of the Heavens, all particulars of that letter are "truths continuous from the Lord", and therefore also "as many mirrors of the Lord"- But if one regards that letter from without, out of a natural state, then there is no connection at all with the Lord, and the veil of truth is then much thicker than in the Old Testament and in the New.

  Page 18, line 35.  . .. and it is this fact that makes the Writings different from and superior to all revelations . . . Here it is again repeated that the truths of the Old and the New Testament are no truths continuous from the Lord (see above, p. 173).

  Page 19, line 7.  ... but it is the internal sense of a revelation . . . What has this description of what according to the reviewer is the purpose of the language in which this revelation is couched to do with a characterization of the internal sense of that revelation? The Word in all its Testaments has an internal and an external or a spiritual and a natural sense, that is, a soul and a body. The purpose of all the Testaments is to lead to the knowledge of the Lord Himself.

  Page 19, line 35.  .. . the deeper arcana concerning the

180                      REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

glorification of the Lm-d. We lead in HEAVEN AND HELL: "The Doctrine of the inmost Heaven is more full of wisdom than the Doctrine of the middle Heaven, and this more full of intelligence than the Doctrine of the lowest Heaven; for the  Doctrines  are  adapted to the perception of the Angels in. each Heaven" (n. 227) and in ON THE NEW JERUSALEM AND ITS CELESTIAL DOCTRINE: "The Doctrine of celestial good, which is that of love to the Lord, is the most comprehensive and at the same time the most hidden; for it is the Doctrine of the Angels of the inmost or third Heaven, which is such that if it were given out of  their mouth,  scarcely the thousandth part would be understood; the things which it contains are also ineffable. This Doctrine is contained in the inmost sense of the Word; but the Doctrine of spiritual love in the internal sense. The Doctrine of spiritual good, which is that of love toward the neighbor, is also comprehensive and hidden; but far. less than the Doctrine of celestial good. . .. That the Doctrine of love toward the neighbor, or of charity, is comprehensive, may be evident from this, that it reaches to all things and each that man thinks and wills, thus to all things that he says and does; also from this, that charity is not the same in one as in another, nor is one the neighbor like another" (n. 107). The celestial Doctrine, as well as the spiritual Doctrine, as well as the natural Doctrine, in  the  letter  of the Latin Word is in ultimates in its fullness. It is clear there is no other relation there between tlian that  of correspondence,  and  that it  is  absolutely impossible to arrive at those internal Doctrines only by direct cognizance.  From  the  above  description  of  the comprehensiveness of the spiritual Doctrine it appears how near the Rev. Hyatt approached the spiritual sense of the Third Testament, when he said that if one wished to see something in the spiritual sense within in that passage concerning the Jews one had to apply it to one's self (see above, p. 5); for as long as man remains in the generals of the letter and does not discern the application of the innumerable particulars which lie concealed in every truth of the letter to the innumerable particulars of his own mind, he is still immeasurably far removed from the spiritual sense.

  Page 19, line 37. ... the fundamental truths of Christ-

181                REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON 

ianity ... The history of the Churches, the First and the Second Coming of the Lord: John the Baptist, the birth of the Lord, the life, the passion and the death, the resurrection, the ascension, the pouring out of the Holy Spirit, the Second Coming; furthermore the history of the Christian Church from its beginning to its consummation, all these things in the spiritual sense have an application to the history of the New Church, of which the Church has not even surmised the existence.

  Page 19, line 38. . . . is there not a latent danger . . . The literal sense derives its entire life from the internal sense. Without the internal sense the letter is dead. The same objection that the reviewer here makes is always made by the old church over against the New Church. In what measure, however, the realization of the internal sense bestows new life and new power to the letter, has been seen by this that one now begins to realize how the text of the Third Testament is Divine even in the singular words. Our principles of translation have thereby been so strongly influenced that we now see that it is of importance to give a literal translation of each smallest word. In the future it will prove impossible to arrive at the genuine sense of the Latin Word on the basis of translations that are not accurate as regards each smallest word.

  .Page 19, line 41.  When, for instance, we read . . . From this question it appears clearly how thick the veil of truth has become in the Third Testament. If the natural signification of these words were not put entirely aside, they could never have the least significance for the spiritual or for the celestial thought.

  Page 20, line 5. . . . indeed. . . a necessary consequence . . . From these words it again appears that the reviewer has not understood the historical development of the view of DE HEMELSCHE LEER. As has been explained in the beginning of this article, DE HEMELSCHE LEER has arrived at its vision of the Divine origin and the Divine essence of the Doctrine of the Church by reading the 12th, 20th, and 26th chapters of Genesis in the ARCANA COELESTIA, where this truth is clearly and openly taught. If one can there see this truth, then a thick veil which before lay over these chapters has, as it were, been lifted for the first time.

182              REPLY TO THE REV. PROF. DR. ALFRED ACTON

  Page 20, line 27.  "By the male child is signified the Doctrine of that Church . . ." DE HEMELSCHE LEER fully acknowledges that what has been said in that passage concerning the birth of the male child and concerning the dragonists applies in the literal sense to the revelation of the Third Testament itself. The fact that there is an internal sense concealed in the literal sense does not mean that the literal sense itself is not true. But that here in the spiritual sense the birth of the Doctrine in the Church itself is treated of, appears clearly from this that by the woman who bore the male child and who was clothed with the sun the New Church is meant in its celestial state, and that Church did then not yet exist. It is well-known that the Church was not established before the nineteenth of June of the year 1770; and that Swedenborg considered himself as belonging to the First Christian Church appears from the ARCANA COELESTIA, n. 9872, where he speaks of the holy Jerusalem as of the Church "which is to succeed this our Church".

  Page 20, line 36.  . . . that the Writings are the Heavenly Doctrine ... The Latin Word in itself is the Divine Doctrine itself; it contains the celestial Doctrine, the spiritual Doctrine, and the natural Doctrine. Only the celestial man of the future celestial New Church will be able to see therein the proper celestial Doctrine (see above, pp. 127, 144?145). It has been explained in DE HEMELSCHE LEER, in connection with the concept explicatio, that is, unfolding, as it appears on page 3 of the ARCANA COELESTIA, "that the Third Testament is indeed in itself an unfolding of the Word, but that as to its literal sense, such as we take direct cognizance of from without, it must be unfolded anew, if man is not to remain in merely natural scientifics; for the proper rational, the spiritual and the celestial, can never lie in sensual cognizance alone, but it consists in internal states to which man according to order must raise himself, and this raising consists in the successive opening of the folds of truth" (First Fasc., pp. 97-99). The reviewer has not entered upon this fundamental exposition with a single word. For those who have understood this exposition it is clear that also everything which the reviewer says in this second part of his review concerning the Doctrine of the Church, is based on an entire misapprehension.

 183           &n