Commentary

 

Memorable Occurrences in Swedenborg's Writings

This list of Memorable Occurrences in Swedenborg's Writings was originally compiled by W. C. Henderson in 1960 but has since been updated.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

True Christian Religion #506

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

506. The fourth experience. 1

I saw in the spiritual world two flocks, one of goats, the other of sheep. I wondered who they were, since I knew that when animals are seen in the spiritual world, they are not animals, but correspondences of the affections and from these the thoughts of those who are there. So I went nearer, and as I approached, the likenesses of animals disappeared, and I saw human beings in their place. It became clear that those who made up the flock of goats were those who had convinced themselves of the doctrine of justification by faith alone, and those who made up the flock of sheep were those who believed that charity and faith are one, just as good and truth are one.

[2] Then I spoke with those who had appeared like goats and said: 'Why have you met together?' Most were clergy who had prided themselves on their reputation for learning, because they knew the secrets of justification by faith alone.

They said that they had met together to hold a council, because they had heard that Paul's statement that man is justified by faith without the deeds prescribed by the law (Romans 3:28) had not been properly understood. For by faith there Paul did not mean the faith of the present-day church, in three Divine persons from eternity, but faith in the Lord God, the Saviour Jesus Christ. By the deeds prescribed by the law he did not mean the deeds prescribed by the law of the Ten Commandments, but those prescribed for the Jews by the law of Moses. Thus from those few words people had come to two monstrously false conclusions by incorrect interpretation: that faith meant the faith of the present-day church, and the deeds meant those prescribed by the Ten Commandments. 'Paul did not mean these,' they said, 'but those prescribed by the law of Moses which were intended for the Jews; and this is clearly established from his saying to Peter, whom he criticised for following Jewish practices, although he knew that no one is justified by the deeds prescribed by the law, but by the faith of Jesus Christ (Galatians 2:14-16).' The faith of Jesus Christ is faith in Him and from Him, see above 338. Because by the deeds prescribed by the law Paul understood the deeds prescribed by the law of Moses, he made a distinction between the law of faith and the law of deeds, and between Jews and gentiles, or between circumcision and lack of circumcision. Circumcision means the Jews, as everywhere else. And he ends with these words:

Are we then abolishing the law by faith? By no means, we are reinforcing the law, Romans 3:27-31.

(He says all this in a single passage.) He also says in the preceding chapter:

It is not those who hear the law who will be justified by God, but those who keep it, Romans 2:13.

He says elsewhere that God will repay each according to his deeds (Romans 2:6), and:

We must all be put on show before the tribunal of Christ, so that each may be rewarded for his bodily acts, whether good or ill. 2 Corinthians 5:10.

There are many more passages showing that Paul rejected faith without good deeds, just as much as James did (James 2:17-26).

[3] Further evidence that Paul meant the deeds prescribed by the law of Moses for the Jews can be drawn from the fact that all the statutes for the Jews are called in the writings of Moses the law, and so these are the deeds prescribed by the law; e.g.:

This is the law of the grain offering, Leviticus 6:14, 18ff.

This is the law of the burnt-offering, the grain-offering, the sin-sacrifice, the guilt-sacrifice and the consecration, Leviticus 7:37, This is the law of beast and bird, Leviticus 11:46ff.

This is the law for one who bears a child, a son or a daughter, Leviticus 12:7.

This is the law for a leprous disease, Leviticus 13:59; 14:2, 32, 54, 57 This is the law of the person with a discharge, Leviticus 15:32.

This is the law in cases of jealousy, Numbers 5:29-30.

This is the law for the Nazirite, Numbers 6:13, 21.

This is the law of cleansing, Numbers 19:14.

This is the law concerning the red cow, Numbers 19:2.

The law for the king, Deuteronomy 17:15-19.

In fact, the whole book of Moses is called 'the Book of the Law' (Deuteronomy 31:9, 11-12, 26; also Luke 2:22; 24:44; John 1:45; 7:22-23; 8:5). They went on to say that they had seen in the writings of Paul that the Law of the Ten Commandments was to be observed in living and to be fulfilled by charity (Romans 13:8-11). He also says that there are three things, faith, hope and charity, and that the greatest of these is charity (1 Corinthians 13:13). So it is clear he did not put faith first. They said that these subjects were what they had been summoned to debate.

