A REVIEW

OF

A RESOLUTION AND REPORT

ADOPTED BY THE MINISTERS OF THE GENERAL CONVENTION OF THE NEW JERUSALEM CHURCH, ON THE SUBJECT OF FORNICATION AND CONCUBINAGE.

C. TH. ODHNER.

THE ACADEMY OF THE NEW CHURCH.

Philadelphia, Pa.

1904.

 T. B. and H. B. COCHRAN,

PRINTERS,

LANCASTER, PA.

 CONTENTS.

PAGE.
Preface 5
Introduction, by W. F. Pendleton 7
The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem respecting

Fornication and Concubinage 25
Etymological Notes 27
Concerning the opposition of scortatry love and

conjugial love 29
Concerning Fornication 53
Concerning Concubinage 73
Laws of Order for the Preservation of the Conjugial 89
Chapter I. The History of the Controversy 89
Chapter Il. The "Resolution and Report." 110
Chapter III. The Inconsistencies of the

"Resolution and Report." 122
Chapter IV. The "Laws of Order." 131
Chapter V. Are the Intermediate Laws meant for

members of the New Church? 142
Chapter VI. In how far are Pellicacy and Concubinage Evil? 153
Chapter VII. The Inefficacy of Faith alone 172
Chapter VIII. Purity in the New Church 180

[blank page]

PREFACE.

The chapters on Fornication and Concubinage in Swedenborg=s work on Conjugial Love have for more than a century been a source of discussion and controversy within the New Church, as well as a special object of attack upon the Church by its enemies without. With the latter it is not necessary to deal here, as they have been ably answered by numerous defenders of our faith; it is to the members of the New Church that the present publication is addressed, as a contribution to the discussion which is still absorbing their attention.

The Ministers of the General Convention of the New Jerusalem in the United States have recently published a "Resolution and Report," setting forth their views and decisions on the subject of Fornication and Concubinage. The publication was originally "printed for private circulation," but as one of the New Church journals, by permission, has reprinted the greater part of it, the privacy of the publication has been removed. And as the "Resolution and Report" presents but one side of the long-continued discussion, it is important that the other side should be heard also, in order that the Church may he able to judge "in freedom according to reason."

[blank page]

INTRODUCTION.

Three leading ideas are set forth in the work on Conjugial Love; first, that conjugial love is eternal; second, that only a remnant of it is to be found in the world; third, that this remnant is to be preserved, or the Church cannot exist.

The first idea is the most universal and most essential of all, and it is for this primarily that the work has been given to the world. It must be made known that there is marriage in heaven, for without this knowledge the New Church, which is to be a truly spiritual Church, cannot be established on the earth.

The knowledge that marriage is eternal has been lost since the ancient ages. The men of the Most Ancient Church knew that marriage is the life of heaven, and their marriages while on earth were happy in consequence. But this knowledge was obliterated and lost in the ages which followed, when men from celestial and spiritual became natural, sensual, and corporeal; and with its loss came the loss of everything spiritual, and the life of men on earth was disjoined from the life of angels in heaven. True conjugial love departed, and adulterous love took the place of the heavenly love of marriage, which had been ordained from creation, anti which reigned supreme in the Adamic Church.

Still the knowledge of the eternity of marriage could not be wholly destroyed; a remnant of it was preserved throughout the ages. We find the Sadducees treating it with contempt in the question which they asked of the Lord, "Whose wife shall she be in the resurrection?" Many centuries later Mohammed promised a polygamous heaven to his followers. The denial or perversion of a truth shows that the truth is present and pressing to be received; but it finds no resting place with a perverse and adulterous generation. And so also to the poet and novelist of our day there is given an obscure perception of the eternity of marriage, but it is perception without knowledge; and there is neither perception nor knowledge of it in the theology of the Christian world.

It was necessary that the Christian Church should come into the most dense ignorance on this subject, in order that the profane ideas respecting the heavenly marriage which still remained from the corrupt Ancient Church, might be abolished, and still more vile profanation be guarded against. Only through such dense ignorance could the way be prepared for the restoration of the genuine truth as it existed in the Golden Age. This is among the causes why the Lord in His answer to the Sadducees concealed from the Christian Church the fact that there is marriage in heaven; for otherwise there would have arisen a worse contempt than that of the Sadducees, or a worse profanation than that of Mohammed.

It is better not to know, than to know and profane; and therefore it is of the Christians also that the Lord spoke, "He hath blinded their eyes, and hardened their hearts; that they should not see with their eyes, nor understand with their hearts, and be converted, and I should heal them." (John xii. 40.)

In this our day, the Lord has come again into the world, revealing the spiritual truth of His Word, the Divine Truth as it is in heaven, to establish a Church truly spiritual which is to endure forever; and, fundamental to this ever enduring Church, the eternity of marriage is revealed, and an entire work is devoted to the subject. Without this there could be no New Church, nor any truly spiritual life on the earth. For the Church is established, grows and progresses, altogether according to the growth of conjugial love. Without this the Church is a barren field, where no fruit is ripened for the harvest.

Since the eternity of marriage is the end of the work on Conjugial Love, this end reigns throughout. There is nothing in the book. from cover to cover, that does not minister to this end, or expound it; and this is true, whether the subject treated of is conjugial love, its opposites, or its intermediates,--all and each tend and conduce to the one end of revealing the eternity of marriage, and of pointing out at the same time the means by which marriage is to become eternal with the man of the Church.

Conjugial love is described in order that it may be sought and cultivated and loved with heart and mind and all ardor of soul; the opposites are described that they may be shunned as the lakes of hell; the intermediates are shown that man may hasten through them, or if delay in them he necessary, still they are not to be loved as an end.

The end is marriage in heaven to eternity, and to this end every syllable in the book contributes; to this end every word in it was written, to this end every truth in its teaches and leads; and he who sees any other end in it, or sees in it that which teaches anything else or leads in any other direction, sees something in his own imagination, hut does not see what is in the book itself.

It is according to the style of Divine Revelation that the end which is universal, and which is to reign throughout, should appear in the outset or beginning. The work on Conjugial Love is no exception.

In that beautiful Memorable Relation, which occupies the first twenty-six paragraphs of the work, we are actually introduced into an angelic society and witness a marriage ceremony in heaven; and so we learn by the evidence of actual sight and experience that the angels are angelic couples living together as one man in blessedness forever.

This Relation is the introduction to the work. But this is not enough. The eternity of marriage must be powerfully impressed upon the mind of the reader, not only by objective presentation, but by subjective reasoning; for the Lord in His Second Coming addresses Himself to the reason of man, in order that the human mind may see and know for itself the mysteries of heaven,--mysteries which the wise men of old longed to see and know, but which in the Divine Mercy was not permitted them until they were removed from their natural scene of activity and life; let mysteries which must be given to the human understanding in order that the final and crowning Church of all churches may be established among men.

The first chapter, therefore, which follows that most beautiful introduction treats openly and directly of Marriages in Heaven. This is the subject and title of the chapter. It is shown to be according to the dictates of reason and Scripture that man lives a man after death, and a woman a woman; that there is no change whatever in their essential characteristics; that the distinction of sex is eternal; that the marriage union therefore continues to exist as before; and that, in fact, there is no heaven except in such a marriage; that an angelic man is a man and a woman united as one; that it is this united man which is conjoined with God; and that the solitary man and the solitarv woman can find no place in heaven.

And at the end of the chapter we are told what the Lord meant when He said to the Sadducees that "in the resurrection they neither marry, nor are given in marriage, but are as the angels of God in heaven." (Matthew xxii. 30.) This teaching in substance is, that marriage or the true conjugial is one with regeneration, which must take place during this life; that in the course of regeneration there is effected a union of a man and a woman, actual or potential; and that in this world or in the other, under the leadings of the Lord's merciful Providence, these two meet and dwell together forever, for they are "as the angels of God in heaven." But as such true conjugial unions could scarcely be effected in the sphere of the first Christian Church, it was necessary that the members of that Church, as well as those of the Jewish dispensation, should not know how it is with the angels of God in heaven. For the vile profanations of marriage which would have followed, would have made the establishment of a new Christian Church impossible.

The subject is continued in the second chapter, in which we are told of the State of Consorts after Death. Two consorts, who have lived together in the world, most commonly meet in the world of spirits,--which is intermediate between heaven and hell,--live together again, and continue so to live if it be possible;

but, as in that world the inmost love and inclination of every heart is made known, if consorts discover that there is no union of spirit, no inmost striving after eternal conjunction, they mutually separate, and each is united to another in whom is discoverable this inmost union and striving of spirit. This is true of all that enter into heaven; but of those who go into hell, no such union is predicated. No such union or inclination to union has been effected in the world by regeneration, and so none can be effected after death. Every such man, and such woman, lives in hell a solitary devil, and eternally strives against any union of spirit with another; the unions which are effected are but temporary; the man striving only for the pleasures of the flesh, the woman for dominion.

It is in this second chapter that the heavenly inspiring PROMISE is given, which should be imprinted in letters of fire on the mind of our youth: this, that eternal conjunction with one of the other sex is provided on earth "for those who from an early age have loved, and wished, and have asked of the Lord, a legitimate and lovely connection with one, and have scorned and shunned wandering lusts." (C. L. 49.)

In the third chapter the subject of the eternity of marriage is continued, but now Love truly Conjugial itself receives special treatment.

