3803. 'Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother' means the kinship of the good represented by 'Jacob' and of the good represented by 'Laban'. This is clear from the meaning of 'telling' as making known; from the representation of 'Jacob' as good, dealt with already; from the representation of 'Rachel', to whom it was made known, as the affection for interior truth, dealt with in 3793; from the meaning of 'brother', who in this place is Jacob, as good, dealt with in 367, 2360, 3303, 3459; and from the meaning of 'father', who in this place is Laban, as good also, dealt with in 3703. From these meanings and from the train of thought it is evident that 'Jacob told Rachel that he was her father's brother' means the kinship of the good meant by 'Jacob' and of the good meant by 'Laban'. To explain the actual kinship however and so the joining together of the two through the affection for interior truth meant by 'Rachel' would only throw the matter into obscurity, for few know what the good of the natural is and that this is distinct and separate from the good of the rational. Neither do they know what a parallel good springing from a common stock is, nor also what the affection for interior truth is. Anyone who has not by finding out for himself gathered some idea of these matters gains merely a superficial idea, if any at all, from a description of them; for a person takes in only as much of a description given by others as fits in with ideas of his own or else which he acquires by coming to see the thing in himself. All else passes him by. It is enough if one knows that countless kinships of good and truth exist, and that heavenly communities exist in accordance with those kinships, 685, 917, 2739, 3612.

[2] The reason why Jacob calls himself Laban's brother when he was in fact his sister's son is that by virtue of good all are brothers. This also is why Laban in turn calls Jacob 'brother' in verse 15. For it is good that constitutes blood-relationship and which effects any joining together, since good is an attribute of love, and love is a spiritual joining together. This also was the reason why in the ancient Churches all who were governed by good were called brothers. The same happened in the Jewish Church, but because that Church despised everybody else and imagined that they alone were the elect it spoke only of those who had been born Jews as brothers. The rest it called companions or foreigners. The primitive Christian Church also referred to as brothers all who were governed by good, but later on it confined the term to those inside its own group. But the name brother disappeared from among Christians when good did so. And when truth took the place of good, or faith the place of charity, none was able any longer to call another brother by virtue of good, only neighbour. This is also a feature of the doctrine of faith when devoid of the life of charity, in that it seems to be beneath them to exist as a brotherhood when this includes any of lower rank than themselves. For being brothers in their case does not have its origin in the Lord, and therefore in good, but in themselves, and therefore in position and gain.

[3803a] 'And that he was Rebekah's son' means the link between these kindred varieties of good. This becomes clear without explanation, for Rebekah, who was Jacob's mother and Laban's sister, was the one in whom the link existed.

367. Apart from showing that charity is the 'brother' of faith and that 'field' means all that comprises doctrine, there is no need to confirm these considerations from similar usages in the Word. That charity is the brother of faith may be clear to anyone from the very nature or essence of faith. The brother relationship between these two was also represented by Esau and Jacob, and was the reason why they struggled for the birthright and the superior position this carried with it. The relationship was also represented by Perez and Zerah, the sons Tamar had by Judah, Genesis 38:28-30, where again the question of primogeniture arises. It was represented by Ephraim and Manasseh as well, Genesis 48:13-14, wherein a similar way the matter of the birthright and the higher position it carried occurs. And there are many other examples. Indeed these two, faith and charity, are both the offspring of the Church. Faith is called 'a man' (vir), as Cain is in verse 1 of this chapter, while charity is called 'a brother', as in Isaiah 19:2; Jeremiah 17:14 and in other places. In Amos 1:9 the union of faith and charity is called 'a covenant between brothers'.

[2] As has been stated, that which Jacob and Esau represented was similar to the meaning of Cain and Abel. The fact that Jacob in a similar manner wished to supplant Esau is also clear in Hosea,

He will make a visitation on Jacob over his ways and requite him according to his deeds; in the womb he supplanted his brother. Hosea 12:2-3.

But the fact that Esau, that is, charity represented by Esau, would nevertheless be the superior is clear from the prediction made through their father Isaac,

By your sword will you live, and you will serve your brother; but when you have dominion over him you will cast away his yoke from above your neck. Genesis 27:40.

Or what amounts to the same, a gentile or new Church is represented by Esau, and the Jewish Church by Jacob. This is why it was stated so many times that they were to recognize gentile nations as brothers. Charity was also the reason for everyone being referred to as 'a brother' in the gentile or Primitive Church, and for the Lord calling 'brothers' those who hear the Word and do it, Luke 8:21. Hearers of it are those who have faith, doers those who have charity. But those who are hearers, that is, say they have faith, but are not doers, that is, have no charity, are not brothers, for the Lord likens them to the foolish, Matthew 7:24, 26.