4835. 'Come [in] to your brother's wife and perform the duty of a husband's brother to her' means that this - that representative of the Church - might be continued. This is clear from the meaning of 'coming (or going in) to a brother's wife and performing the duty of a husband's brother to her' as preserving and continuing that which constitutes the Church. The requirement laid down in the Mosaic Law, that if a man died without issue his brother was to marry his widow and raise up seed for his brother, and that the firstborn was to receive his dead brother's name, whereas all other sons were to be his own, was called the duty of a brother-in-law. The fact that this directive was nothing new in the Jewish Church but a practice already in existence is clear from the words used here; and the same goes for many other directives given to the Israelites through Moses, such as the law forbidding them to take wives from the daughters of the Canaanites and requiring them to marry within their own families, Genesis 24:3-4; 28:1-2. From these and many other examples it is evident that a Church had existed previously in which the same kind of practices were followed as those at a later time which were declared to and demanded of the sons of Jacob. Altars and sacrifices likewise had been in use since ancient times, as is evident from Genesis 8:20-21; 22:3, 7-8. From this it is plain that the Jewish Church was not a new Church but a revival of the Ancient Church which had perished.

[2] What the law regarding the duty of a brother-in-law had been is clear in Moses,

If brothers dwell together but one of them dies, and has no son, the wife of the dead one shall not marry a stranger outside [the family]; her brother-in-law shall go in to her, and take her to himself as his wife, and so perform the duty of a brother-in-law to her. Then it will happen, that the firstborn whom she bears shall succeed to the name of his dead brother, so that his name is not wiped out from Israel. But if the man is unwilling to take his sister-in-law, his sister-in-law shall go up to the gate to the elders, and she shall say, My brother-in-law refuses to raise up for his brother a name in Israel; he is unwilling to perform the duty of a brother-in-law for me. Then the elders of his city shall call him and speak to him; and if he stands and says, I do not desire to take her, his sister-in-law shall go up to him in the sight of the elders, and she shall remove his shoe from upon his foot and spit in his face; and she shall answer and say, So will it be done to the man who does not build up his brother's house. Therefore his name will be called in Israel, The house of him who has his shoe taken off. Deuteronomy 25:5-10.

[3] Anyone who does not know what the duty of a brother-in-law represents inevitably believes that the practice existed solely for the sake of preserving a name and consequently an inheritance. But the preservation of a name and an inheritance was not in itself a great enough reason why a brother should have been required to enter into a marriage with his sister-in-law. Rather, the practice was ordained so that the preservation and continuation of the Church might be represented through it. For a marriage represented the marriage of good and truth, which is the heavenly marriage. It therefore represented the Church too, for the Church is a Church by virtue of the marriage of good and truth, and when this marriage exists within it the Church makes one with heaven, which is the true heavenly marriage. And because a marriage represented these things, 'sons and daughters' were therefore representations and also meaningful signs of truths and goods. This being so, 'being without issue' meant a lack of good and truth, and so meant that no representative of the Church existed in that house any longer, and that as a consequence it was not in communion with the Church. In addition 'brother' represented a kindred good to which the truth represented by a widow might be joined. For to be the kind of truth that has life, produces fruit, and thereby continues that which constitutes the Church, truth cannot be joined to any other good but that which is its own and a kindred one. This was how those in heaven perceived the duty of a brother-in-law.