[4] However, not to disturb them, I went away; and then again they looked at a distance like goats, sometimes lying down and sometimes standing. But they turned their backs on the flock of sheep. When they were debating, they seemed to be lying down, but standing up when they reached a conclusion. But I kept my gaze fixed on their horns, and was surprised to notice that at one time the horns on their foreheads appeared to point forwards and upwards, at another time curving away towards their backs and eventually pointing completely the other way. Then they suddenly turned to face the flock of sheep, but they still looked like goats. So I went up to them again and asked: 'What are you doing now?' They replied that they had reached the conclusion that faith alone produces the good deeds of charity, as a tree produces fruit.

Then a clap of thunder was heard, and a flash of lightning was seen coming from above. Following this an angel appeared, standing between the two flocks, who shouted to the flock of sheep: 'Do not listen to them. They have not abandoned their former faith, which is that faith alone brings justification and salvation, and the practice of charity plays no part. Neither is faith a tree; it is man who is the tree. Repent and look to the Lord, and you will have faith; before doing that, the faith you have is not a faith with any life in it.'

Then the goats whose horns were curved backwards wanted to join the sheep. But the angel who stood between them divided the sheep into two flocks. He told those on the left: 'Go and join the goats; but I warn you, the wolf will come and seize them, and you with them.'

[5] After the two flocks of sheep had been separated, and those on the left had heard the angel's threatening words, they looked at one another and said: 'Let us talk with our former companions.' Then the left-hand flock spoke to the right-hand one and said: 'Why have you abandoned our shepherds 2 ? Are not faith and charity one, as a tree and its fruit are one? The tree extends through its branches into the fruit; if you break a piece off a branch which forms the connection between the tree and its fruit, the fruit will be lost, won't it, and together with the fruit all the seed which might grow into a new tree? Ask our priests if that isn't so.'

So they asked the priests, and they looked around at the rest, who were winking at them to get them to say that they had made a good point. After this they replied: 'You have made a good point, but as regards the extension of faith into good deeds, like that of a tree into its fruit, we know many secrets, but this is not the occasion to divulge them. The chain or thread which links faith and charity has many knots on it, and only we, the priests, are able to undo them.'

[6] Then one of the priests, who belonged to the right-hand flock of sheep, got up and said: 'Their answer to you was Yes, but to their own party No, for they do not think as they speak.' 'How then do they think?' the others asked; 'Don't they think as they teach?'

'No,' he replied, 'they think that every good of charity, what is called a good deed, which a person does for the sake of salvation and everlasting life, is not in the least good, because by doing the deed himself the person wants to save himself, claiming for himself the righteousness and merit of the one Saviour. They think that this is true of every good deed in which a person is aware of his volition. They hold therefore that there is no link at all between faith and charity, not even that faith is retained and preserved by good deeds.'

[7] But those who belonged to the left-hand flock said: 'You are telling lies to accuse them. Don't they preach charity and its deeds, what they call the deeds of faith, openly in our hearing?'

'You do not understand their sermons,' he replied; only a clergyman who is present can grasp and understand them. What they have in mind is merely moral charity, and its social and political good deeds.

They call these the good deeds of faith, but they are certainly not. For an atheist can do them just as well and in the same guise. They say therefore with one voice that no one is saved by any deeds, but by faith alone. Let us take a comparison to illustrate this. They say that an apple-tree produces apples, but that if a person does good for the sake of salvation, just as the tree by a continuous extension of itself produces apples, then the apples are rotten inside and full of maggots. They say too that a vine produces grapes, but if a person were to do spiritual good deeds as a vine makes grapes, he would make bitter grapes.'

[8] Then they asked: 'What for them are the good deeds of charity, those that are the fruits of faith?'

He replied that perhaps they lurk out of sight somewhere near faith, but are not attached to it. 'They are,' he said, 'like a person's shadow, which follows behind him when he is looking towards the sun, and which he cannot see unless he turns around. Or rather I might say that they are like horses' tails, which in many places are docked nowadays, because people say: "What use are they? They serve no purpose, and if they remain attached to the horse, they easily get dirty."'

