scruples not to conjecture that such is the fact, and adds to the apostles the prophets also. "You will perhaps say," he remarks, as if again he were addressing this accuser," that we shall have no need of their teaching when we go to heaven; for we shall be near God himself, and shall receive all immediately from him. But hath the Scripture anywhere excluded the assistance of our fellow-spirits? God can teach us here on earth immediately by his own Spirit, without the use of books and letters, without the help of prophets and ministers, men of like passions with ourselves; and yet he chooses rather to do it in an instrumental way, and makes his creatures in the lower world the means of our instruction under the superior influence of his own Spirit. And why may he not use the same methods to communicate knowledge to spirits that newly arrive at that upper world? There we shall see the patriarchs of the old world, and prophets of the old dispensation, as well as the apostles and evangelists of Christ and his gospel. There Paul and Moses shall join together to give us an account of the Jewish law, and read wondrous and entertaining lectures on the types and figures of that economy, and still lead our thoughts to the glorious antitype with surprising encomiums of the blessed Jesus. Paul shall unfold the dark places of his own writings, better than he himself once understood them; and Moses shall become an interpreter of his own law, who knew so little of the mystery and beauty of it on earth himself." (Vol. ii. pp. 425, 426.) Now when Swedenborg affirms, only that part of what Watts here so confidently anticipates is true, is it to be deemed less credible, than when proposed with so many additions by Watts? But the scene of the specific preaching of the apostles mentioned by Swedenborg, is not in heaven, but in the intermediate region or world of spirits. We have, however, amply seen, in Sect. IV., Part III., that this interme diate region was to be the scene of the last judgment, and, of course, that, at that time, great and extraordinary operations were there to be accomplished. One of these operations, it is declared by the Lord himself, should be," the sending of his angels, who should gather together his elect from the uttermost part of the earth to the uttermost part of heaven." (Mark xiii. 27.) Is there the least improbability in supposing, that at least among these angels might be the twelve apostles? And how were they to ascertain who were the elect, and to gather them togather? What means so likely, as by proclaiming the gospel of the kingdom of the Lord Jesus Christ,-by announcing the fact, that he had taken to him his great power, and would reign, as the only God of heaven and earth? Thus, in every point of view, there is much that confirms the probability of Swedenborg's statement on this subject; and nothing on which the shadow of an argument can be raised against it. But it will not be generally believed, so long as the inward incredulity which is now so general in regard to the existence of

any spiritual world whatever, continues to exert its torpifying influence on the human mind. Where this prevails, and among those in whom it does not break out into open denial, it is all very well to talk of such things, so long as they are only proposed, as by Watts, in the way of conjecture and speculation: suggestions thus offered may be admired as ingenious, pretty, and plausible: but rise from the language of conjecture to that of knowledge; affirm that the views proposed are not to be played with as the creations of fancy, but to be acted upon as the realities of fact; and the inward spirit of incredulity at once rises in rebellion, shuts the mind against the admission of the thought, and, proceeding from rejection to aggression, pronounces with dogmatism, that what appeared beautiful regarded as a fiction, is absurdity when regarded as a truth.

With this remark, I conclude my examination of the extracts from our author, given in the Anti-Swedenborg. I trust it will be seen by the generality of those whose minds are not entirely closed by a confirmed state of such incredulity, that all the statements which have been noticed, are perfectly in accordance with the assertions of Scripture, and with the dictates of reason also, when Reason is aware of the two truths which Scripture and Reason equally testify, that man after death is a real man as before, and that all the circumstances in which he then finds himself, are outward expressions of his inward state. It must also be seen by all, that however I may have succeeded in the vindication of the extracts, the manner in which they have been selected by our adversary is in the highest degree partial and unjust; that they by no means afford a fair opportunity of judging of the writings of the illustrious Swedenborg.

