New Christian Bible Study

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 #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.

From Swedenborg's Works

 

True Christian Religion #459

Study this Passage

  
/ 853  
  

459. I will add here the following accounts of experiences, of which this is the first.

I saw at a distance five schools, which were bathed in light of different colours, the first in flame-coloured light, the second in yellow, the third in brilliant white, the fourth in light mid-way between that of midday and that of evening, the fifth hardly visible at all, since it was as if placed in the shades of evening. On the roads I saw some people riding horses, some in carriages, and some on foot. Some of them were running or hurrying, and these were bound for the first school, the one surrounded by flame-coloured light. On seeing them I was seized and driven by a desire to go there and listen to the discussion. So I quickly prepared myself and joined the group which was hurrying to the first school, and I went in together with them. There was a large gathering to be seen there, some moving to the right and some to the left, to sit down on the benches round the walls. In front I saw a low platform, on which stood the person who had the duty of presiding; he had a staff in his hand, a hat on his head, and clothing tinged with the flame-coloured light of the school.

[2] When they were assembled, he raised his voice and said, 'Brethren, to-day's subject for discussion is: "What is charity?" Anyone of you may know that charity in its essence is spiritual, and in its exercise natural.'

At once someone on the first bench to the left, where those who had a reputation for wisdom were seated, got up and began to speak as follows. 'My opinion is that charity is morality with faith breathed into it.' He supported his opinion like this. 'Is there anyone who does not know that charity follows faith, as an attendant does her mistress? And that a person, if he has faith, carries out the law, and so charity, so spontaneously that he is unaware that it is the law and charity which he lives by. For if he did know and so acted, thinking at the same time of obtaining salvation on this account, he would sully his holy faith with his self (proprium) and thus maim its efficacy. Surely this is in accordance with the dogma of people in our country?' Here he looked at those sitting beside him, who included some clergy, and they nodded assent.

[3] 'Yet what is spontaneous charity but morality, something we are all taught from childhood? This is therefore essentially natural, but it becomes spiritual when faith is breathed into it. Can anyone tell by looking at the morality of their lives whether people have faith or not? Everyone lives a moral life, but only God, who puts in and seals faith, knows and can tell the difference. I hold therefore that charity is morality with faith breathed in, and this morality coming from faith is in its inmost productive of salvation; all other is not productive of salvation, because it aims at merit. So it is a waste of effort to mix charity and faith together, at least if they are linked from within and not attached from without. Mixing and linking them would be like putting the footman who stands at the back into the carriage with the bishop, or like bringing the door-keeper into the dining-room to sit at table with the lord.'

[4] Next someone on the first bench to the right got up and said: 'My opinion is that charity is piety with pity breathed into it, and I support this view by the consideration that nothing else but piety coming from humility of heart could propitiate God. Piety prays continually that God may grant faith and charity; and the Lord says:

Ask and it shall be granted you, Matthew 7:7.

And since it is granted, both faith and charity are contained in it. I say that charity is piety with pity breathed into it, because all devout piety is pitying. Piety moves a person's heart to groan, and what is this but pitying? Admittedly this goes once the prayer is said, but it returns when the prayer is repeated, and when it returns piety is in it and so piety is in charity. Our priests ascribe everything conducive to salvation to faith, and nothing to charity; what then remains except piety pityingly praying for both? When I read the Word, I could not help seeing that faith and charity were the two means to salvation; but when I consulted the ministers of the church, I was told that faith was the sole means, and charity was no use. Then it seemed to me as if I was at sea in a ship being tossed about between two reefs; so fearing shipwreck, I climbed into the lifeboat and sailed away. My lifeboat is piety; and what is more, piety is useful for all purposes.'

[5] He was followed by someone from the second bench on the right, who said: 'My opinion is that charity is doing good both to the upright and to the criminal. I support this view like this. What is charity but goodness of heart? A good heart wishes well to all, upright as well as criminal. The Lord said too that we should do kindnesses to our enemies. If therefore you take your charity away from anyone, does not charity then become to that extent non-existent, and thus you become like a man who has lost one leg and walks by hopping on the other? The criminal is just as much a human being as the upright man; charity looks on everyone as human, so if he is a criminal, what has that to do with me? Charity behaves like the heat of the sun, which gives life to both harmful as well as harmless animals, to wolves as much as to sheep. And it makes bad trees grow just as much as good ones, and thorns as much as vines.' On saying this he took in his hand a fresh grape, and said: 'Charity behaves like this grape; cut it open and all that is in it is lost.' Then he cut it open, and its contents were lost.