On hearing this someone in the left-hand flock of sheep became indignant and said: 'There certainly must be some link, else how could they be called the deeds of faith? Possibly the good deeds of charity are introduced by God into what a person does of his own will by some influence; let us say, by some affection, some afflatus, inspiration, urging and excitation of the will, some silent perception in thought, leading to exhortation, contrition and so to conscience, and thus leading to compulsion, obedience to the Ten Commandments and the Word, either like a child or like a wise man, or by some other means resembling these. How else could they call them the fruits of faith?'

To this the priest replied that they could not. 'And,' he said, 'if they do say that something like this happens, they still stuff their sermons full of words which prove that it is not from faith. There are still others who teach that such things occur but only as signs of faith, not as bonds linking it with charity. There are some, however, who have devised a theory of linking by means of the Word.'

Then they said, 'Isn't this how a link is made?' But he answered, 'That is not what they think, but they imagine it happens just by listening to the Word. For they claim that man's whole rational and voluntary faculty is in matters to do with faith impure and merit-seeking, since in spiritual matters a person cannot understand or will anything, work or co-operate, any more than a stick.'

[9] However one, on hearing that man was believed to be like this in all matters to do with faith and salvation, said: 'I heard someone saying: "I have planted a vineyard. Now I shall drink wine until I am drunk." But another man asked: "Surely you will drink wine out of your goblet by the use of your right hand?" "No," he said, "I shall drink out of an invisible goblet by means of an invisible hand." "Then," said the other man, "you certainly won't get drunk."'

A little later the same man said: 'Please listen to me. I tell you, drink the wine which comes from understanding the Word. Don't you know that the Lord is the Word? Is not the Word from the Lord? Is He not thus in it? If therefore you do good from the Word, are you not doing it from the Lord, in accordance with His words and His will? If you then look to the Lord, He will also guide and teach you, and you will do it of yourselves from the Lord. Can anyone who does something at a king's behest, in accordance with his words and his instructions, say: "I am doing this in accordance with my own words or instructions, and of my own will."'

[10] After this he turned to the clergy and said: 'You ministers of God, do not lead the flock astray.' On hearing this the majority of the left-hand flock went away and joined the right-hand flock.

Then some of the clergy began saying: 'We have heard things we never heard before. But we are shepherds, and we shall not abandon the sheep.' So they went away with them, saying: 'This man has uttered a true saying. How can anyone say "I do this of myself" when he does it in accordance with the Word, so at the Lord's behest, in accordance with His words and His will? Can anyone who does something at a king's behest, in accordance with his words and his will, say: "I am doing this of myself"? We now see it was by Divine providence that the link between faith and good deeds, which is recognised by the members of the church, was not discovered. It could not be, because it could not exist; for there was no faith in the Lord, who is the Word, and so there was not either any faith coming from the Word.'

But the rest of the priests, who belonged to the flock of goats, went off waving their hats and shouting: 'Faith alone, faith alone, long live faith alone.'

Footnotes:

1. This passage is repeated with modifications from Apocalypse Revealed 417.

2. The Latin word means both shepherd and pastor.

  
/ 853  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

True Christian Religion #697

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

697. The sixth experience. 1

I once saw not far from me an atmospheric phenomenon. I saw a cloud divided into smaller clouds, some of which were blue and others dark; and I saw these as it were colliding with one another. They were striped with glittering rays which crossed them; sometimes the stripes had sharp tips like sword-points, at other times they appeared square-ended like broken off swords. Sometimes the stripes ran out so as to meet, at other times they withdrew into themselves, rather like boxers. So it looked as if these little clouds of varied colours were fighting one another, but they were playing. Since this atmospheric display took place not far from me, I lifted up my eyes and looking hard I saw boys, young men and old men entering a building constructed of marble with also porphyry in its foundations. The phenomenon was over this building. Then I asked one of those who were going in what was happening there. 'It is a high school,' he replied, 'where young men are given an introduction to various forms of wisdom.'

[2] On hearing this I went in with them. I was in the spirit, that is, in much the same state as people in the spiritual world, those who are called spirits and angels. Inside the school there was in front a chair, in the middle were benches, around the sides seats, and a gallery over the entrance. The chair was for the young men who were to take turns to reply to the question set. The benches were for the audience, the seats at the sides for those who had previously given wise answers, and the gallery for the older men who were to be umpires and judges. In the middle of the gallery there was a platform, where a wise man, called the headmaster, was seated. He put the questions, and the young men answered these from the chair.

When all were assembled, the man on the platform got up and said: 'Please now reply to this question and answer it if you can: what is the soul and what is its nature?'