It is first shown that there is such a thing, but that "at this day it is so rare, that it is not known what it is, and scarcely that it is." It is next shown what is the origin of love truly conjugial; that its origin is spiritual; that its cause, source, and life is in heaven in the marriage of good and truth with the angels; that the marriage of good and truth descends from the place of its birth in heaven, opens the internal of the regenerating man, and, descending further into his natural, becomes there love truly conjugial, lifting him into the sphere and consociation of the angelic societies: that then this love brings the natural into correspondence with the spiritual, and there is effected the marriage of the Lord and the Church; for now is come the marriage supper of the Lamb, and His wife hath made herself ready. The Bride and Wife of the Lamb is the New Church, which is the New Jerusalem; and the Church is married to the Lamb, when the consorts in it,--each couple a united man,--are conjoined with the Lord, by which conjunction heaven is present and the Lord reigns.

We are afterwards told that "this love, from its origin and from its correspondence, is celestial. spiritual, holy, pure and clean, above every love which is from the Lord, with the angels of heaven, and with the men of the Church;" that it is "the fundamental love of all celestial, spiritual, and thence natural loves, that "into this love are gathered all joys and all delights from first to last;"

but that "no others come into this love, nor can be in it, except those who come to the Lord, and love the truths of the Church and do its goods;" and that "this love was the love of loves with the ancients, who lived in the golden, silver, and copper ages."

Then follows a series of six Relations, in which are described the heavens of all the past ages, from the Golden Age down to the present, and the state of conjugial love in each. After this comes the fourth chapter, which treats at length of the Origin of Conjugial Love from the Marriage of Good and Truth; and the fifth chapter is devoted to the subject of the Marriage of the Lord and the Church, and its Correspondence, closing with the teaching that "conjugial love is according to the state of the Church, because it is according to the state of wisdom, with man; and that because the Church is from the Lord, conjugial love is also from Him." It follows, therefore, that love truly conjugial can be preserved and restored only with those who acknowledge and worship the Lord in His Divine Human as the God of heaven and earth; and consequently that this can be effected in the New Church alone, which the Lord in His Second Coming is now establishing in the world; in which Church conjugial love is to be the love of loves, as it was in the ancient ages; for in this Church the idea of eternity will reign supreme, and the God of eternity supremely worshipped.

Now the opposite begins to appear, and the sixth chapter is devoted to the consideration of the Chaste and the non-Chaste. For the opposite must be removed, and in order that it may be removed, it must he known, and the Lord alone can make it known. Man can never know it from himself, or from the light of the world; and therefore in the work on Conjugial Love the Lord Himself reveals the opposite and enlightens the mind of the reader that he may see for himself and in himself the opposite, which is destructive of the conjugial, and seeing supplicate the Lord for help and power to resist; for it is a war he cannot wage from his own power and resources.

It is unnecessary to summarize further. The work on Conjugial Love is accessible to all. The Lord has caused it to be written in the Latin language, and English translations of it are in print. He who believes in the Lord in His Second Coming, and fails to read this work with prayer and fasting of spirit, does not do his whole duty as a spiritual man, and in the neglect there is danger of disaster to his spiritual faith and life.

The work has been given that it may be read, and studied, and meditated upon. He who does this will see in it eternity and the blessedness of eternal life;

for he will see in it the Lord God of eternity, in the attitude of Infinite Mercy to the misery and distress of fallen man; he will see in it eternal marriage with one of the other sex, as the goal of human life, the perfection of human existence, and the hope of the human race; he will see the world as it is, with love truly conjugial almost lost, with no knowledge of it as to what it is, and with scarcely any that it is; he will see that the love of one of the sex is a spiritual love, and--what is unknown in the world--that it is the chief thing that distinguishes man from animals; he will see and acknowledge in humility of heart that without the idea of eternity marriage is nothing but concubinage; he will see marriage within in the Church as the only hope for the permanent upbuilding of the New Church, and for the future existence of the human race; and he will see himself pictured in the mirror of Divine Truth, sharing the state of the Christian world, and will find himself praying to the Lord God of heaven and earth to preserve in him the precious spark, the very small remnant, of a chaste love of marriage, that he may not become as Sodom and like unto Gomorrah.

The doctrine of the eternity of marriage has been revealed, and the remnant of the conjugial still existing in the world is to be preserved, that the New Church may exist. And various means for its preservation are taught, both positive and negative.

The positive include the cultivation of all the graces of spiritual life, for the sake of which the Church has been organized, public worship inaugurated, and the priesthood established,--all involved in the command to teach men and lead them to the good of life by the truth of doctrine. The Writings are to be read by the individual; the Word is to be expounded as to its internal sense by the priest; the Lord in His Second Coming, revealing Himself in His Divine Human as the God of heaven and earth, is to be publicly and privately worshipped; the understanding of truth is to be cultivated and nourished by all the agencies it is possible for the Church to set in motion; schools and colleges for the education of the young in the Church are to be established, that the initiaments of the understanding may be inspired in the sphere of the Church, and that the understanding of truth may be fully formed in the mind of our youth, before they are sent forth to battle with the falsities and evils of human life, in the world. All the instrumentalities of New Church life are to be provided, organized, rendered active and effective, primarily that the conjugial may be preserved, and grow, and be established, as the fundamental of the life of heaven and the Church.

Nor must the negative means for the preservation of the conjugial be lost sight of or forgotten; for if they are, all the positive means and instrumentalities will be of no avail whatever.

First and foremost and fundamental among these, is the shunning of adultery, and all the forms of promiscuous fornication and whoredom as sins against God. Without this it is utterly impossible to preserve the conjugial, for it is the commission of these evils, and the cherishing of the lust of them under a hypocritical exterior, that has brought the Church to its consummation: and it is the same that renders the restoration of the conjugial impossible except by Divine help and power: except the Lord shorten the days of the consummation by executing the Last Judgment in the spiritual world; except the Lord reveal Himself in His Word as the God of heaven and earth, and establish a New Heaven and a New Church out of those who are willing to believe in Him, and follow Him by keeping the commandments of His Word.

There are also means of preservation that are neither positive nor negative, but intermediate. We are told that the love of the sex in general is :it first an intermediate love, neither good nor evil; but that it becomes good or evil in the degree that it is determined to one of the sex, or becomes roaming lust; and further, while it is still in this intermediate state, it may be ultimated, and yet remain intermediate, as being neither good nor evil, provided the ultimation be limited to one: and that in such cases the conjugial cannot otherwise be preserved, or would be defiled and jeopardized.

The teaching on this subject has been misunderstood or denied, not only in the Old but also in the New Church; and since it is a part of the Revelation which the Lord in His Second Coming has given to the New Church, it is necessary that it be set forth in clear light, and defended from the attacks that have been made upon it; for the defense of it is a defense of Revelation itself. To defend one of the modes by which the conjugial is preserved is to defend all, and thus it is a defense of the conjugial itself; and so the attack on this doctrine carries with it an assault upon the very life and existence of the Church.

This brings us to the subject of the following little work, now presented to the New Church public. Why has it been written? Why has a certain doctrine in the second part of the work on Conjugial Love been selected for special treatment, and so ably and vigorously defended? Why did it receive a prominent place in the annual address to the General Assembly of the General Church of the New Jerusalem in the year 1899? Why has the Academy of the New Church for years insisted upon the maintenance of this Doctrine? Sinister reasons have been given by those unfriendly to our cause and work; but we propose now to give the real reason.

It is a simple one. The doctrine in question is taught in the Writings of the New Church, and it has been attacked. This is our only apology. We are maintaining the authority of Divine Revelation, and we are defending the freedom of the individual in his understanding and application of it. We believe that this Doctrine has been given for the freedom and preservation of the conjugial, and we therefore believe that it is to be maintained for the freedom and preservation of the conjugial, and that therefore the freedom of individual judgment in the application of the Doctrine is to be defended and protected.

Whatever be the cost or sacrifice, it is necessary that the integrity of Divine Revelation be preserved, as well as the freedom of the individual to regulate his own life, according to his own judgment in the light of doctrine. The right of private judgment in matters of religion is assured to every citizen in free countries under the civil law. And the right and freedom of individual interpretation and application of doctrine must be preserved at all hazards in the New Church; and the resolutions of Councils, Boards, and Committees, are not to stand for individual conscience, or for the understanding of truth in the individual mind. This is all the more true, when the false and hypocritical standard of morals, existing in the world, is imported and by resolution of Council promulgated as the law of the New Church.

It is not only necessary that the conjugial be preserved for the existence of the New Church, but the truth concerning it must be preserved. This truth is in danger. The work on Conjugial Love is but little read, and the idea of the eternity of marriage is clear being rooted out, because of the open encouragement and practice of mixed marriages, a practice that is heinous and profane in the sight of heaven. And one of the modes pointed out by Divine Revelation, by which the conjugial may be preserved, is scorned and repudiated. It is time to speak out upon this subject, and that the speech be made in no uncertain tones.

The doctrine of the New Church is the Law for the New Church, and every point of that Law is to be defended and maintained. Not one jot or one tittle of the Law is to pass away or be destroyed, but all is to be preserved and fulfilled. He who denies one point of the Law denies all, even as he who sins against one commandment sins against all. A confirmed denial of one truth of the Law is, in spirit, a denial of all, and will become the actual denial of all, if grievous repentance do not follow.

It was our desire to let this subject rest, with the hope of a gradual growth of faith in Divine Revelation, with the hope of a gradual return to reason and common sense in the New Church.

But the enemies of our body will not allow the subject to rest, and they have also by their persistency disturbed the General Convention for several years. And therefore it has now became necessary for us to give the reasons for the faith that is in us.

