kind of evidence that would evince the matter-of-fact truth of the miracle of the 5000 than the Old Church has. The Divine Truth absolutely refuses to be proved to the carnal mind by merely carnal evidences. Yet that is just what C. J. L. appears to me to require. And surely Swedenborg is not likely to have troubled himself to prove, to the mere scholar, the DATE of the composition of the Gospels." Another correspondent, who, we believe, takes the same view of the subject as regards the general argument, writes to say, "I think I could throw some light upon the origin and nature of the questions of C. J. L., but I could not prepare it in time for your next number. I will however, D. V., send you an article on the subject as soon as I can." THE USE AND ABUSE OF THE PHILOSOPHY OF SWEDENBORG. DEAR SIR, Mr. George St. Clair strongly objects to the word "jester" used in regard to himself, in consequence of a reported expression of his as to the Science of Correspondence, quoted in my paper as above. He assures me that all he has said or written of Swedenborg has been in serious earnestness, and not in jest. I accept the assurance, and withdraw the expression. I considered the remark as a jest when writing, and used the words I did strictly and solely in reference to that remark. But I am the more moved to recall the word "jester," because I find that it may be construed to imply that Mr. St. Clair is accustomed to jest on subjects usually held sacred, an idea which I should much regret to convey.-Yours sincerely, J. WILLIAM TONKS. Review. SWEDENBORG'S WRITINGS AND CATHOLIC TEACHING; OR, A VOICE Lon 1881. THE author tells us in his preface that such considerable additions have been made to the present edition as to give it the character of a new work. An enlarged edition had, to some extent, been rendered necessary by the vicar's last work on "The Swedenborgians," though substantially a reprint of the articles that appeared in the Old Church Porch. The charges to which Mr. Clissold's work is an answer are numerous, and extend over a wide field. It is pleasing to find that on the vicar's part "the investigation is conducted in a spirit of Christian courtesy, and manifestly with a desire of doing justice to the personal character and literary qualifications of Swedenborg; of both of which, much to the credit of the writer, he speaks in the most honourable manner, admitting that he was a man more eminent, perhaps, than any other in the acquirements of human learning and philosophy." He even admits the beauty of some of his theological views. "We have," says the vicar, "according to his theory, three different orders of mind simultaneously accepting God's Word: first, the angels with their celestial mind; then, men gifted with the Spirit of God in the Church, that is, the spiritual mind; and then, again, ordinary worldly men with the mere natural mind. Now there is great truth in this idea, and great beauty also; for certain it is that we all do, with different minds, and even in ourselves in different times and under different circumstances, read and hear the Word of God diversely." Again, "When, for a moment, we seem inclined to smile at some of the strange ideas he propounds, the next moment we are checked by the extreme beauty, chasteness, and holiness which lies at the foundation of the thought which he expresses. There is no end of the wildness of his poetic fancy, treating the deep things of God with a strain of novelty which startles us at first, but which always ends in making us reflect. Whatever his revelations are, however visionary the doctrine he propounds, we always find some hidden reason for what he says. The poet is balanced by the philosopher." But notwithstanding this favourable testimony, which it is pleasing to notice, the vicar is a determined opponent of Swedenborg's teachings; and, what is much to be regretted, he sadly misrepresents them, which we might almost presuppose from the first quotation. Whether or not it be true that it is, as some have affirmed, difficult to master Swedenborg's theology, certain it is that no one who has not mastered it is qualified to dispute or attempt to refute it. The vicar, like some who have preceded him, has not only an imperfect but an erroneous conception of most of the doctrines he undertakes to refute. "Among other charges of heresy, for instance," says Mr. Clissold, "he represents Swedenborg as denying that there is any Son of God at all; as denying the Incarnation; as asserting that in Christ there are two persons; as virtually denying the necessity of the Atonement; as denying all merit to Christ, and imputing it to man; as denying the doctrine of Redemption by blood; as asserting that the first three chapters of Genesis have no authority; -all these charges being deliberately made without an attempt at verification by direct reference to any one passage of Swedenborg's own writings; the only show of evidence being what the editor says that another author says that Swedenborg says; and it is in this way, by the help of occasional references, that he comes to his own conclusion.' Yet it is of this performance of the vicar of Frome that a reviewer in the Church Times, when noticing a work by Mr. Clissold on "The Consummation of the Age," remarks that "the pages of the Old Church Porch, familiar to most of our readers, contains so complete an exposure and refutation of Swedenborg, that it is unnecessary to allude to them here." Happily this notion is not universal in the Church of England, nor in the Church of Scotland, as our present number testifies. There can be no doubt that it is general. And this opposition, founded very much on misconception of what the New Church doctrines really are, helps to account for the slow progress of the cause, over which our adversaries make merry, like those who saw the two witnesses in the streets of the great city spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, from which they draw the conclusion of failure, and predict early extinction. The Church Quarterly for January 1878 says that the Swedenborgians do not amount to more than ten thousand (in this country it should have said), and that this, after a century, is a proof of utter failure. To this Mr. Clissold answers, "That it is a proof of the hostility to the Church there can be no doubt; but still this very hostility is no other than was predicted to befall the Church in the wilderness, and