[3] On hearing this all were astonished and began to murmur; and some of the crowd on the benches cried out: 'What man is there from the age of Saturn 2 down to our times who has been able by any effort of rational thought to see and grasp what the soul is, much less what its nature is. Surely this is beyond the capacity of anyone's understanding?'

But people in the gallery replied to this: 'This is not beyond the understanding, but within its capacity and purview. just give a reply.'

So the young men got up who had been chosen that day to mount the chair and reply to the questions. There were five of them, who had been examined by the elders and found to be outstandingly clever. They were then sitting on padded seats at the sides of the chair. They then took it in turn, according to the order in which they sat, to climb up to the chair. As each went up, he put on a tunic of opalescent silk and over it a gown of soft wool with flowers woven in it, and a hat on his head with a chaplet of roses surrounded by small sapphires on the crown.

[4] Then I saw the first man so clothed go up and say: 'What the soul is and what its nature is has not been revealed to anyone since the first day of creation. It is a secret which God alone keeps in His treasure-houses. But this much has been discovered, that the soul dwells in man like a queen. However the location of its residence has been the subject of conjecture among learned experts. Some have placed it in the small tubercle between the cerebrum and the cerebellum known as the pineal gland. They have guessed that this was the seat of the soul because the whole person is controlled from those two brains, and that tubercle regulates them. So what governs the two brains at its whim, must also govern the whole person from head to heel. This view,' he said, 'has been regarded by many in the world as true or very probable, but a later age has rejected it as a mere invention.'

[5] On finishing this speech he took off the gown, tunic and hat, and the second of those chosen put them on and so took the chair. His pronouncement about the soul was that in the whole of heaven and in the whole of the world there is no one who knows what the soul is and what its nature is. 'This much,' he said, 'we know, that the soul exists and is in man; but where it is, is a matter of guesswork. This is certain, that it is in the head, since that is where the understanding thinks and the will forms its resolutions; and it is on the face in front of the head that man's five sense organs are to be found. What gives all of these life is the soul which resides inside the head; but I would not dare to express an opinion on where in it its residence is. I have agreed with those who have assigned to it a lodging in the three ventricles of the brain; at other times with those who placed it in the corpora striata there, at other times with those who placed it in the medullary substance of either brain, at other times with those who placed it in the cortical substance, at others with those who placed it in the dura mater. For there was no lack of points to be made in favour of each one of these seats.

The point in favour of the three ventricles in the brain was that they are the receptacles of the animal spirits and all the brain's lymphs. The points in favour of the corpora striata were that these compose the marrow through which the nerves emerge, and by means of which either part of the brain has continuous extensions to the spine; and from one or other of these the fibres emerge which compose the whole structure of the body. The points in favour of the medullary substance of either brain were that it is a gathering and massing together of all the fibres which form the starting point for the development of the whole person. The point in favour of the cortical substance was that here are the first and last ends, and so the beginnings of all fibres, and so of sensation and movement. The point in favour of the dura mater was that it is the shared covering of either brain, from where it stretches in a kind of continuity over the heart and the viscera of the body. For my part, I do not rate one of these theories as superior to another. Will you please, decide and choose which is the best theory.'

[6] After saying this he came down from the chair and passed on the tunic, gown and hat to the third, who went up to the chair and spoke as follows. 'How can I at my age deal with such a lofty subject? I appeal to the learned people seated at the sides here, I appeal to you wise people in the gallery, in fact I appeal to the angels of the highest heaven: can anyone by the light of his reason form for himself any idea of the soul? As regards its seat in man, I can offer as good a guess as anyone else. My guess is that it is in the heart and consequently in the blood. My reason for this is that the heart by means of the blood from it controls both the body and the head. There is a large blood-vessel called the aorta emerging from it and reaching the whole of the body; and there are blood-vessels called carotid arteries emerging from it and reaching the whole of the head. As a result it is universally agreed that the soul by means of blood from the heart sustains, nourishes and gives life to the whole organic system of both the body and the head. An additional reason for believing this assertion is the fact that Holy Scripture says so many times 'soul and heart'. For instance, you are to love God 'with all your soul and with all your heart'; and God creates in man 'a new soul and a new heart' (Deuteronomy 6:5; 10:12; 11:13; 26:16; Jeremiah 32:41; Matthew 22:37; Mark 12:30, 33; Luke 10:27, and elsewhere). It also says explicitly that the blood is the soul of the flesh (Leviticus 17:11, 14).' On hearing this some people raised their voices to cry 'Very learned!'; they were members of the clergy.