Men sometimes write and speak better than they know; and the reverse of this proposition is also true, which is, that men often write and speak worse than they know. For the inspiration of all thought and speech is from the other world, and carries more than the medium of it is aware. It is so with the attacks made upon the doctrine in question. Those who do it are ignorant of what they are doing; they do not know that their hostile attack is inspired from a source in the other world where the Divine Truth is hated, where the enemies of the New Church swarm and gather, where the Dragon burns with wrath to destroy the New Church in its beginning.

The work which follows is now commended to the consideration of the reader.

W. F. PENDLETON.

[blank page]

The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem

Respecting

Fornication and Concubinage.

(From The Delights of Wisdom respecting Conjugial Love, after which follow the Pleasures of Insanity respecting Scortatory Love. By Emanuel Swedenborg, a Swede. NOS. 423-476.)

[blank page]

ETYMOLOGICAL NOTES.

For the better understanding of certain terms used in the following chapters from Conjugial Love, the etymological derivations of these terms are here presented.

ADULTERY, from the Latin ad, to, and alter, another: the sexual approach of a married person to another than the wedded partner with whom he or she is actually cohabiting.

FORNICATION; according to Webster's Dictionary this word is derived from the Latin fornix, meaning a vault, hence a brothel in an underground vault, as in ancient Rome. But fornix, itself, is derived from the Greek porne, a prostitute or courtesan, and this from the verb perao, to carry away for sale, the Greek courtesans being usually girls carried away by pirates and sold into slavery.

PELLICACY. This word cannot be found in any English Dictionary, but has been adopted by all the translators of Conjugial Love from the Latin pellicatus, meaning here the keeping of a mistress, pellex, (French maitresse C. L. 459; Swedish Frilla, S. D. 6054), by an unmarried man. The word pellex is used also for an Israelitish or Mohammedan concubine, (C. L. 342-377, A. E. 376, 654).

SCORTATORY, from the Latin scortum, meaning, I, a skin or hide; 2, loose, lewd woman, a whore. "Scortation" in the Writings of the New Church, means nothing else than whoredom, and "scortator," whore-monger, but since "whorish" is not a sufficiently strong and fitting adjective, "scortatory" is retained in its place.

The translation of the following chapters from Conjugial Love is that of the Boston Edition of 1833, with some revision by the Rev. E. S. Price and C. Th. Odhner.

[blank page]

CONCERNING THE OPPOSITION OF SCORTATORY LOVE AND CONJUGIAL LOVE.

423. At this threshold, it ought first to be disclosed, what is meant in this chapter by scortatory love. The fornicatory love which precedes marriage, is not meant; nor that which follows it after the death of a consort; nor concubinage which is engaged in from legitimate, just and serious causes; neither are the mild kinds of adultery meant, nor the grievous kinds of which man actually repents, for the latter do not become opposite, and the former are not opposite, to conjugial love; that they are not opposite, will be seen in the following pages, where each will be treated of. But by scortatory love opposite to conjugial love, is here meant the love of adultery, when it is such that it is not reputed as a sin, nor as a thing evil and dishonorable against reason, but as what is agreeable to reason; this scortatory love not only makes conjugial love the same with itself, but also ruins, destroys and at length nauseates it. In this chapter the opposition of this love to conjugial love is treated of; that no other is treated of, may be evident from what follows concerning fornication, concerning concubinage, and concerning the various kinds of adultery.

424. 1. THAT IT IS NOT KNOWN OF WHAT QUALITY SCORTATORY LOVE IS, UNLESS IT IS KNOWN OF WHAT QUALITY CONJUGIAL LOVE IS. By scortatory love is meant the love of adultery, which destroys conjugial love, as above, n. 423 That it is not known of what quality scortatory love is, unless it is known of what duality conjugial love is, it is not necessary to demonstrate, but only to illustrate by similitudes; as, for instance, who can know what is, evil and false, unless he knows what is good and true? And who knows what is unchaste, dishonorable, unbecoming, and unbeautiful, unless he knows what is chaste, honorable, becoming, and beautiful? And who can distinguish insanities but he that is wise, or that knows what wisdom is? Also, who can rightly perceive unharmonious and grating sounds, but he that by learning and study has imbibed harmonious numbers? In like manner, who can see clearly of what quality adultery is, unless he has seen clearly of what quality marriage is? And who can present to the judgment the filthiness of the pleasures of scortatory love, but he that has first presented to his judgment the cleanness of conjugial love? Now, because I have finished the Delights of Wisdom concerning Conjugial Love, from the intelligence thence acquired, I am able to describe the Pleasures concerning Scortatory Love.

425. II. THAT SCORTATORY LOVE IS OPPOSITE TO CONJUGIAL LOVE. There is not any thing in the universe which has not its opposite, and opposites are not things relative to each other, but they are contraries; relatives are between what is greatest and least of the same thing, but contraries are opposites, and the latter are relative to each other, as the former are to each other, wherefore also the relations themselves are opposite. That each and every thing has its opposite, is manifest from light, heat, the times of the world, affections, perceptions, sensations, and many other things. The opposite of light is darkness, the opposite of heat is cold, the opposites of the times of the world are day and night, summer and winter; the opposites of the affections are joys and sorrows, and states of gladness and of sadness; the opposites of the perceptions are goods and evils, and truths and falses, and the opposites of the sensations are things agreeable and things disagreeable. Hence in all evidence it may be concluded, that conjugial love has its opposite; that this is adultery, every one may see, if he will, from all the dictates of sound reason I tell, if you can, what else is its opposite. To this is added, that since sound reason, from its own light, could see this manifestly, therefore it has enacted laws, which are called civil laws of justice, in favor of marriages, and against adulteries.

In order that it may be still more distinctly manifest that they are opposites, it is permitted to relate, what I have frequently seen in the spiritual world: when those whet in the natural world, have been adulterers from confirmation, perceive the sphere of conjugial love flowing down out of heaven, immediately they either flee away into caverns and hide themselves, or, if they make themselves obstinate against it, are inflamed with rage, and become like furies. That this is so, is because all the agreeable and disagreeable things of the affections are there perceived, and sometimes as clearly as odor is perceived by the smell, for they have not a material body which absorbs such things. But that the opposition of scortatory love and conjugial love is not known by many in the natural world, is from the delights (jucundis) of the flesh, which apparently emulate the delights of conjugial love in the extremes, and they who are in pleasures only, do not know any thing about that opposition; and I can affirm that if you should say, that every thing has its opposite, and should conclude that conjugial love too has its opposite, the adulterers would answer, that that love has not an opposite, because scortatory love in no sense discriminates itself from it: from which also it is manifest, that he, who does not know of what quality conjugial love is, does not know of what quality scortatory love is;

and besides, that from scortatory love it is not known of what quality conjugial love is, but from the latter is known the quality of the former. No one knows from evil what is good, but from good he knows what is evil: for evil is in darkness, but good is in light.

426. III. THAT SCORTATORY LOVE IS OPPOSITE TO CONJUGIAL LOVE, AS THE NATURAL MAN, VIEWED IN HIMSELF, IS OPPOSITE TO THE SPIRITUAL MAN. That the natural man and the spiritual are opposite to each other, so far that the one wills not what the other wills, yea, that they combat each other, is known in the church, but still not as yet explained; what, therefore, discriminates the spiritual man and the natural, and excites the latter against the former, shall be told. The natural man is that into which every one, while he grows up, is at first introduced, which is done by means of sciences and knowledges and by the rational things of the understanding; but the spiritual man is that into which he is introduced by the love of doing uses, which love is also called charity; wherefore as far as any one is in charity, so far he is spiritual, but as far as he is not in it, so far he is natural, even if he should be quick-sighted in genius and wise in judgment. That the latter man, which is called natural, separated from the spiritual, however much he elevates himself into the light of reason, still gives himself up to lusts, and is employed about them, becomes manifest from his genius alone, in that he is destitute of charity and he that is destitute of this, is open to all the lasciviousness of scortatory love;

wherefore, when it is said to him, that this libidinous love is opposite to chaste conjugial love, and he is asked to consult his rational light, still he does not consult that light except in conjunction with the delight of the evil implanted by nativity in the natural man, from which he makes the conclusion, that his reason sees nothing against the sweet sensual allurements of his body, in which after he has confirmed himself, his reason is stupid as to all those sweet things which are predicated of conjugial love: yea, as was said above, he fights against them and conquers, and, as a conqueror after the overthrow, he destroys the stronghold of conjugial love with himself from the outmosts to the inmosts; these things the natural man does from his scortatory love. This is mentioned in order that it may be known whence is the opposition of these two loves; for, as has been shown before in many places, conjugial love, viewed in itself, is spiritual love, and scortatory love, viewed in itself, is natural love.

427. IV. THAT SCORTATORY LOVE IS OPPOSITE TO CONJUGIAL LOVE, AS THE WEDLOCK OF EVIL AND FALSITY IS OPPOSITE TO THE MARRIAGE OF GOOD AND TRUTH.

That the origin of conjugial love is from the marriage of good and truth, has been demonstrated above in its own chapter, from n. 83 to 102; thence it follows, that the origin of scortatory love is from the wedlock of evil and falsity, and that thence they are opposite, as evil is opposite to good, and the falsity of evil to the truth of good; there are the delights of each love, which thus are opposite, for love without its delights is not any thing. That these are thus opposite to each other, does not at all appear; that it does not appear, is because the delight of evil love in externals counterfeits the delight of good love; but in internals. the delight of evil love consists of mere concupiscences of evil; evil itself is a conglobated mass, or roll of these; but the delight of good love consists of innumerable affections of good; good itself is as it were a bundle of these united together: this bundle or that roll is not felt by man except as one delight, and because the delight of evil in externals counterfeits the delight of good, as was said, therefore also the delight of adultery appears as the delight of marriage; but after death, when every one lays aside externals, and internals are laid bare, then it is manifest to the sense, that the evil of adultery is a roll of the concupiscences of evil, and that the good of marriage is a bundle of the affections of good: thus that they are altogether opposite to each other.

