In New Christian thought, “charity” has a significantly different meaning than in the common modern English definition. In Swedenborg's works "charity" is usually the English rendering of the Latin word "caritas", which is also the root of the verb “to care.” If we think of “charity” as “a state of caring,” we can start seeing what Swedenborg was trying to convey.

“Caring” does not necessarily have to be emotional. You can take care of someone you don’t like, you can take care of business or errands or duties that have little or no emotional content. Swedenborg would call these “acts of charity,” things done from a desire to be a good person. But the idea of “caring” can elevate, too: When you care about someone it involves real affection, and to care about an idea or mission implies a deep commitment - it is a feeling, an emotional state. The ultimate state of “caring,” of course, would be caring about all of humanity, wanting what’s best for everyone on the planet. This is what Swedenborg would call “true charity,” and it is marked by love - the love of others. Importantly, though, it can't be left as an abstraction; it needs to be grounded out in action.

Or as Swedenborg puts it in Arcana Coelestia 8033: “Charity is an inward affection consisting in a desire which springs from a person's heart to do good to the neighbour, which is the delight of his life.”

At all these levels, though, charity cannot act on its own. It needs tools.

Imagine, for instance, a young mother falling and breaking her leg. Her four-year-old might love her desperately, but cannot take care of her. A paramedic, meanwhile, might see her as just a case number, but will get her stabilized and delivered to a hospital. The difference, obviously, is knowledge. The paramedic has a bunch of tested, true ideas in her head that give her the capacity to care for the mother; the four-year-old does not.

That knowledge is actually part of what Swedenborg would call “faith,” though he’s referring to spiritual things rather than medical ones. In general, “faith” in Swedenborg’s works refers to not just belief in the Lord but also the things we accept as true because they come to us from the Lord and the Lord’s teachings. If we take them and apply them to life, we can do works of charity - we can use knowledge to take care of people and things, to actually do something good. For this reason, faith and charity are often linked in Swedenborgian theology.

And just like the idea of caring, these items of faith can elevate. “Thou shalt not murder” is a good low-level matter of faith, and should certainly be applied if we want to be charitable people. “Love thy neighbor as thyself” is a bit higher, a bit more internal, and will help us be charitable on a deeper level. The idea that by loving others we are loving the Lord will take us to a deeper place yet.

And perhaps most beautiful of all is what happens when we reach a state of true charity. If we work to be good because we want to serve the Lord, the Lord will eventually change our hearts, transforming us so that we delight in being good and delight in loving and helping others. At that stage the ideas of faith change from being the masters over our evil desires to being the servants of our good desires. From a loving desire to be good and serve others we will seek and use knowledge that lets us fulfill that mission.

(Referenties: Arcana Coelestia 809, 916 [2], 1798 [2-5], 1799 [3-4], 1994, 8120; Charity 11, 40, 56, 90, 199; The New Jerusalem and its Heavenly Doctrine 121; True Christian Religion 367, 377, 392, 425, 450, 453, 576)

122. The twelve disciples of the Lord represented the church as to all things of faith and charity in the complex, as did also the twelve tribes of Israel (n. 2129, 3354, 3488, 3858, 6397). Peter, James, and John represented faith, charity, and the goods of charity in their order (n. 3750). Peter represented faith (n. 4738, 6000, 6073, 6344, 10087, 10580). And John represented the goods of charity, see the preface to the eighteenth (Arcana Coelestia 2135) and twenty-second Arcana Coelestia 2760vvv1-2 chapters of Genesis.

That there would be no faith in the Lord, because no charity, in the last time of the church, was represented by Peter's thrice denying the Lord before the cock crew the third ¹ time; for Peter there, in a representative sense, is faith; (n. 6000, 6073). "Cock crowing," as well as "twilight," signifies in the Word the last time of the church (n. 10134[1-13]). And "three" or "thrice," signifies what is complete to the end (n. 2788, 4495, 5159, 9198, 10127). The like is signified by the Lord's saying to Peter, when Peter saw John follow the Lord:

What is it to thee, Peter? follow thou Me, John; for Peter had said of John, What is this? (John 21:21, 22); (n. 10087).

John lay on the breast of the Lord, because he represented the good of charity (n. 3934, 10081). That the good of charity constitutes the church, is also signified by the words of the Lord from the cross to John:

Jesus saw His mother, and the disciple whom He loved, who stood by, and He said to His mother, Woman, behold thy son: and He said to that disciple, Behold thy mother; and from that hour that disciple took her to himself (John 19:26, 27).

"John" signifies the good of charity, and "woman" and "mother," the church; and the whole passage signifies that the church will be where the good of charity is; that "woman" in the Word means the church (see n. 252-253, 749, 770, 3160, 6014, 7337, 8994). And likewise "mother" (n. 289, 2691, 2717, 3703, 4257, 5580, 8897, 10490). All the names of persons and places in the Word signify things abstractly from them (n. 768, 1888,4310, 4442, 10329).

Voetnoten:

2189. They said to him, Where is Sarah your wife? means rational truth, which did not at that time show itself because it existed within rational good. This is clear from the representation of 'Sarah' here as rational truth, dealt with above in 2173. The implications of these things - as also of those that follow where the state of the Lord's Rational is the subject, which state is represented by 'Sarah' - cannot so easily be explained intelligibly unless the general nature of the state of the rational as regards good and as regards truth is known; and also in the Lord's case as regards the Divine and as regards the Human in which He was at that time.

[2] The first and foremost element of the rational with man is truth, as stated already in 2072, and therefore it is the affection for truth, which exists with man to enable him to be reformed and so regenerated, such reformation being effected by means of cognitions and facts, which are matters of truth. These are being constantly implanted in good, that is, in charity, so that in this manner he may receive the life of charity. It is therefore the affection for truth with man that predominates in his rational. For the situation with the life of charity, which is the life of heaven itself, is that in people who are being reformed and regenerated it is constantly being born and developing and increasing, such growth being achieved by means of truths. Therefore the more truth that is implanted, the more is the life of charity perfected. Thus as is the nature and the amount of truth present with man, so is the charity present with him.

[3] These few observations may to some extent show what the position is with man's rational. Within truth however no life is present, only within good. Truth is merely the recipient of life, that is, of good. Truth is like the clothing or a garment worn by good. In the Word too therefore truths are called clothes, and also garments. But when good composes the rational, truth passes out of sight and becomes as though it was good; for good is now shining through the truth, in the same way as when angels are seen clothed they appear in brightness that looks like a garment, as also was the case when angels appeared before the prophets.

[4] These then are the implications of the explanation given, that rational truth did not at that time show itself because it existed within rational good, meant by 'they said to him, Where is Sarah your wife?' But because the Lord's Rational Good at that time was Divine, as it can never be with any angel, it cannot be described other than by the use of a comparison, thus by the use of an illustration presenting something similar but not the same.