Hoping that these observations may be taken in as good part as they are intended, both by your readers in general and the worthy author of the alterations in particular, I remain, wishing you and all a "Happy New Year,"

PHILO.

THE BIBLE AND MODERN CRITICISM.
To the Editor of the Intellectual Repository.

REV. SIR,—It is an old saying that "Man's extremity is God's
opportunity," and truly, I think, the following extract from "The
History of the Bible," in "Chambers' Information for the People,"
shows that the extremities of the old beliefs of the Christian Church
are very nearly reached :-"We have . . . surveyed the canonical
literature of the Old Testament from the standpoint of modern criti-
cism. If that criticism rests on a solid foundation, it will, in the
course of time, necessarily effect a revolution in the creed of Christen-
dom. The grounds of belief will have to be laid anew. Religion
... itself is in no danger. . . . The instinct which gave it birth is
indestructible. Hence the strength of the old faiths and the hope of
the new; but men will have in the future to stand in a different rela-
tion to the momentous ideas of God, Eternity, Immortality, Righteous-
ness, Duty, from that which they have occupied in the past.
This by no means implies that the sacred books of the Hebrews are
to be set aside, or that the truths which they contain are to be con-
sidered less a Divine Revelation than before, but only that men must
learn to recognise and feel their Divine authority, by a spiritual
sympathy with the heroes and sages and saints of the early world.
They must walk with God, as Enoch and Abraham did.”

What the author means by the above it is not easy to make out, except that he has some consideration left for the timid believers in the Bible as the Word of God, and does not wish to cut the supports from under them just yet. What the new grounds of belief are to be, and what newer or higher precepts relating to Duty, Righteousness, etc., we are to be provided with, I presume he nor anybody else can tell us. Though he says, "Religion itself is in no danger," yet the Bible is, by the wise men's crucial criticism, in a very critical state evidently, and will, by the verdict of its critics, have to be shelved, and perhaps placed in the British Museum as an antique curiosity.-I am, Rev. Sir, yours truly, E. D.

CONFERENCE AND ISOLATED RECEIVERS.

To the Editor of the Intellectual Repository.

SIR,-Permit me, in accordance with the expressed or implied wish of the members present at the last morning sitting of the late Conference (with one exception), to invite the attention of the New Church to a movement, the object of which is to secure for institutions of the Church, other than Societies, recognition by, and representation in, the governing body of the Church.

Remote from New Church societies, necessitated to look for the privileges of worship to the liberality or indifference of other denominations, meeting with little sympathy, much distrust and misconception from those around, shut out. from the delights, privileges, and duties devolving on those who are permitted to worship in unity, isolated receivers yet occupy an important position in the Church. As sentinels posted in the outworks of the citadel, they are subject to the first attacks, and able, also, to make the earliest impressions on the ranks of their opponents. Or, like the skin, which envelopes. and protects the finer organisms of the body, they interpose between the vital principles of the Church and their would-be assailants. They are the nuclei of societies, the pioneers of an advancing system of Truth; nor are there in any of our societies men who love and study the heavenly doctrines with greater diligence and zeal.

Now, as all power is in its fulness in ultimates, the New Church is collectively in a healthy and vigorous state when her external and internal, superior and inferior, organizations act as one; when those beyond the fostering care of ministers and societies co-operate with these in working to advance the cause of Truth. Conference, being the Church in a more extended sense than is any one society, should make these-so to speak-motherless children objects of her especial care, affection, and encouragement. If she undertake to watch over the spiritual and temporal welfare of societies, why not also those who lack the strength and edification afforded by brotherly sympathy and similar modes of thought? If twelve members of a society be represented in Conference, why not twelve isolated receivers? The principle is identical; but in the former case the interest is united and localized, in the latter it is also united, but occupies a wider area. We have an exact parallel in our county and borough representation.

The point aimed at is to strengthen the Church individually and

collectively, so that her life, from first principles to ultimates, may be united and vigorous. But, to receive interior life, there must be an exterior plane, constituted of Societies, Missionary Institutions, Tract Societies, Colportage, and other Associations, all of which occupy peculiar and important positions in Church order. As branches of the same tree, these should all be connected with and spring from Conference; as having similar responsibilities, similar ends and interests, they are entitled to representation in Conference.

Probably there are difficulties attending such thorough combination in the New Church system of polity, but when the right principle is discerned, the true way of meeting the attendant difficulties will also be discerned.

If Conference would recognise City, County, or District Associations of the Church-formed on the basis of the Declaration of Faith, and consisting of twelve or more members who subscribe to the funds of such Association—and support by their influence and presence, whenever practicable, the lectures and public worship delivered and arranged for under the auspices of the Association-as Societies, accord to them the same privileges and demand from them similar responsibilities, the difficulties in the matter would probably be overcome. Nor is it easy to see why the same recognition should be withheld from other institutions of the Church. In Conference all should meet as on a common platform, and the general necessities and work of the Church be more widely known. Then the New Church would begin to realize the strength of union, and her various associations would receive an impetus in their work and formation.

During Conference I had the pleasure of submitting these suggestions to the President, Rev. Dr Bayley, who at once and cordially expressed his approval, and promised his support to a motion giving effect to them, if such were brought forward at next Conference. Several other members of Conference also endorsed the principle.

I should feel myself indebted to any members of the Church who would publicly in the pages of the Repository (if the Editor kindly permit), or privately, by letter (addressed to 1 Bell Place, Stamford Road, Bowden, Cheshire), offer their opinions on this subject.

Thanking you for your courtesy in inserting this letter, I am, sir, your obedient servant, JOHN STUART BOGG.

76

Reviews.