428. As regards the wedlock itself of what is evil and false, be it known, that evil loves falsity, and wills that it should be one with itself, and they also conjoin themselves; in like manner as good loves truth and wills that it should be one with itself, and they also conjoin themselves; from which it is manifest, that as the spiritual origin of marriage is the marriage of good and truth, so the spiritual origin of adultery is the wedlock of evil and falsity; thence it is, that this wedlock, in the spiritual sense of the Word is understood by adulteries, whoredoms and fornication; see THE APOCALYPSE REVEALED, n. 134. It is from this principle that he that is in falsity and takes evil into a partnership of his bed-chamber, from the joint covenant confirms adultery, and commits it as far as he dares and is able; he confirms it from evil by means of falsity, and commits it from falsity by means of the evil; and also, on the other hand, that he that is in good and marries truth, or he that is in truth and takes good into a partnership of the bed-chamber with himself, confirms himself against adultery and in favor of marriage, and embraces a blessed conjugial life.

429. V. THAT THENCE SCORTATORY LOVE IS OPPOSITE TO CONJUGIAL LOVE, AS HELL TS OPPOSITE TO HEAVEN.

All who are in hell, are in the wedlock of evil and falsity, and all who are in heaven, are in the marriage of good and truth, and because the wedlock of evil and falsity is also adultery, as has just been shown above, n. 427, 428, hell is also adultery; thence it is, that all there are in the lust, lasciviousness, and shamelessness of scortatory love, and shun and exceedingly dread the chaste and modest things of conjugial love; see above, n. 428. From these things it may be seen, that those two loves, the scortatory and the conjugial, are opposite to each other, as hell is to heaven, and heaven to hell.

430 VI. THAT THE UNCLEANNESS OF HELL IS FROM SCORTATORY LOVE, AND THAT THE CLEANNESS OF HEAVEN IS FROM CONJUGIAL LOVE. All hell abounds in uncleanness, and the universal origin of this is impure and obscene scortatory love; into such uncleanness the delights of this love are turned. Who can believe that all delight of love is presented, in the spiritual world, under various appearances so as to be seen, under various odors so as to be perceived, and under various forms of beasts and birds so as to be viewed? The appearances, under which the lascivious delights of scortatory love in hell are presented to be seen, are dung and mire; the odors there, by which they are presented to be perceived, are foul odors and stenches; and the forms of beasts and birds, under which they are there presented to be viewed, are swine, serpents, and birds called ochim and tziim.

But the reverse is the case with the chaste delights of conjugial love in heaven: the appearances, under which those are seen there, are gardens and flowery fields; the odors, by which they are there presented to be perceived, are perfumes from fruits, and fragrances from flowers; and the forms of animals, under which the are there presented to view, are lambs, kids, turtle-doves, and birds of paradise. That the delights of loves are turned into such and similar things, is because all things which exist in the spiritual world are correspondences; into these the internals of their minds are turned when they pass forth and become external before the senses. But it should be known, that there are innumerable varieties of uncleanness, into which the lasciviousness of scortations are turned when they go off into their correspondences; and the varieties are according to the genera and species of those lascivious things, which may be seen in the following pages, where adulteries and their degrees are treated of; such uncleanness, however, does not come forth from the delights of the love of those who have repented, because they have been washed from them in the world.

431. VII. THAT IT IS SIMILAR IN RESPECT TO THE UNCLEANNESS IN THE CHURCH, AND THE CLEANNESS THERE. The reason is, because the church is the kingdom of the Lord on earth, corresponding to his kingdom in the heavens, and the Lord also conjoins them, that they may make one;

He also distinguishes those who are therein as He distinguishes heaven and hell. and He distinguishes according to the loves: those who are in the impure and obscene delights of scortatory love, associate to themselves like ones from hell: but those who are in the pure and chaste delights of conjugial love, are by the Lord associated to like angels from heaven: these their angels, while with man they stand near adulterers from what is confirmed and purposed, perceive those stinking things spoken of above, n. 430, and recede a little. On account of the correspondence of filthy loves with dung and mire, it was commanded the sons of Israel, "That they should carry with them a paddle, with which they should cover their excrement, lest Jehovah God, walking in the midst of their camp, should see the nakedness of the thing, and should return." Deut. xxlii. 14, 15, this was commanded, because the camp of the sons of Israel represented the church, and those unclean things corresponded to the lascivious things of scortations; and by Jehovah God walking in the midst of their camp, was signified his presence with the angels; that they should cover, was because all those places in hell, where troops of such ones live, are covered and shut up; wherefore also it is said, lest He see the nakedness of the thing. That all places in hell are shut up, it has been given to see, and also that, when they were opened, which took place when a new demon entered, such a grievous smell was thence exhaled, that it infested my belly with heaviness; and, what is wonderful, those stenches are to them as agreeable as dung is to swine. From these things it is manifest, how it is to be understood, that the uncleanness in the church is from scortatory love, and that the cleanness there is from conjugial love.

432. VIII. THAT SCORTATORY LOVE MORE AND MORE MAKES A HUMAN BEING NOT HUMAN, AND A MAN NOT A MAN; AND THAT CONJUGIAL LOVE MAKES A HUMAN BEING MORE AND MORE HUMAN AND MAN. That conjugial love makes a man human is illustrated and confirmed by each and everything which in the first part, concerning love and the delights of its wisdom, has been demonstrated in the light before the reason, as, 1. That he that is in love truly conjugial, becomes more and more spiritual, and the more any one is spiritual the more he is man. 2. That he becomes more and more wise, and the more any one is wise, the more he is man. 3. That with him the interiors of the mind are more and more opened, so far that he sees or intuitively acknowledges the Lord and the more any one is in that sight or in that acknowledgment, the more he is man.

4. That he becomes more and more moral and civil, because a spiritual soul is in his morality and civility, and the more any one is morally civil, the more he is man. 5. That after death he also becomes an angel of heaven, and an angel is in essence and form human, and the genuine human in his face also shines forth from his speech and from his manners; and from these things it is evident, that conjugial love makes man more and more man. That the contrary is the case with adulterers, follows as evinced from the very opposition of adultery and marriage, of which it has been treated and is treated in this chapter, as, 1. That they are not spiritual, but in the highest degree natural; and the natural man, separated from the spiritual, is human only as to the understanding, but not as to the will; the latter he immerses in the body and the concupiscences of the flesh, and at those times the understanding also accompanies it; that such a one is only half a man, he himself can see from the reason of his understanding, if he elevates it. 2. That adulterers are not wise, except in their speech, and also in their gestures, when they are in company with those who are eminent in dignity, with those renowned for erudition, and with those of good morals, but that, when alone with themselves, they are insane, by holding of no account the divine and holy things of the church, and by defiling the moral things of life with things impure and unchaste, will be evinced in the chapter concerning adulteries.

Who does not see that such gesticulators are human only as to the external figure, and as to the internal form not human? 3. That adulterers become less and less human, my own ocular experience, from having seen them in hell, has served me for evident confirmation; for there they are demons, and, when they appear in the light of heaven, their faces are as pustules, their bodies as it were hunched, their speech is rough, and their gestures antic. But it should be known, that such are adulterers from what is purposed and from what is confirmed, but not adulterers from what is not deliberate: for there are four kinds, of adulterers, of whom in the chapter concerning adulteries and their degrees. Adulterers from what is purposed, are those who are so from lust of the will; adulterers from what is confirmed, are those who are so from persuasion of the understanding; adulterers from what is deliberate, are those who are so from the enticements of the senses; and adulterers from what is not deliberate, are those who are not in the faculty, or not in the liberty, of consulting the understanding. The two former kinds of adulterers are those who become more and more not men; but the two latter kinds become men, according as they recede from those errors, and are afterwards wise.

433. That conjugial love makes a human being more a man, the things which were adduced in the preceding part concerning conjugial love and its delights, also illustrate, which are,

I. That the faculty and ability, which is called virile, accompanies wisdom according as the latter is animated from the spiritual things of the church, and that thence it is in conjugial love; and that wisdom opens the vein of this love from its fountain in the soul, and thus invigorates, and also blesses with perpetuity, the intellectual life, which is masculine life itself. 2. That thence it is, that the angels of heaven are in this ability to eternity, according to their own declarations, in the RELATION, n. 355, 356: that the most ancient people, in the golden and silver ages, were also in lasting efficacy, because they loved the caresses of their wives, and greatly dreaded the caresses of harlots, I have heard from their own mouths; see the RELATIONS, n. 75, 76. That this spiritual sufficiency is also in the natural, and will not be wanting to those at this day who come to the Lord, and abominate adulteries as infernal, has been told me from heaven. But the contrary happens to adulterers from what is purposed, and to adulterers from what is confirmed, of whom just above, n. 432, at the end; that with these the faculty and ability which is called virile is diminished in vigor even until it is none, and after this, cold towards the sex commences, and that after that there follows a kind of disgust which tends to loathing, is known, although little published:

that such are those adulterers in hell, I have heard, at a distance, from the sirens, who are obsolete lusts of venery, and also from the whore-mongers there. From these things it is clear, that scortatory love makes a human being less and less human and unmanly; and that conjugial love makes man more and more human and a man.