[6] After this speech someone else got up from the second bench on the left and said: 'My opinion is that charity means looking after one's relatives and friends in every way, and this is how I support it. Is there anyone who does not know that charity begins with oneself? Everyone is one's own neighbour. Charity therefore advances from itself through degrees of nearness, first to brothers and sisters, from them to nearer and more distant relatives, and so the advance of charity is limited by itself. Those outside the group are strangers, and strangers are not inwardly acknowledged, so they are estranged from the internal man. But blood-relations and other relatives are naturally linked to one; and habit, which is second nature, does the same for friends, so that they become the neighbour. Charity joins another person to oneself from within, and so from without. Those who are not joined from within should merely be termed companions.

'Surely all birds recognise their kindred, not by their plumage, but by their call; and when they are close, by the vital sphere spreading from their bodies. This affection for their kin which brings them together is called instinct in the case of birds, but the same affection in the case of human beings, when directed towards one's family and people, is the instinct of truly human nature. What is it that makes us kin but blood? This is what a person's mind, which is also his spirit, feels and, so to speak, scents. The essence of charity consists in this kindred feeling and the sympathy it induces. On the other hand, however, absence of kinship, which also gives rise to antipathy, is as it were the absence of blood and so of charity. Because habit is second nature, and this too makes a sort of kinship, it follows that charity includes doing good to friends. Does not anyone who has been at sea and puts in to a port and is told that it is a foreign country, where he does not recognise the languages and customs of its inhabitants, find himself as it were out of place and feel no pleasure in love towards them? But if he is told that it is his native land, and recognises the languages and customs of the inhabitants, he feels as it were at home, and then he feels pleasure from love, a pleasure which is also that of charity.'

[7] Next someone on the third bench to the right got up, and speaking in a loud voice said: 'My opinion is that charity is giving alms to the poor and helping the needy. There is no doubt that this is charity, because this is what the Divine Word teaches, and its dictates admit no rebuttal. Giving to the rich and those with ample resources is nothing but boastful vanity, devoid of charity but motivated by imagining a reward. In this there can be no real affection of love towards the neighbour, but only a spurious affection which is acceptable on earth, but not in the heavens. It is need and want therefore which call for assistance, since here the idea of reward is excluded. In the city where I live, where I know who are upright and who are wicked, I have observed that on seeing a poor man in the street all the upright stop and give him alms; but the wicked, catching sight of the poor man to one side, go past as if blind to the sight of him, and as if deaf to his voice. Does not everyone know that the upright have charity and the wicked do not? A person who gives to the poor and helps the needy is like a shepherd who leads his hungry and thirsty sheep to pasture and to water; but a person who only gives to the rich and affluent is like a person who worships tin gods, and presses food and drink on those who are suffering from overindulgence.'

[8] Next someone got up from the third bench on the left and said: 'My opinion is that charity is building hospices, hospitals, orphanages and hostels, and supporting them with donations. I support this view by the fact that such acts of kindness and assistance are public, and surpass by miles private acts. Charity as a result becomes richer and more full of goodness, because the good deeds are numerous, and the reward to be hoped for according to the promises contained in the Word becomes larger. For as anyone prepares the ground and sows, so shall he reap. Is not this giving to the poor and helping the needy on a larger scale? Is there anyone who does not by this aim at approval by the world, and at the same time hope for praise and humble, grateful thanks expressed by those who are so supported? Does not this lift up the heart, together with the affection which is called charity, right to its peak? Rich people who do not walk in the streets, but ride, cannot notice the beggars sitting by the walls on either side, and hand out small coins to them; but they make contributions to enterprises which are of advantage to many people at once. Lesser folk, however, who walk in the streets and do not possess such resources, do the other thing.'