A CRITICAL EXAMINATION OF THE "SCIENCE OF CORRESPONDENCE,"

OR

SYSTEM OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION PROMULGATED BY SWEDENBOEG. London: Trübner & Co. 1875.

AN anonymous "pioneer of civilization" and "knowledge" desires, by the twenty-seven pages of which his pamphlet consists, "to awaken out of their fools' paradise of self-delusion" (p. 27) all those who regard the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg with reverence, and who consider his teachings worthy of their belief; and in order to bring about this desirable result, he undertakes "a Critical Examination of the Science of Correspondence, or System of Biblical Interpretation promulgated by Swedenborg."

Let us see what qualifications he brings to this task. In speaking of Jacob, the son of Isaac, he uses this language: "This wily Hebrew is represented in the Scriptures as having cheated his father-in-law (Laban) out of his flocks and herds by the most cunning and subtle devices" (p. 18); and in speaking of Christ, he calls Him "one of the descendants of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob" (p. 19). We see, therefore, that, with Colenso and the author of "Supernatural Religion," whom he quotes in pages 3-5, he regards the Sacred Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments as mere "human compositions," lacking "all Divine authority," and that he denies the Divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ. He denies, therefore, à priori, the truth of any system of interpretation by which the Divine inspiration of the Sacred Scripture and the Divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ is to be established. And as the " 'Science of Correspondence" is the key of Swedenborg's interpretation of the Scriptures, therefore, before entering upon its critical investigation, he condemns it as false. He is like the scholar who makes up his mind beforehand that a thing is black, and then tries to prove that it is so.

Another disqualification which he brings to his task is a total inability to compass the subject of correspondence. He quotes the following (p. 6) as Swedenborg's definition of correspondence: "What is natural exists from what is spiritual, as effect from its cause, and this relationship is called correspondence." Correspondence, therefore, expresses the relation between natural and spiritual things; and by correspondence those things in the spiritual and natural worlds are brought together which occupy the relation of cause and effect. It is plain, therefore, that a rational understanding of the subject of correspondence requires, first, a clear and definite understanding of the relation between cause and effect; secondly, a thorough understanding of the spiritual world or the world of cause; and thirdly, an adequate understanding of the natural world or the world of effect; and, further, that when any of these requisites, or all three, are wanting in the case of a scientific inquirer, it is absolutely impossible for him to institute a "critical examination" of the subject of correspondence. That such is the case with the writer of the pamphlet before us can be very easily proved.

First, on p. 8 he declares, in respect to the action of the heart and of the lungs : "The heart is simply a muscular force-pump, impelled to blind mechanical action by nervous stimulation. The lungs are simply a collection of air-cells and passages dependent for the performance of their functions upon the action of certain muscles ;" and he ridicules the idea of a man's will and understanding,

or his spiritual being, having anything to do with the action of these organs. He declares, therefore, that the action of the heart and lungs is produced by a natural or material agency altogether, and he denies that they are the natural effect of a spiritual cause.

On the other hand, however, he declares, on p. 9, that "between the brain and the will and understanding the most intimate relation of cause and effect subsists." He admits, therefore, the agency of a spiritual cause in the case of the brain-provided he does not consider spirit a mere attribute of matter—and he denies the agency of a spiritual cause in the case of the heart and lungs. The operation of the will and understanding, or of a spiritual cause, in man is therefore confined, according to this writer, to the brain, and does not extend to the rest of the body. From this, however, it appears, either that the writer does not acknowledge the existence of spiritual causes at all; or that he is not consistent, and hence not rational, in the determination of the cause of the human body, attributing a spiritual cause to one part of the body and a material cause to another. But in either case it follows, that he is totally incapacitated from perceiving, and hence from "critically examining," the correspondence of the heart and lungs; for if he denies the existence of a spiritual cause, he denies thereby the possibility of correspondence; but if he denies beforehand the possibility of correspondence, he is no longer able “critically to examine" it.

The second requisite for a rational understanding of the subject of correspondence is a thorough knowledge of the world of spirit or of the world of cause. And from this it follows that in order to examine critically "the Science of Correspondence as promulgated by Swedenborg," it is necessary to be familiar with his idea of the spiritual world and of spiritual objects, and especially with his doctrine of discrete degrees, without which it is impossible to have any idea of what he means by correspondence. Yet of all this the writer knows absolutely nothing. The only thing he considered necessary in order to prepare himself for a "critical examination" of Swedenborg's science of correspondence was to study two chapters treating of correspondence in the work on “Heaven and Hell,” viz., Nos. 87 to 115, to consult some of the Indexes, and to read a few references in the work on "Divine Love and Wisdom," and in the "Arcana Cœlestia"! Throughout the whole of his "critical examination" the writer accordingly displays a gross ignorance not only of Swedenborg's ideas of the spiritual world in general, but also of his psychology or intellectual philosophy, the whole of which is based on the doctrine of discrete degrees. A glaring instance of this occurs on p. 7, where he seeks to controvert what he calls Swedenborg's "arbitrary division of man's nature into Will and Understanding." He says there, "With Sweden. borg the term Will is synonymous with affection, and is meant to include emotion, but to class these in the same category is as unscientific as it is incorrect. To 'will' and to 'wish' imply totally distinct things, as is evident from the possibility of a man's being able to will that which he does not desire, and to will not to do that which he wishes to do. As nothing can be in opposition to itself, this possibility of antagonism is proof of distinction of faculty.

Swedenborg's language on this subject is: "A wish is from delight" (A. C. 5623), and, "All delights whatever which are felt by man are of his love. Love manifests itself by them, yea, it exists and lives by them" (Conjugial Love, No. 68); further, "When man's will is spoken of, the affection which is of love is understood; for man's will is nothing else. This affection rules man, for the affection of love is his life" (A. C. 7342). Of love, finally, he says in A. C.