434. IX. THAT THERE IS A SPHERE OF SCORTATORY LOVE, AND A SPHERE OF CONJUGIAL LOVE. What is meant by spheres, and that they are manifold, and that those which are of love and wisdom proceed from the Lord, and descend through the angelic heavens into the world, and pervade it even to its ultimates, has been shown above, n. 222 to 226, and n. 386 to 397. That there is not any thing in the universe, that has not its opposite, may be seen above, n. 425; from this it follows, that because there is a sphere of conjugial love, there is also a sphere opposite to it, which is called the sphere of scortatory love; for those spheres are opposite to each other, as the love of adultery is opposite to the love of marriage; concerning which opposition it has been treated in the preceding parts of this chapter.

435. X. THAT THE SPHERE OF SCORTATORY LOVE ASCENDS FROM HELL, AND THAT THE SPHERE OF CONJUGIAL LOVE DESCENDS FROM HEAVEN.

That the sphere of conjugial love descends from heaven, was shown in the places cited above, n. 434; but that the sphere of scortatory love ascends from hell, is because this love is thence, n. 429. This sphere ascends thence from the unclean things, into which the delights of adultery of those who are there of each sex are turned; concerning which the delights of adultery of those who are there of each sex are turned; concerning which se above, n. 430, 431.

436. XI. THAT THOSE TWO SPHERES MEET EACH OTHER IN EACH WORLD, BUT DO NOT CONJOIN THEMSELVES. By each world is meant the spiritual world and the natural world; in the spiritual world those spheres meet each other in the world of spirits, because this is mediate between heaven and hell; but in the natural world they meet each other in the rational plane with man, which also is mediate between heaven and hell; for there flows into it from above the marriage of good and truth, and there flows into it from below the marriage of evil and falsity; the latter flows in through the world, but the former through heaven. Thence it is, that the human rational can turn itself to which side it pleases, and receive the influx; if to good, it receives it from above, and then the rational of that man is formed more and more for the reception of heaven; but if it turns itself to evil, it receives that influx from below, and then his rational is formed more and more for the reception of hell.

That those two spheres do not conjoin themselves, is because they are opposite, and opposites act upon opposites no otherwise than as enemies, one of whom, burning with deadly hatred, attacks the other from fury, but the other is in no hatred, but only in the zeal of defending himself; from which things it is manifest, that those two spheres only meet each other, but do not conjoin themselves. The middle space which they form, is on the one part from evil not of falsity, and from falsity not of evil, and on the other part from good not of truth, and from truth not of good, which two may indeed touch each other, but still cannot conjoin themselves.

437. XII. THAT BETWEEN THOSE TWO SPHERES THERE IS AN EQUILIBRIUM, AND THAT MAN IS IN IT. The equilibrium between them is a spiritual equilibrium, because it is between good and evil, and from this equilibrium man has free agency; in this, and by means of this, man thinks and wills, and thence speaks and acts, as from himself. His rational is in the option and election whether it will receive good, or whether it will receive evil, and therefore whether he will rationally from freedom dispose himself to conjugial love, or whether he will rationally from freedom dispose himself to scortatory love; if to the latter, he turns the hinder part of the head, and the back, to the Lord;

if to the former, he turns the forehead and breast to the Lord; if to the Lord, his rationality and liberty are led by Him; but if backwards from the Lord, his rationality and liberty are led by hell. 

438. XIII. THAT MAN CAN TURN HIMSELF TO WHICH SPHERE HE PLEASES, BUT THAT AS FAR AS HE TURNS HIMSELF TO THE ONE, SO FAR HE TURNS HIMSELF AWAY FROM THE OTHER. Man was created, that he may do what he does from freedom according to reason, and altogether as from himself: without these two, he would not be man, but a beast; for he would not receive any thing inflowing from heaven to himself, and appropriate it to himself as his own, and thence it would not be possible that any thing of eternal life should be inscribed on him; for this must be inscribed on him as his, in order that it may be his own; and because there is not any thing free towards the one side, unless there be also the like towards the other, as there is no weighing, unless the scales, from an equilibrium, can preponderate on either side; thus also unless man has freedom from reason to accede also to evil, thus from the right to the left, and from the left to the right, in like manner to the infernal sphere, which is the sphere of adultery, as to the heavenly sphere, which is that of marriage.

439. XIV. THAT EACH SPHERE BRINGS WITH DELIGHTS; that is to say, that as well the sphere of scortatory love, which ascends from hell, as the sphere of conjugial love, which descends from heaven, affects the recipient man with delights;

the reason is, because the ultimate plane, in which the delights of each love terminate, and where they fill and complete themselves, and which presents them in their sense, is the same. Thence it is, that scortatory caresses and conjugial caresses are perceived alike in ultimates, although they are altogether unlike in internals; that thence they are unlike in ultimates, is not judged of from any sense of the difference; for none but those who are in love truly conjugial, are sensible of the dissimilitudes from the differences in the ultimates; for evil is known by good, but not good by evil, as a sweet odor is not perceived by the nostril, when a foul odor inheres in it. I have heard from the angels, that they distinguish, in the ultimates, the lascivious from what is not lascivious, as any one distinguishes the fire of burnt dung or horn by its bad smell, from the fire of burnt aromatics or of cinnamon-wood by their sweet smell; and that this is from the difference of the internal delights which enter the external, and compose them.

440. XV. THAT THE DELIGHTS OF SCORTATORY LOVE COMMENCE FROM THE FLESH, AND THAT THEY ARE OF THE FLESH EVEN IN THE SPIRIT; BUT THAT THE DELIGHTS OF CONJUGIAL LOVE COMMENCE IN THE SPIRIT, AND THAT THEY ARE OF THE SPIRIT EVEN IN THE FLESH.

That the delights of scortatory love commence from the flesh, is because the stimulant heats of the flesh are the beginnings of them. That they infect the spirit, and that they are of the flesh even in the spirit, is because not the flesh but the spirit feels the things which happen in the flesh; with this sense the case is similar as with the rest, as that the eye does not see and distinguish the various things in objects, but the spirit; and that the ear does not hear and distinguish the harmonies of tunes in singing, and the concordances of the articulation of sounds in discourse, but the spirit; and the spirit feels every thing according to its elevation into wisdom; the spirit which is not elevated above the sensual things of the body, and thus adheres to them, feels no other delights than those which flow in from the flesh, and which flow in from the world through the senses of the body; these it seizes upon, with these it is delighted, and makes them its own. Now, because the beginnings of scortatory love are only the stimulant heats and itchings of the flesh, it is manifest, that these in the spirit are filthy allurements, and as they ascend and descend, and reciprocate themselves, so they excite and inflame. In general, the cupidities of the flesh, viewed in themselves, are nothing else than conglomerated concupiscences of evil and false;

thence is this truth in the church, that the flesh lusts against the spirit, that is, against the spiritual man; wherefore it follows, that the delights of the flesh, as to the delights of scortatory love, are nothing but effervescences of lust, which in the spirit become springs of impurities.

441. But the delights of conjugial love have nothing in common with the foul delights of scortatory love; the latter are indeed in the flesh of every human being, but they are separated and removed, according as the spirit of man is elevated above the sensual things of the body, and from a height sees their appearances and fallacies beneath; in like manner he then perceives the fleshly delights, at first as apparent and fallacious delights, and afterwards as libidinous and lascivious ones, which are to be shunned, and gradually as detrimental and injurious to the soul, and at length he feels them as disagreeable, filthy, and exceedingly nauseating; and in the degree that he thus perceives and feels those delights, in the same degree also he perceives the delights of conjugial love as innocent and chaste, and at length as delicious and blessed. That the delights of conjugial love become also of the spirit in the flesh, is because, after the delights of scortatory love are removed, as was said just above, the spirit, released from them, enters chaste into the body, and fills the breasts with the delights of its own blessedness, and from the breasts the ultimates also of that love in the body;

thence the spirit acts with these, and these with the spirit, afterwards in full communion.

442. XVI. THAT THE DELIGHTS OF SCORTATORY LOVE ARE PLEASURES OF INSANITY, BUT THAT THE DELIGHTS OF CONJUGIAL LOVE ARE DELIGHTS OF WISDOM. That the delights of scortatory love are pleasures of insanity, is because no others than natural men are in that love, and the natural man is insane in spiritual things, for he is against them, and therefore embraces only natural, sensual and corporeal delights. It is said that he embraces natural, sensual and corporeal delights, because the natural is distinguished into three degrees; natural in the highest degree are those who, from rational sight, recognize insanities, and still are home along by the delights of them, as boats are by the stream of a river; natural in a lower degree are those who see and judge only from the senses of the body, and despise, and reject as of no value, things rational which are contrary to appearances and fallacies; natural in the lowest degree are those who, without judgment, are borne along by the alluring heats of their body; the latter are they who are called natural corporeal, the former natural sensual, but the first natural. Scortatory love, its insanities and pleasures, with them, are similarly graduated.

443. That the delights of conjugial love are delights of wisdom, is because no other than spiritual men are in that love, and the spiritual man is in wisdom; and thence he embraces no other delights than those which agree with spiritual wisdom. Of what quality the delights of scortatory love are, and of what quality those of conjugial love, may be elucidated by a comparison with houses; the delights of scortatory love may be compared to a house whose walls glitter from without as shell-fish, or as the specular stones of the spurious color of gold called selenites, but in the apartments within the walls are filth and rubbish of every kind; but the delights of conjugial love may be likened to a house whose walls shine as with the finest gold, and the apartments within are splendid, filled, as it were, with jewels of various degrees of value.