[9] On hearing this another on the same bench suddenly shouted him down and said: 'Still the rich ought not to rate the munificence and excellence of their charity higher than the pittance one poor man gives another. For we know that everyone acts in a manner appropriate to his station, the king to his, the judge to his, the officer to his, the courtier to his. Charity regarded in essence does not depend upon the rank of the person and thus on the gift he can confer, but on the depth of affection which motivates the charitable act. Thus the footman who gives a small coin may bestow his gift in fuller charity than the lord who gives or bequeaths a fortune. This too is in accordance with this passage:

Jesus watched the rich throwing their offerings into the treasury, and saw too a poor widow throwing in two pennies. He said, Truly I tell you that this poor widow has contributed more than all the others, Luke 21:1-3.'

[10] After these someone got up from the fourth bench to the left, and spoke. 'My opinion,' he said, 'is that charity is endowing places of worship, and doing kindnesses to their ministers. I support this view by the fact that a person who does so has a holy purpose in mind and that is what motivates his acts; in addition he sanctifies his gifts. Charity demands this, because it is essentially holy. Is not all worship in churches holy? For the Lord says:

Where two or three are gathered together in my name, there I am in their midst. [Matthew 18:20.]

Priests who are His servants conduct that worship. I deduce from this, that gifts which are given to priests and to churches are superior to those which are handed out to other people and for other purposes. Moreover, a minister has been given the authority to bless, by which he sanctifies the gifts. And afterwards nothing so much broadens and cheers the mind as seeing one's offerings as so many sanctuaries.'

[11] Then someone got up from the fourth bench to the right and said: 'My opinion is that charity is the Christian brotherhood of old; and I support that view by the fact that every church which worships the true God begins with charity, as did the Christian church of old. So since charity joins minds, and makes one out of many, they called themselves brethren, in Jesus Christ their God. Since they were then surrounded by barbarous nations who made them afraid, they held their property in common. In this they rejoiced together and with one mind, and at their meetings every day talked about the Lord God their Saviour, Jesus Christ; and at their lunches and dinners they discussed charity, and this was the source of their brotherhood. But after their time, when schisms began to arise, culminating in the heinous Arian heresy, which for many people did away with the idea of the divinity of the Lord's Human, charity went out of fashion and the brotherhood fell apart. It is true that all who in truth worship the Lord and keep His commandments are brothers (Matthew 23:8), but brothers in spirit. Since at the present time no one is recognisable for what he is in the spirit, there is no need for them to call one another brothers. A brotherhood based on faith alone, much less on faith in any other God than the Lord God the Saviour, is no brotherhood, because charity, which makes it a brotherhood, is lacking in that faith. So I deduce that charity was the Christian brotherhood of old, but this in time past, not now. Yet I prophesy that it will come again.' When he said this a flame-coloured light showed through an east window, and tinged his cheeks. The gathering was astonished to see this.

[12] Lastly someone got up from the fifth bench on the left and asked permission to add a contribution to what the last speaker had said. When this was granted, he said: 'My opinion is that charity is forgiving everyone his faults. I got this opinion from the way people are accustomed to speak on going to the Holy Supper; for some then say to their friends, "Forgive me any wrong I have done," thinking that by this they have fulfilled all the requirements of charity. But I thought to myself that this is merely a painted picture of charity, and not the real form of its essence. For this saying is uttered as much by those who do not forgive as by those who make no effort to acquire charity; and such people are not included among those mentioned in the prayer which the Lord Himself taught: "Father, forgive us our faults, just as we forgive those who wrong us." For faults are like ulcers, which, if they are not lanced and healed, form a collection of pus; and this infects the adjacent areas, and creeps around like a snake, turning blood everywhere into pus. It is much the same with faults against the neighbour; unless they are removed by repentance and by living in accordance with the Lord's commandments, they linger and become embedded. Those who without repenting only pray to God to forgive them their sins, are like the citizens of a city smitten with plague, who go to the governor and say, "Sir, heal us." The governor will tell them, "What do you mean, heal you? Go to the physician and find out the remedies, buy them from the chemist, use them, and you will be cured." So the Lord will say [to those] who beg for their sins to be forgiven without really repenting, "Open the Word, and read what I said in Isaiah:

Woe to the nation that sins, weighed down with iniquity. When you spread out your hands, I hide my eyes from you; even though you pray time and again, I do not hear. Wash yourselves, put away the wickedness of your deeds from before my eyes; cease to do evil, learn to do good. And then your sins will be taken away and forgiven, Isaiah 1:4, 15-18."'