But I have one other remark to make, which is perhaps of some importance; it is, That even they who may be of opinion, that such statements as some of those which we have been considering, had no other origin than the imagination of the writer, will not be justified, on this account, in rejecting, indiscriminately, the whole of his writings. I have known several, whose prejudices against supernatural communications were so strong, that they could not believe the reality of those of Swedenborg; who yet were immediately satisfied, on looking into his works, that the greatest injustice is done him in the estimate formed of him by the religious world at large; and who became fully convinced of the truth of his general views of doctrine. It can absolutely be denied by none, that in all his writings are delivered sentiments of the highest importance, proposed and discussed in the most luminous and truly rational manner, and with a clearness of evidence which those who are not deterred from seriously attending to it by extraneous considerations find it very difficult to resist; is it then the part of a rational man, under the influence of merely extraneous considerations, to refuse to avail himself of what is indisputably excellent, and

to reject the whole for what he regards as a blemish in certain parts? On the supposition that those parts are merely the offspring of imagination, they must have been the products, not of a light or disordered mind, but of a meditation so profound, that the subjects of it occasionally became embodied as realities. If, also, the having received such impressions, whether real or not, is a sufficient reason for rejecting the whole of his writings and sentiments, with them must be rejected the writings and sentiments of many others, who were regarded with the highest esteem in their life-time, and who have since retained, and retain still, a large share of influence over the opinions of mankind. Even deists have been of this number. The story of Lord Herbert of Cherbury is well known; who was encouraged, as he believed, by a supernatural appearance, to publish his book against the Christian religion. Among the great geniuses who arose on the revival of learning, few were more distinguished than the celebrated Cardan. This man believed, and most solemnly affirms, that he had frequent communications with spirits: yet none of the learned allege this as a reason for rejecting his writings in toto, or for refusing to look at the valuable things which they are admitted to contain. Abundance of similar instances might be adduced; but I will content myself with that of the famous Luther. If we are not to accept the doctrines of the New Church, because their propounder avers that he had spiritual communications; we ought never to have separated from the Church of Rome, because the greatest of the Reformers asserts the same thing. Many statements respecting Luther's supernatural intercourses, contained in his own works, might be quoted: but we will take a specimen of a Memorable Relation of his from his book De Missa Privata et Unct. Sacerd. [It may be seen complete in the edition of his works printed at Wittenberg in 1588, tom. vii. p. 479. In the later editions some parts of it have been omitted; but I have ascertained that it is contained, with only the omission of the words describing the devil's voice, in the copy of Luther's works in the library of the Royal Institution. tom. vii. p. 228.)

Do

"Awaking from a sound sleep a few nights ago," says Luther' "the devil, who, I assure you, has made me pass many an uneasy one, began to speak to me as follows. Listen to me, O learned man! you know that, for these fifteen years, you have been in the daily habit of saying private masses: Now what if all this time you have committed daily acts of idolatry, and, instead of the body and blood of Christ, have adored, and exhibited to others to adore, nothing but plain bread and wine?' I instantly replied, 'I am an anointed priest, ordained by a bishop; I acted according to the command of my superiors: why then should I not be said to have truly consecrated, as I pronounced the words attentively, and said mass most devoutly?' Very true,' said the devil; but the very Turks and heathens per

form their rites in their temples from a principle of obedience, as well as you. But what if your ordination and consecration were both false, like that of the Turks and Samaritans?' Here," says Luther," my heart began to beat, and the cold sweat to ooze cut from every pore. The devil put forth his whole argumentative force; and he has a deep and strong voice. Nor can such an altercation continue long; on the contrary, question and answer pass in an instant. It was then I plainly perceived how it sometimes happens that people are found dead in their beds. He can destroy the human frame when and where he chooses: nay, so oppress the soul as to force it from the body, as he has often nearly done mine; so that I am convinced both Empson and Ecolampadius were killed in this manner; for no human being, unassisted by God, can withstand it."-He goes on to relate, at a considerable length, the remainder of the dispute; and what is not a little extraordinary, he gives the devil the right side of the argument, and is convinced by him of the idolatrous nature of private masses.