CONCERNING FORNICATION

444a. By fornication is meant the lust of a youth or of a young man with a courtesan before marriage; but lust with a woman who is not a courtesan, that is, with a virgin or with the wife of another, is not fornication, but with a virgin it is seduction, and with the wife of another it is adultery. In what respect these two differ from fornication, cannot be seen by any rational person, unless he sees clearly the love of the sex in its degrees and diversities, and on the one part its chaste things, and on the other its unchaste, and divides each part into genera and into species, and thus distinguishes; otherwise the distinction between what is more and less chaste, and between what is more and less unchaste, cannot be prominent in the idea of any one, and without these distinctions all relation perishes, and, with it, perspicacity in matters of judgment, and the understanding is involved in such shade, that it knows not how to discriminate fornication from adultery, and still less the mild kinds of fornication from its grievous ones, and those of adultery in like manner; thus it mixes evils, and from diverse evils makes one pottage, and from diverse goods one paste.

In order, therefore, that the love of the sex may be distinctly known as to that part in which it inclines and progresses to scortatory love altogether opposite to conjugial love, it is expedient, that the beginning of it, which is fornication, should be surveyed

445. I. THAT FORNICATION IS OF THE LOVE OF THE SEX. It is said that fornication is of the love of the sea, because fornication is not the love of the sex, but is from it. The love of the sex is as a fountain, from which both conjugial love and scortatory love may be derived, and they may be derived through fornication, and they may be derived without it; for the love of the sex is in every man, and it either puts itself forth, or does not put itself forth; if, before marriage, it puts itself forth with a courtesan, it is called fornication; if not until with a wife, it is called marriage; if, after marriage, with another woman, it is called adultery; wherefore, as was said, the love of the sex is as a fountain, from which as well chaste love as unchaste love may stream forth; but with what caution and prudence chaste conjugial love can proceed through fornication, and from what imprudence unchaste or scortatory love proceeds through it, will be opened in what follows. Who can make this conclusion, that one who has committed fornication cannot be more chaste in marriage?

446. II. THAT THE LOVE OF THE SEX, FROM WHICH IS FORNICATION, COMMENCES WHEN A YOUTH BEGINS TO THINK AND ACT FROM HIS OWN UNDERSTANDING, AND THE VOICE OF HIS SPEECH BEGINS TO BECOME MASCULINE.

This is adduced to the rise of the love of the sex, and thence of fornication, may be known; that is, when the understanding begins of itself to become rational, or from its own reason to see clearly and look out for such things as are for emolument and use, for which, then, that which is in the memory from parents and masters, serves for a plane. There takes place at that time a turning in the mind; before, he thought only from the things brought into the memory, by meditating upon and obeying them; afterwards, from reason exercised upon them; and then, love leading, he disposes the things residing in the memory into a new order, and in agreement with this order he arranges his proper life, and thinks successively more and more according to his own reason, and wills from his own freedom. That the love of the sex follows the commencement of man's own understanding and progresses according to its vigor, is known; an indication that that love ascends as the understanding ascends, and that it descends as the understanding descends; by ascending is meant into wisdom, and by descending is meant into insanity; and it is wisdom to restrain the love of the sex, and it is insanity to let it forth into wide extent; if it be let forth into fornication, which is the beginning of its activity, this ought to be moderated from the principles of honor and morality implanted into the memory and thence in the reason, and afterwards to be implanted in the reason and thence in the memory.

That, together with the commencement of man's own understanding, the voice also begins to become masculine, is because the understanding thinks, and, by means of thought, speaks; an indication that understanding makes the man, and also his masculinity; consequently, that as his understanding is elevated, so he becomes human, and also a many man; see above, n. 433, 434.

447. III. THAT FORNICATION IS OF THE NATURAL MAN, in like manner as is the love of the sex, which, if it becomes active before marriage, is called fornication. Every man is born corporeal, becomes sensual, then natural, and successively rational, and if he does not then stop, he becomes spiritual; the cause that he thus progresses, is in order that planes may be formed, on which the higher things may rest, as a palace upon its foundations; the ultimate plane with the things built thereon, may also be likened to ground in which, when prepared, noble seeds are implanted. As concerns the love of the sex specifically, it also is at first corporeal, for it commences from the flesh; next it becomes sensual, for from its general nature the five senses receive delight;

afterwards it becomes natural similar to the same love with animals, because it is a roaming love of the sex; but because man was born that he may become spiritual, it afterwards becomes natural rational, and from natural rational, spiritual, and at length spiritual natural; and then that love, having become spiritual, flows into and acts upon rational love, and through this into and upon sensual love, and through this at length into and upon that love in the body and the flesh; and because the latter is its ultimate plane, it acts upon it spiritually, and at the same time rationally and sensually; and it flows in and acts thus successively, while man is in meditation upon it, but simultaneously, while he is in the ultimate. That fornication is of the natural man, is because it proximately proceeds from the natural love of the sex; and it may exist natural rational, but not spiritual because the love of the sex cannot become spiritual before it becomes conjugial; and the love of the sex from natural becomes spiritual, when man recedes from roaming lust, and devotes himself to one, to whose soul he unites his own soul.

448. IV. THAT FORNICATION IS LUST, BUT NOT THE LUST OF ADULTERY. The reasons that fornication is lust are, 1. Because it comes forth from the natural man, and, in all that comes forth from that man, there is concupiscence and lust; for the natural man is nothing but an abode and receptacle of concupiscences and lusts, for all the evil propensities inherited from parents reside there.

2. Because the fornicator looks roamingly and promiscuously to the sex, and not as yet to one of the sex, and, as long as he is in that state, lust excites him to do what he does; but according as he looks to one, and loves to conjoin his life with her life, concupiscence becomes chaste affection, and lust becomes human love.

449. That the lust of fornication is trot the lust of adultery, every one sees clearly from common perception; what law, and what judge, imputes to a fornicator like criminality as to an adulterer? The reason why this is seen from common perception, is, that fornication is not opposite to conjugial love, as adultery is; conjugial love may be inwardly stored up in fornication, as the spiritual may be in the natural; yea, the spiritual is also actually evolved from the natural, and when the spiritual is evolved, then the natural encompasses it as bark does wood, and as a sheath the sword, and also serves the spiritual as a defence against violences. From these things it is manifest, that natural love, which is love to the sex, precedes spiritual love, which is love to one of the sex; but if fornication comes forth from the natural love of the sex, it may also be wiped away, provided conjugial love is regarded, wished for, and sought, as the principal good.

Altogether otherwise is it with the libidinous and obscene love of adultery; that this is opposite to conjugial love, in the preceding chapter concerning the opposition of scortatory love and conjugial love; wherefore it an adulterer from purpose, or from what is confirmed, for various reasons enters the conjugial bed, the case is inverted, the natural with its lascivious and obscene things lies hid without. From these things reason may see, that the lust of limited fornication is, in respect to the lust of adultery, as the first lukewarmness is to the cold of mid-winter in the northern regions.

450. V. THAT THE LOVE OF THE SEX, WITH SOME, CANNOT WITHOUT INJURY BE TOTALLY RESTRAINED FROM GOING FORTH INTO FORNICATION. It is unnecessary to recount the injuries, which too great restraint of the love of the sex may cause and operate with those who, from superabundance, labor under venereal excitement; from this source, with such persons, are the origins of certain diseases of the body, and disorders of the mind, not to speak of secret evils, which are not to be named. It is otherwise with those who have so scanty a love of the sex, that they are able to resist the efforts of its lust; equally so with those who are at liberty to introduce themselves into the legitimate partnership of the bed, in youthful age, without consumption of their worldly fortunes, thus at the first favoring omens.

Since this is the case in heaven with infants, when they have grown up to the conjugial age, it is not known there what fornication is; but it is different on earth, where matrimonies cannot be contracted until after the period of youth is completed, which is the case with many who live in countries where positions can be obtained only by long service, and the means for supporting a house and family must be acquired before a worthy wife can be courted.

451. VI. THAT THEREFORE IN POPULOUS CITIES BROTHELS ARE TOLERATED. This is adduced as a confirmation of the preceding article. It is known that they are tolerated by kings, magistrates, and thence by judges, the police, and the people, at London, Amsterdam, Paris, Vienna, Venice, Naples, and also at Rome, besides many other places; among the causes, for which they are tolerated, are those also mentioned above.

452. VII. THAT FORNICATION IS LIGHT, SO FAR AS IT LOOKS TO CONJUGIAL LOVE, AND PREFERS IT. There are degrees of the qualities of evil, as there are degrees of the qualities of good; wherefore every evil is lighter and more grievous, as every good is better and more excellent. The case is similar with fornication, which, because it is lust, and the lust of the natural man not yet purified, is an evil; but because every man is capable of being purified, therefore, as far as he approaches a purified state, so far that evil becomes a lighter evil, for so far it is wiped away:

thus as far as fornication approaches conjugial love, which is purified state of the love of the sex; that the evil of fornication is more grievous, so far as it approaches the love of adultery, will be seen in the subsequent article. That fornication is light, so far as the man looks to conjugial love, is because then, from the unchaste state in which he is, he looks to a chaste state; and as far as he prefers this, so far also he is in it as to the understanding; and as far as he not only prefers it, but also loves it better, so far he is in it also as to the will, thus as to the internal man; and then fornication, if he nevertheless continues in it, is to him a necessity, the causes of which have been explored by him. There are two reasons which render fornication light with those who prefer and love better the conjugial state; the first is, that to them a conjugial life is the purpose, intention or end: the other is, that they separate evil with themselves from good. As regards THE FIRST, that to them a conjugial life is the purpose, intention or end, this is so because man is such a man as he is in his purpose, intention or end, and such he is also before the Lord and before angels, yea, such also is he regarded before the wise in the world; for the intention is the soul of all action, and in the world makes his guilt or guiltlessness, and after death imputation.