[13] When the speeches were over, I held up my hand and asked permission, although I was a stranger, to give my opinion. The presiding officer put this to the meeting, and when it was agreed, I spoke as follows: 'My opinion is that charity is acting in every deed and employment from a love of justice combined with judgment; but from love that has no other source than the Lord God the Saviour. All that I have heard from those sitting on the benches on the right and the left are well-known examples of charity. But as the presiding officer of this gathering said in his introductory remarks, charity is in its origin spiritual, but in what is derived from this it is natural. Natural charity, if inwardly it is spiritual, appears to the sight of angels transparent, like a diamond. But if inwardly it is not spiritual, but purely natural, it appears to the sight of angels pearly, like the eye of a boiled fish.

[14] 'It is not for me to say whether the well-known examples of charity, which you have brought forward one after another, are inspired by spiritual charity or not. But I can say what the spirituality in it must be, for them to be natural expressions of spiritual charity. Their spirituality consists in their being done from a love of justice combined with judgment, that is, in a person looking to see, when he does something charitable, whether he acts from justice; and it is judgment which allows him to see this. For a person can do harm by kindnesses, and do good by things that look like doing harm. For example, harm is done by kindnesses if anyone supplies a hard-up highwayman with the money to buy himself a sword, although in asking he will not say this is his intention. Or if anyone helps him break out of prison and shows him the way to the woods, saying to himself, "It is not my fault that he robs travellers; I helped a fellow human being." To take another example: if someone feeds an idler, and takes care he is not compelled to work, saying, "Come into a room in my house and lie in bed; why tire yourself out?" anyone doing this is fostering idleness, Or again, if anyone promotes relations and friends of bad character to high office, in which they can set on foot many kinds of mischief. Can anyone fail to see that charitable deeds of this sort are not motivated by any love of justice combined with judgment?

[15] 'On the other hand, a person may do a kindness by acts which look like wrong-doing; for instance, a judge who acquits a wrong-doer because he weeps, utters pious expressions and begs to have his offence overlooked, on the grounds that he is his neighbour. Yet the judge in fact acts charitably, when he imposes the sentence prescribed by law, for by so doing he prevents him from doing further wrong and harming the community, which is the neighbour in a superior degree; and he sees to it that such a judgment is not a cause of scandal. Is anyone unaware that it is for their own good that servants are chastised by their masters, and children by their parents, for doing wrong? It is much the same with those in hell, all of whom love to do wrong, being kept shut up in prison and punished when they act wickedly, a punishment permitted by the Lord to reform them. This happens because the Lord is justice itself, and does whatever He does as the result of judgment itself.

[16] 'These facts allow us to see clearly why it is that, as I said before, spiritual charity arises from a love of justice combined with judgment, but from love from no other source than the Lord God the Saviour. The reason is that all the good of charity is from the Lord; for He says:

He who remains in me and I in him brings forth much fruit, because without me you can do nothing, John 15:5.

also:

He has all power in heaven and on earth, Matthew 28:18.

All love of justice combined with judgment has no other origin than the God of heaven, who is justice itself, and the source of all human powers of judgment (Jeremiah 23:5; 33:15).

[17] 'This leads to the conclusion that everything said about charity from the seats to right or left - that it is morality with faith breathed into it, piety with pity breathed into it, doing good to the upright and to the wicked, looking after one's relatives and friends in every way, giving to the poor and helping the needy, building hospitals and supporting them with gifts, endowing places of worship and doing kindnesses to their ministers, that it is the Christian brotherhood of old, or forgiving everyone his faults - all of these are splendid examples of charity, when they are done out of a love of justice combined with judgment. Otherwise they are not charity, but only like watercourses cut off from the spring that feeds them, and like branches torn from a tree. True charity consists in believing in the Lord, and acting fairly and righteously in every deed and employment. Anyone therefore who at the Lord's bidding loves justice and executes it with judgment is an image and likeness of charity.'

[18] This speech was greeted with the sort of silence typically kept by those who are led by the internal man to see and acknowledge that something is so, but do not yet do so in their external man; I could observe this from their faces. But I was then suddenly carried up out of their sight, for from being in the spirit I re-entered my material body. A natural person, being clothed in a material body, is invisible to any spiritual person, that is, any spirit or angel, and so are they to him.

  
/ 853  
  

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

©2024 New Christian Bible Study Corporation. All rights reserved. Printed from newchristianbiblestudy.org