[7] After this the fourth put on the garments worn by the previous speaker, and on taking the chair said: 'I too suspect that there is no one of such a sharp and subtle mind as to be able to discern what the soul is and what its nature is. I think therefore that anyone who wishes to scrutinise it has his subtlety exhausted by useless exertions. But from childhood up I have persisted in believing the opinion of the ancients, that man's soul is in the whole of him and in every part of him, and so is as much in his head and each of its parts as in the body and each of its parts. It is a useless invention of modern scholars to locate its seat in some part rather than everywhere. Also the soul is a spiritual substance, to which neither extension nor position can be attributed, but only residing and filling. Again, is there anyone who does not understand life when he mentions the soul, and is not life in the whole and in any part you like to name?' There were many in the audience who supported this statement.

[8] He was followed by the fifth, who, adorned with the same emblems, pronounced from the chair as follows: 'I don't much care to say where the soul is, whether it is in some part or in the whole person. But I will draw on my own resources to disclose my opinion on this question, what the soul is and what its nature is. No one thinks of the soul as anything but something pure, which can be likened to ether or air or wind, the vital principle in which derives from the faculty of reason, which man has to a higher degree than animals. I have based this opinion on the fact that, when a person expires, he is said to breathe out or give up his soul or spirit. As a result too a soul which goes on living after death is believed to be a breath of this kind, containing the life of thought which is called the soul. What else could the soul be? But because I have heard people from the gallery asserting that the question what the soul is and what its nature is, is not beyond the understanding, but within its scope and purview, I beg and beseech you to disclose yourselves this everlasting secret.'

[9] The elders in the gallery here looked at the headmaster, who had set the question. He understood from their nods that they wanted him to go down and tell them the answer. So he at once got down from the platform, and passing through the auditorium took the chair, and holding up his hand said: 'Please listen to me. Is there anyone who does not believe the soul to be the most intimate and subtle essence of a person? But what is essence without form but a figment of the imagination? The soul then is a form, but what sort of form I will tell you. It is the form of all the parts of love and all the parts of wisdom. All the parts of love are called affections, and all the parts of wisdom are called perceptions. The perceptions as a result of and so together with the affections make up a single form containing countless parts but arranged in such order and so cohering that they can be called a unity; and they can be called a unity, because nothing can be taken away from it or added to it, if it is to be a unity. What is the human soul but such a form? All the parts of love and all the parts of wisdom are the essentials of such a form, and in the case of a person these essentials are in his soul, and from his soul in his head and body.

[10] 'You are called spirits and angels; and you believed in the world that spirits and angels were like puffs of wind or particles of ether, and so minds of higher or lower degree 3 . Now you see clearly that you are truly, really and actually people, who in the world lived and thought in a material body; and you knew that it is not the material body that lives and thinks, but the spiritual substance in that body. This you called the soul, whose form you did not know; yet now you have seen it and go on seeing it. You are all souls, about whose immortality you have heard, thought, talked and written so much; and since you are forms of love and wisdom coming from God, you cannot ever die. The soul then is a human form, from which nothing can be taken away, and to which nothing can be added, and it is the inmost form of all the forms throughout the body. Since the forms which are outside receive from the inmost both essence and form, you are therefore souls, just as you appear to be to your sight and to ours. In short, the soul is the real person because it is the inmost person; its form therefore is the human form in full perfection. But it is not life, but is the nearest receiver of life from God, and so God's dwelling.'

[11] This speech was greeted by many with applause, but there were some who said, 'We must think about this.' I then went home, and suddenly there appeared above that high school, in place of the previous atmospheric display, a shining cloud without any stripes or rays fighting one another. This cloud penetrated the roof and coming inside lit up the walls. I was told that they saw things written on them, among which was this:

Jehovah God breathed into man's nostrils the breath of life, and man became a living soul, Genesis 2:7.

Footnotes:

1. This section is repeated from Conjugial Love 315.

2. The 'golden age' of antiquity.

3. Latin: mentes et animi.

  
/ 853  
  

Thanks to the Swedenborg Society for the permission to use this translation.