As to THE OTHER, that those who prefer conjugial love to the lust of fornication, separate evil from good, thus the unchaste from the chaste; and they who separate these two in perception and intention, before as yet they are in the good or the chaste, are also separated and purified from the evil of that lust when they come into a conjugial state. That the case is not thus with those who in fornication look to adultery, will be seen in the article now following.

453 VIII. THAT THE LUST OF FORNICATING IS GRIEVOUS, SO FAR AS IT LOOKS TO ADULTERY. All who are in the lust of fornication look to adultery, when they do not believe adulteries to be sins, and think of marriages the same as they think of adulteries, with the sole difference that marriage is according to law and adultery unlawful; these also make of all evils one evil, and mix them together, as filth with eatable food in one dish, and as rubbish with wine in one cup, and thus eat and drink; they do in like manner with the love of the sex, with fornication, with pellicacy, with adultery milder, grievous and more grievous, yea, with ravishing or defloration; moreover, they not only commix all those things, but also mix them in with marriages, and pollute these with a like notion; but those who do not even discriminate the latter from the former, after roaming intercourse with the sex, are overtaken with cold, disgust and loathing, at first for the consort, then for the others, and at length for the sex.

That with them there is not the purpose, intention or end of what is good or chaste, to exculpate them, nor a separation of evil from good, or of what is unchaste from what is chaste, that they may be purified, as is the case with those who, from fornication, look to conjugial love, and prefer, it, concerning whom in the preceding article, n. 452, is manifest of itself. It is permitted to confirm these things by this news from heaven: I have met with many who in the world had lived like others in externals, clothing themselves splendidly, feasting sumptuously, trading with borrowed money as others, seeing stage-plays, joking upon amatory matters as if from lust, besides other like things, and yet the angels charged those things upon some as evils of sin, and upon others as not evils, and the latter they declared innocent, but the former guilty. To the question, why they did so, when yet those persons had done things alike, they answered, that they regard all from the purpose, intention or end, and distinguish according to them, and that, therefore, those whom the end excuses or condemns, they excuse or condemn, since all in heaven have the end of good, and all in hell the end of evil; and that this, and nothing else, is meant by the words of the Lord, Judge not, that ye be not condemned. (Matt. vii. 1.)

454. IX. THAT THE LUST OF FORNICATING IS MORE GRIEVOUS, AS IT VERGES TOWARDS THE DESIRE OF VARIETIES, AND TOWARDS THE DESIRE OF DEFLORATION. The reason is that these two are accessories of adultery, thus aggravating it: for there are adulteries mild, grievous, and more grievous, and each is estimated according to its opposition to, and thence destruction of, conjugial love. That the desire of varieties and the desire of defloration strengthened by actualities, lay waste conjugial love, and drown it as it were in the bottom of the sea, will be seen in the chapters concerning them, which follow.

455. X. THAT THE SPHERE OF THE LUST OF FORNICATING, SUCH AS IT IS IN ITS BEGINNING, IS MEDIATE BETWEEN THE SPHERE OF SCORTATORY LOVE AND THE SPHERE OF CONJUGIAL LOVE, AND MAKES THE EQUILIBRIUM. Concerning the two spheres, of scortatory love and of conjugial love, it was treated in the former chapter, where it is shown that the sphere of scortatory love ascends from hell, and that the sphere of conjugial love descends from heaven, n. 435: that those two spheres meet each other in each world, but do not conjoin themselves, n. 436: that between those two spheres there is an equilibrium, and that man is in it, n. 437: that man can turn himself to which sphere he likes, but that so far as he turns himself to the one, so far he turns himself away from the other, n. 438:

what is meant by spheres, n. 434, and from the passages there cited. That the sphere of the lust of fornicating is mediate between those two spheres, and makes the equilibrium, is because, while any one is in it, he can turn himself to the sphere of conjugial love, that is, to this love, and also to the sphere of the love of adultery, that is, to the love of adultery; but if to conjugial love, he turns himself to heaven; if to the love of adultery, he turns himself to hell; each is in the free determination, good pleasure and will of man, to the end that he may act freely according to reason, and not from instinct, and therefore in order that he may be man and appropriate to himself influx, and not a beast, which appropriates nothing of it to itself. It is said, lust of fornication such as it is in its beginning, because then it is in a middle state: who does not know, that whatever man does in the beginning is from concupiscence, because from the natural man? And who does not know, that that concupiscence is not imputed, while from natural he is becoming spiritual? The case is similar with the lust of fornication, while the love of man is becoming conjugial.

456. XI. THAT CARE IS TO BE TAKEN, LEST CONJUGIAL LOVE, BY IMMODERATE AND INORDINATE FORNICATIONS, DE DESTROYED. BY immoderate and inordinate fornications, by which conjugial love is destroyed, are meant the fornications by which not only the strength is enervated, but also all the delicate sensations of conjugial love are taken away;

for from unbridled license in them, there arise not only infirmities and thence want of potency, but also uncleannesses and obscenities, in consequence of which conjugial love cannot be perceived and felt in its cleanness and chastity, and thus neither in its sweetness and in the delights of its flower: not to speak of the detriments of the body and mind, or of the unpermitted allurements, which not only deprive conjugial love of its blessed enjoyments, but even take it away, and turn it into cold, and thus into disgust. Such fornications are excesses by which conjugial sports are turned into tragic scenes: for immoderate and inordinate fornications are as burning fires, which rise out of the ultimates, and consume the body, parch the fibres, defile the blood, and vitiate the rationality of the mind; for they burst forth as fire bursts forth from the foundation into the house, and consumes the whole. That this may not happen, care is to be taken by parents, because a youth not fully grown, being highly excited with lust, cannot as yet from reason impose restraint upon himself.

457. XII. INASMUCH AS THE CONJUGIAL OF ONE MAN WITH ONE WIFE IS THE JEWEL OF HUMAN LIFE, AND THE REPOSITORY OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION.

These two things are what have been demonstrated, universally and particularly, in the whole preceding part concerning conjugial love and the delights of its wisdom. That it is the jewel of human life, is because the life of man is such as that love is with him, for it makes the inmost of his life; for it is the life of wisdom cohabiting with its love, and of love cohabiting with its wisdom, and thence it is the life of the delights of both; in a word, man is a living soul by means of that love; thence it is, that the conjugial of one man with one wife is called the jewel of human life. This is confirmed from the things above: that with one wife there is given truly conjugial friendship, confidence, potency, because a union of minds, n. 333, 334: that in union with one wife, and from it, are heavenly blessednesses, spiritual satisfactions, and thence natural enjoyments, which from the beginning have been provided for those who are in love truly conjugial, n. 335: that it is the fundamental love of all heavenly, spiritual, and thence natural loves, and that into that love are brought together all joys and all gladnesses from firsts to lasts. n. 65 to 69: and that, viewed in its origin, it is the sport of wisdom and love, has been fully demonstrated in THE DELIGHTS OF WISDOM CONCERNING CONJUGIAL LOVE, which constitutes the first part of this work.

458. That this love is the repository of the Christian religion, is because this religion makes one and cohabits with that love;

for it has been shown, that no others come into that love, and can be in it, than those who come to the Lord, and do the truths of His church and its goods, n. 58, 59. That that love is from the Lord alone, and that thence it is with those who are of the Christian religion, n. 131, 335, 336: that that love is according to the state of the church, because it is according to the state of wisdom, with man, n. 130: that these things are so, was confirmed in the whole chapter concerning the correspondence of it with the marriage of the Lord and the church, n. 116 to 131; and in the chapter concerning the origin of that love from the marriage of good and truth, n. 83 to 102.

459. XIII. THAT THIS CONJUGIAL, WITH THOSE WHO FOR VARIOUS CAUSES CANNOT AS YET ENTER INTO MARRIAGES, AND WHO ON ACCOUNT OF SALACITY CANNOT GOVERN THEIR LUSTS, CAN BE PRESERVED, IF THE LOVE OF SEX BECOME RESTRICTED TO ONE MISTRESS. That by those who are salacious, immoderate and inordinate lust cannot be restrained, reason sees and experience teaches; in order, therefore, that this immoderateness and inordinateness,--with those who labor under venereal excitement and who cannot from various causes, hasten and anticipate marriages,--may be curbed, and reduced to something moderate and ordinate, there appears no other refuge and as it were asylum, than the keeping of a mistress, who in French is called maitresse.

