4433. 'And he took her, and lay with her, and ravished her' means that there was no other way in which it could be joined to the affection for truth meant by the sons of Jacob, her brothers. This is clear from the meaning of 'taking her, lying with her, and ravishing her' as being joined together, though not in the rightful way, which is through betrothal. But the meaning these words carry, that there was no other way in which they could be joined together, cannot be seen by anyone unless he knows the fuller implications of them. Interior truth received from the Ancients, which is meant by 'Shechem the son of Hamor the Hivite', is the truth which among the Ancients had served the internal dimension of the Church, and so had been the internal dimension of their statutes, judgements, and laws, in short of their religious observances and the like. Those truths were their matters of doctrine on which they based their lives, which were in fact matters of doctrine concerning charity; for in ancient times those who belonged to the genuine Church had no other kind of doctrine. These same truths may be called, in relation to doctrine, the interior truths of faith, but in relation to life, goods. If a Church was to be established among the nation descended from Jacob it was necessary for them to be introduced into those truths and goods. For unless internal things are present within external ones, that is, unless people have internal things in mind when involved with external ones - and unless at the same time they feel an affection for internal things or at least unless they feel an affection for external things on account of internal ones, nothing of the Church is there. Internal things constitute the Church, for the Lord is present within these; that is to say, spiritual and celestial things originating in Him are present within them.

[2] But the nation descended from Jacob, that is, the Israelitish and Jewish nation, was unable to be introduced in the rightful way which is through betrothal, for the reason that their external worship did not correspond [to anything internal]. For they received from their fore-fathers - from Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob - the worship established by Eber, which was different externally from the worship of the Ancient Church, see 1238, 1241, 1343, 2180. And because that worship was different, interior truths which existed among the Ancients were not able to be joined to it in the rightful way through betrothal, only in the way described in this chapter. This enables one to understand what is involved in the assertion that there was no other way in which it could be joined to the affection for truth meant by 'the sons of Jacob, Dinah's brothers'.

[3] But although a joining together could have been effected in this way, in accordance with the law, also known to the Ancients, which is set out in Exodus 22:16; Deuteronomy 22:28-29, the character of that nation was nevertheless such that it would by no means allow any joining of interior truth received from the Ancients to the external forms of worship that existed among the descendants of Jacob, 4281, 4290, 4293, 4307, 4314, 4316, 4317. Among that nation therefore no Church could be established, but instead merely that which was a representative of the Church, see 4281, 4288, 4307. The character of that nation, which was such that it was not only unable to receive interior truths but also completely annihilated them among themselves, is represented in this chapter by the sons of Jacob answering Shechem and Hamor deceitfully, verse 13; and after that by Simeon and Levi's smiting the city with the edge of the sword and killing Shechem and Hamor, verses 25-26; and by the rest of the sons coming upon the slain and plundering the city, and taking away the flocks, the herds, and whatever there was in the city, in the field, and in the houses, verses 27-29. This shows what is meant by the prophetical utterances of Jacob, who by then was Israel,

Simeon and Levi are brothers; instruments of violence are their swords. Into their secret place let my soul not come; in their congregation let not my glory be united; for in their anger they killed a man, and in their pleasure they hamstrung an ox. Cursed be their anger, for it is fierce, and their fury, for it is severe. I will divide them in Jacob, and will scatter them in Israel. Genesis 49:5-7.

3670. 'And He will give you the blessing of Abraham' means the joining of the Divine itself to the good and truth of the natural. This is clear from the meaning of 'blessing' as a joining together, dealt with above in 3660, 3667, and from the representation of 'Abraham' as the Lord's Divine itself, which is called the Father, dealt with in 2011, 3251, 3439. And as these words are addressed to Jacob, who is to represent the Divine Good and Truth of the Lord's Divine Natural, it is a joining together of the Divine itself to the good and truth of the Natural - this joining together being meant in the internal sense by 'He will give you the blessing of Abraham'. In the sense of the letter it is possession of the land of Canaan that is meant by 'the blessing of Abraham', and also by the words that follow, 'to inherit the land of your sojournings, which God gave to Abraham'. This also is what these words are taken to mean by all who believe that the historical descriptions of the Word do not embody anything more heavenly and deeper than that. This is especially so with the Jewish nation, which also claims from that sense to hold a superior position to all other nations and peoples. Their forefathers understood those words in the same way, especially Jacob, who had that kind of disposition, as becomes clear from what has been stated just above in 3667. That is to say, he did not know Jehovah and was unwilling to acknowledge Him unless He conferred bodily and worldly benefits on him. The fact that neither Abraham, nor Isaac, nor Jacob were meant, but that Jacob represented the Lord's Natural which He was to make Divine is abundantly evident from the explanations given. The same applies to the character of any person who represents, whether evil or good; for the evil are no less able to represent, and have represented, the Lord's Divine, see 665, 1097, 1361.

[2] The same may be seen from the representatives which also exist at the present day. For all kings, no matter who they are or what they are like, represent the Lord through the kingly office itself residing with them; and in like manner all priests, no matter who they are or what they are like, do so through their priestly office. The kingly office itself and the priestly office itself are sacred, no matter who serves in them. Consequently the Word taught by someone evil is no less sacred; nor is the Sacrament of Baptism, or the Holy Supper, or similar ministrations any less so. From this it may also be seen that no king can possibly claim as his own the sacredness that goes with his kingly office, nor any priest the sacredness that goes with his priestly office. Insofar as he does claim it or attribute it to himself he brands himself with the sign of a spiritual thief, or the mark of spiritual theft. And insofar as he commits what is evil, that is, acts contrary to what is right and fair, and contrary to what is good and true, a king throws off his representation of the sacred kingly office, and a priest his representation of the sacred priestly office, and then represents the reverse of this. This explains why so many laws were laid down in the Jewish representative Church concerning the sacredness which was to be attached in particular to priests when ministering. More on this matter will in the Lord's Divine mercy be stated later on.