Now that there was some illusion in this statement of Luther's will be generally thought. Admitting there to be any reality in it whatever, it certainly was not the devil, considered as the sovereign of hell, with whom he held the conversation; nor was it with all hell, considered as one aggregate power, in which sense the devil is spoken of in Scripture. According, however, to Swedenborg's statements, it is by no means impossible that some spirit or other discoursed with Luther on this occasion, whom he, judging of the case from his own previously formed opinions, might suppose to be the devil. But even on the supposition that it was an evil spirit, or a devil, the relation is very incongruous: the sentiments delivered are by no means in perfect accordance, as is strictly the case in all Swedenborg's relations, with the imputed character of the speaker. But let the incongruity be ever so extreme; or even supposing the whole, as will now be the judgment of most, to be the mere offspring of imagination; will any assert that the writings of Luther are therefore to be rejected altogether? that it was absolutely wrong, under such a guide, to forsake the Romish communion? that it is impossible justly to regard him, as he has been hitherto extensively regarded, as an extraordinary instrument in the hands of Providence for good? They who hesitate at coming to such conclusions in regard to Luther, ought to beware how they adopt similar ones in regard to Swedenborg. The observation would be true, were his statements equally incongruous: much more is it true, when, as just remarked, there is none of his Memorable Relations which does not wear much more of the character of consistency and probability than does this Memorable Relation of Luther's. The case altogether stands exactly thus:

Luther affirms that he had supernatural communications, of which he relates many instances:

Swedenborg affirms that he, also, had supernatural communications; and he gives such explanations of the nature of the spiritual world, and of man as possessing a spiritual part as well as a natural part, as clearly account for his own spiritual experience, and for Luther's also:

Luther, notwithstanding his relations of his supernatural communications, is regarded by all Protestants as entitled to the utmost respect as a theological leader and writer;

Consequently, Swedenborg, whose writings on no subject are less rational than those of Luther, and on many are far more so, is entitled to at least an equal degree of respect from the Christian world.

The above relation, with other similar statements, has lately been published by the Catholics as a tract, under the title of Martin Luther's Conference with the Devil,' by way of throwing ridicule on Luther and the Reformation; in exactly the same manner as our opponents, by their "Sundry Extracts," endeavour to throw ridicule on Swedenborg and the New Church; and if these succeed in their object, the Catholics, most certainly, ought to succeed in theirs.

I only add, to prevent misconception, that while in these last paragraphs I have reasoned upon the supposition, that Swedenborg's statements respecting his spiritual intercourse might only originnte in imagination, I by no means intend to admit, that in my own estimation, formed from an examination of all the circumstances of the case, there is any possibility of such having been the fact. And though I am of opinion that they who think so, may, nevertheless, read his writings with advantage, I am satisfied that few of those who shall thus come to the conviction that his writings are true in part, will fail to conclude in the end, that they are true altogether.

No. II. SECTION VII. PART IV. P. 430.

The New-Church Doctrine of the Trinity, not a Revival of Sabellianism, or any other Ancient Heresy.

A very common mode of attempting to throw odium on the doctrines of the New Church, is that of giving them the name of Sabellianism, or some other long exploded error. Thus, after stating, in his way, our view of the Trinity, (as given above, p. 393,) the writer I chiefly follow proceeds thus;

"If there were any merit in the authorship of this anti-scriptural doctrine, yet even then it would not fall to the share of the Baron, for the very same doctrine in substance was broached and propagated in the third century by an arch-heretic of the name of Noetus, and whose followers were called Noetians, and also Patripassians, because they said the Father suffered in the body of Christ for the sins of all mankind. After this arose another sect bearing some resemblance, though somewhat different, under the denomination of Sabellians, being the followers of one Sabellius." [P. 10.].