[4] The meaning of this practice - of a sister-in-law removing the shoe from upon the foot of the man who refused to do the duty of a brother-in-law, and of her spitting in his face - was this: Anyone devoid of good and truth, external and internal, would destroy those things that constitute the Church; for 'the shoe' means that which is external, 1748, and 'the face' that which is internal, 1999, 2434, 3527, 4066, 4796. From this it is evident that 'the duty of a brother-in-law' represented the preservation and continuation of the Church. But when through the Lord's Coming representatives of internal things came to an end, that particular law was done away with. It is like a person's soul or spirit in relation to his body. A person's soul or spirit is the internal part of him and his body the external; or what amounts to the same, the soul or spirit is the true likeness of the person, whereas the body is merely a representative image of him. When a person rises again his representative image or that which is external, namely his body, is cast aside, for he is now conscious in that which is internal, namely the true likeness of him. It is also like a person who is in darkness and from there looks at things belonging to light; or what amounts to the same, like one who is in the light of the world and from there looks at things belonging to the light of heaven. For the light of the world in comparison with the light of heaven is as darkness. Within that darkness, that is, within the light of the world, things belonging to the light of heaven as they exist essentially cannot be seen, but are seen so to speak within a representative image, even as the human mind is seen in a person's face. Therefore when the light of heaven is seen in its own essential brightness, the darkness of representative images is dispelled. This was effected through the Lord's Coming.

[4835a] 'And raise up seed for your brother' means so that the Church does not perish. This is clear from the meaning of 'seed' as truth derived from good, or faith grounded in charity, dealt with in 1025, 1447, 16110, 1940, 2848, 3310, 3373, 3671. The same is also meant by the firstborn who was to succeed to the name of the dead brother, 352, 367, 2435, 3325, 3494. 'Raising up seed for a brother' means continuing that which constitutes the Church, in line with what has been stated just above in 4834, and thus means so that the Church does not perish.

8788. 'And sanctify them today and tomorrow' means covering over their interiors in order that those people may appear now and subsequently in the holiness of faith. This is clear from the meaning of 'sanctifying' as arranging them so that outwardly they may appear in holiness; and since this is accomplished by covering over their interiors, 'sanctifying' has this meaning also. The fact that 'today and tomorrow' means now and subsequently is self-evident. What all this implies will be stated briefly. The Church established among the Jews was not, as regards the Jews themselves, the Church, only a representative of the Church. For the Church to exist there must reside with those belonging to the Church faith in the Lord, and also love to Him, as well as love towards the neighbour. These virtues make the Church. But they did not reside with the people who were called Jacob; for they did not acknowledge the Lord, and so did not wish to hear about faith in Him, let alone about love to Him or indeed about love towards the neighbour. They were ruled by self-love and love of the world, the kinds of love that are the complete opposites of love to the Lord and love towards the neighbour. Such a disposition has been rooted in that people from their earliest forebears. This is why no Church could be established among that people; all they could do was represent things that constitute the Church. Mere representation of the Church comes about when people's worship centres on external things, but only on such things as correspond to heavenly ones. External things then serve to represent internal, and the internal things are made evident in heaven, to which those people are consequently joined. Therefore to make representation possible among the Israelite people, when interiorly they were devoid of the faith and love of heaven, indeed were full of self-love and love of the world, their interiors were covered over. Then their externals alone, without their internals, could be conveyed to spirits, and through these to angels. Consequently unless their internals had been covered over, internals too would have been made evident, in which case the representation would have been destroyed because foul [thoughts and affections] would have burst out and defiled it. Such a covering over was possible with that people more than with all the rest because they venerated external things more than others did; they thought that those things themselves were intrinsically holy, indeed Divine.

All this makes clear what one should understand by 'sanctifying', namely covering over their interiors in order that those people may appear in the holiness of faith, though not to themselves, only to the angels present with them. See what has been shown already about this people and the establishment of the Church among them, in 4208, 4281, 4288, 4289, 4293, 4307, 4314, 4316, 4317, 4429, 4433, 4444, 4459, 4844, 4847, 4865, 4899, 4911, 4912, 4500, 7048, 7051, 8588. The fact that sanctification among them amounted to no more than an appearance of holiness in externals, since they themselves had no holiness within them, becomes clear from the ceremonies by which they were sanctified, that is to say, by sacrifices, washings, sprinklings of blood, and anointings, which do not in any way whatever touch internal things.