as such is rather a testimony on its behalf than otherwise." "It is of the Lord's Providence that the Church should at first be confined to a few, and that its numbers should increase successively, because the falses of the former Church must first be removed; for before this truths cannot be received, since truths that are received and implanted before falses are removed do not remain, and are also ejected by the Dragonists" (A. R.). This possibility is very plainly testified by the vicar himself. After pronouncing certain statements of Swedenborg respecting the Trinity and Atonement thoroughly heretical, he yet notwithstanding does not hesitate to say, "If Swedenborg had brought forward, in his case, any such collateral proofs and signs as those which St. Paul did, or the prophets did, then we should believe what he said with similar confidence." "On the mere deficiency of collateral proof, not on the ground of the impro Р bability of the thing, do we, without hesitation, reject and dismiss the claim of the Swedenborgians, and set them down among the schismatics of our unhappy age." Here is a candid confession that men might cling to the falses of the Old Church, and yet, without any interior conviction, believe in the truths of the New. What kind of materials would the Church be made up of, supposing converts could be made in this way? Truly it must be of the Divine Providence that the New Church should for a time be confined to a few, and that its truths should not be received except so far as the falses of the Old are removed. Sometimes we ourselves think that the progress of the Church is slow; let us be thankful that it is not hastened on such conditions as the vicar of Frome proposes; and for want of which he predicts its speedy extinction. "It is not probable," says he, "that this sect will be of long endurance." "With the influence of their gifted and extraordinary founder decaying, as years roll on, it is most likely that his name will die out," "which seems," says Mr. Clissold, "to be like an unintentional paraphrase on the words of the Psalmist, 'When shall he die, and his name perish?' We have already observed, however, that what is to decay' and 'die out' is the Old Dispensation and not the New. In the mean time the Church of the New Dispensation is but the Church in the wilderness, and as such consists only of a few." "The reason is," says Swedenborg repeatedly, "because in the end of the Church there are but few who are in truth from good, and therefore it is that the Church abiding with few is signified by the woman flying into the wilderness." We may remark that the vicar, as a clergyman of the orthodox Church, naturally appeals to the writers of the Church in support of his own doctrines and in refutation of ours. But here Mr. Clissold, from his intimate acquaintance with the writers of all ages, from those of the fathers downwards, has a great advantage over his opponent, by being able to bring the testimony of eminent men, and in particular eminent men of the Church of England, to refute the opinions of those whom the vicar quotes. These we venture to say are amongst the most enlightened of her teachers who have had some foregleams of the coming light. We close our review by quoting Mr. Clissold's conclusion. "As understood of the General Judgment, the cry was raised at midnight, 'Behold the Bridegroom is coming;' but the Creeds say, not is coming, but shall come, therefore was it not a false alarm? Swedenborg resolves the article in the Creeds into a Coming, the Catholic Church resolves the Coming into a Creed. There never can be a Second Advent upon the principles advocated by the Catholic Church, according to the editor. It will always be a Creed, never a Coming; always future, never present; always prophecy, never history; a prophecy in marble; unchangeable, while all around is changing; predicting what is to come, when it has come long ago; venerably old, when all things are new; pointing to the future of the Church, when the time of the Church is no longer. "Such is the result of the interpretation of prophecy according to the Creeds and Traditions of the past. And now in CONCLUSION, what said the angels concerning the Second Coming? "Ye meu of Galilee! why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen Him go into heaven.'1 Not without deep significance were these eleven reminded that they were men of Galilee, on the remotest borders and circumferences of the Church, touching upon the Gentiles, upon heathenism, and all but out of the Church; whose minds were free from the traditions, teaching, and violent prepossessions of the Church of that day; that it might be fulfilled which was spoken by the prophet, saying, 'Galilee of the Gentiles; the people which sat in darkness saw great light.' 2 And if it were not the Church of that day which saw the Lord ascend, what if in like manner it should not be the Church of this day which should see Him come again? and if the Lord did not ascend conspicuously to all the Church in that day, but only to witnesses chosen before of God,3 what if He should come again in like manner in the present day? And if it were from men of Galilee that He was taken up in that day, what if in like manner it is to men of Galilee He should come down in this day? And if these men of Galilee represented not the recognised Church of that day, but a New Church; what if in this matter Catholics should find themselves mistaken when they are ever appealing to the Church,' 'the Catholic Church,' the Catholic teaching of the Church,' 'the interpretation of the Catholic Church,' or the authoritative voice of the Church interpreting God's Word from the beginning?' The Jews of old rested in the antiquity of their Church, the heathens in that of their religions, and NOVELTY was one of the foremost charges brought against Christianity; and what was the answer? The following of St. Ambrose to Symmachus: Our way of Religion you say is new, and yours ancient; and what does this either hurt our cause or help yours? If ours be new, 'twill in time become old. Is yours old? There was a time when it was new. The goodness and authority of religion is not to be valued by length of time, but by the excellency of its worship; nor does it become us to consider so much when it begun, as what it is we worship.' 1 Acts i. 11. 2 Matt. iv. 15, 16. 3 Acts x. 41. 4 Cave's Primitive Christianity, Part I. chap. ii. |