It is known that in countries where there is a settled government, there are many who cannot contract matrimony, until after the period of youth is passed, because positions are obtained by service, and means for supporting a house and family are to be acquired, and then first a worthy wife is to be courted; and yet, in the preceding age, the fountain of potency can with few be kept shut up and reserved for a wife: it is better, indeed, that it should be reserved; but if, on account of the unbridled power of lust, it cannot, an intermediate method is needed, by which conjugial love may be prevented from perishing in the meantime: that pellicacy is this intermedial, may be concluded from the following considerations: I. That by means of it inordinate promiscuous fornications are curbed and limited, and thus a more restricted state is induced, which is more nearly related to conjugial life. II. That the ardor of venery, in the beginning boiling and as it were burning, is allayed and mitigated, and thus the lasciviousness of salacity, which is filthy, is tempered by something as it were analogous to marriage. III. By it the strength is not thrown away, nor imbecilities contracted, as by roaming and unlimited amours. IV. By it also diseases of body and insanities of mind are avoided. V. Equally so by it are adulteries guarded against, which are whoredoms with wives, and stuprations, which are violations of virgins:

not to speak of those scandalous things, which are not to be named. For a youth, while he is a stripling, does not consider that adulteries and stuprations are any thing else than fornications, thus that one is the same as the other; nor does he know from reason how to resist the enticements of certain ones of the sex, who have studiously given their attention to meretricious arts; but in pellicacy, which is a more ordinate and a more sane fornication, he may learn and see the distinctions. VI. By pellicacy, moreover, no access is given to the four kinds of lusts, which are in the highest degree destructive of conjugial love, and which are, the lust of defloration, the lust of varieties, the lust of violation, the lust of seducing innocences; concerning which in the following pages. But these things are not said to those who are able to restrain the heat of lust, nor to those who are able to enter into marriage immediately upon their being mature, and to offer and expend upon their wife the first-fruits of their potency.

460. XIV. THAT PELLICACY IS PREFERABLE TO ROAMING LUST, PROVIDED THERE BE NOT DEALINGS WITH MORE THAN ONE, NOR WITH A VIRGIN OR UNDEFLOWERED WOMAN, NOR WITH A MARRIED WOMAN, AND PROVIDED IT BE KEPT SEPARATE FROM CONJUGIAL LOVE.

When and with whom pellicacy is preferable to roaming lusts, was alluded to just above. I. That pellicacy is not to be carried on with more than one, is because with more there is something polygamic in it, which induces in man a state merely natural, and thrusts this down into a sensual state so far that he cannot be elevated into a spiritual state, in which conjugial love must be; see n. 338, 339. II. That it is not to be carried on with a virgin or undeflowered woman, is because conjugial love with women acts as one with their virginity; thence is the chastity, purity and holiness of that love; wherefore to engage and deliver up that virginity to any man, is to give a pledge that she will love him to eternity; therefore a virgin must not, from any rational consent, bargain it away, without the promise of the conjugial covenant; it also is the crown of her honor; wherefore, without the covenant of marriage, to seize upon it beforehand, and afterwards to dismiss her is to make a courtesan of a virgin, who might have become a bride and a chaste wife, or to defraud some man, and either is damnable: therefore he that adjoins to himself a virgin as a mistress may, indeed, cohabit with her, and thus initiate her into the friendship or love, but always with the constant intention, if she does not commit whoredom, that she is to become his wife. III. That pellicacy is not to be carried on with a married woman, because this is adultery, is manifest.

IV. The reason that the love of pellicacy is to be kept separate from conjugial love, is because those loves are distinct, and, therefore, not to be mixed together; for the love of pellicacy is unchaste, natural and external love, but the love of marriage is chaste, spiritual and internal: the love of pellicacy separates the souls of two, and conjoins only the sensual things of the body, but the love of marriage unites souls, and, from the union of the souls, the sensual things also of the body, until from two they become as one, which is one flesh: V. The lope of pellicacy enters only into the understanding, and into the things which depend upon the understanding; but the love of marriage enters also into the will, and into the things which depend upon the will, and therefore, into every and each thing of a human being; wherefore, if the love of pellicacy becomes the love of marriage, the man cannot by any right recede, without the violation of a conjugial union; and if he does recede, and marries another, conjugial love perishes by the breach of it. It ought to be known, that the love of pellicacy is held separate from conjugial love, in that the man does not promise marriage to the mistress, nor lead her into any hope of marriage. Yet it is better that the torch of the love of the sex should be first kindled with a wife.

CONCERNING CONCUBINAGE.

462. In the preceding chapter, where fornication was treated of, pellicacy was also treated of; and by this was meant the connection of an unmarried man with a woman under contract; but by concubinage is here meant the connection of a married man in like manner under contract with a woman. Those who do not distinguish genera, use those two terms promiscuously, as if of one meaning, and thence one signification; but since there are two kinds, and the term pellicacy fits the former, because a mistress (pellex) is a courtesan, and the term concubinage fits this latter, because a concubine is a substituted partner or the bed, therefore, for the sake of distinction, the ante-nuptial contract with a woman is signified by pellicacy, and the post-nuptial by concubinage. Concubinage is here treated of for the sake of order; for from order it is discovered of what quality marriage is on the one part, and of what duality adultery is on the other. That marriage and adultery are opposites, was first treated of in the chapter concerning the opposition of them; and how far they are opposite, and of what quality the opposition is, cannot be learned except from the intermediates, which come between, of which also concubinage is one.

But because there are two kinds of concubinage, and these kinds are to be thoroughly discriminated, therefore, this chapter, as the former were, will be divided into its parts.

463. I. THAT THERE ARE TWO KINDS OF CONCUBINAGE, WHICH DIFFER VERY MUCH FROM EACH OTHER, ONE CONJOINTLY WITH THE WIFE, AND THE OTHER APART FROM THE WIFE. That there are two kinds of concubinage, which differ very much from each other and that one kind is to adjoin a substituted partner to the bed, and to live conjointly and simultaneously with her and with the wife, and that the other kind is, after a legitimate and just separation from the wife, to take a woman in her place as a partner of the hell. That these two kinds of concubinage are different from each other, as a dirty linen cloth differs from one that is washed, may be seen by those who look upon things minutely and distinctly: but by those who look confusedly and indistinctly, it cannot be seen; yea, it may be seen by those who are in conjugial love, but not by those who are in the love of adultery; the latter are in night concerning all the derivations of the love of the sex, but the former are daylight concerning them. But still those who are in adultery may see those derivations and their distinctions, not, indeed, in themselves from themselves, but from others while they hear them spoken of;

for there is with an adulterer a like faculty of elevating the understanding as with a chaste consort; but an adulterer, after he has acknowledged the distinctions heard from others, always obliterates them, while he immerses his understanding in his filthy pleasure; for what is chaste and what is unchaste, and what is sane and what is insane, cannot be together, but they may be distinguished by the understanding separated. Once, in the spiritual world, those who did not consider adulteries sins were asked by me whether they knew one distinction between fornication, pellicacy, the two kinds of concubinage, and between the degrees of adultery; they said that one was as the other; and they were asked whether marriage was so too; and they looked around to see whether any of the clergy were present, and since they were not, they said, that in itself it was a like thing. It was otherwise with those who, in the ideas of their thought, considered adulteries sins; these said, that, in their interior ideas, which are those of perception, they saw distinctions, but had not yet studied to discern and known them apart: that I can positively affirm, that those distinctions, as to their minuti are perceived by the angels of heaven. In order, therefore, that it may be manifest, that there are two kinds of concubinage opposite to each other, one by which conjugial love is abolished, the other by which it is not abolished, on this account the damnable kind will be first described, and afterwards the other, which is not hurtful.

464. II. THAT CONCUBINAGE CONJOINTLY WITH A WIFE, IS UNLAWFUL TO CHRISTIANS, AND DESTESTABLE. That it is unlawful, is because it is against the conjugial covenant. and that it is detestable, is because it is against religion, and what is against the latter and at the same time the former, is against the Lord; wherefore, as soon as any one, without a really serious cause, adjoins a concubine to a wife, heaven is closed to him, and by the angels he is no more numbered among Christians. From that time, also, he contemptuously rejects the things which are of the church and of religion, and afterwards does not lift up his face above nature, but turns himself to it, as to a divinity which favors his lust, from whose influx his spirit then receives animation: the interior cause of this apostacy will be opened in what follows. That this concubinage is detestable, the man himself does not see, because, after heaven is shut up, he has become spiritual insanity; but a chaste wife sees it clearly, because she is conjugial love, and this love loathes it; wherefore also many of them refuse actual conjunction with their men afterwards, as something that would contaminate their chastity from the contagion of the lust adhering to the men from the courtesans.

465. III. THAT IT IS POLYGAMY, WHICH HAS BEEN CONDEMNED AND IS TO BE CONDEMNED, BY THE CHRISTIAN WORLD. That concubinage simultaneous or conjoint with a wife is polygamy, although not so recognized, because not established as such by any law and not so named, every one sees, even if he be not sharp-sighted; for a woman kept for use, and a sharer of the conjugial bed, is as a wife. That polygamy has been condemned, and is to be condemned by the Christian world, was shown in the chapter concerning polygamy, especially from these things there: that it is not lawful for a Christian to marry more than one wife, n. 338; and that a Christian, if he marries more, commits not only natural adultery, but also spiritual adultery, n. 339; that it was permitted the Israelitish nation, because with that nation there was not a Christian church, n. 340. From these things it is manifest, that to adjoin a concubine to a wife, and to share the bed with both, is filthy polygamy.

466. IV. THAT IT IS SCORTATION, BY WHICH THE CONJUGIAL, WHICH IS THE JEWEL OF CHRISTIAN LIFE, IS DESTROYED. That it is a scortation more opposite to conjugial love than common scortation, which is called simple adultery, and that it is a deprivation of all faculty and inclination for conjugial life, which is in Christians by nativity, may be proved by arguments which are valid before the reason of a wise man.

As respects the FIRST, that concubinage simultaneous or conjoint with a wife is a scortation more opposite to conjoint with a wife is a scortation more opposite to conjugial love than common scortation, which is called simple adultery, may be seen from these things: that in common scortation, or simple adultery, there is not a love analogous to conjugial love, for it is only a stimulant heat of the flesh, which immediately cools down, and sometimes does not leave behind it a vestige of love for the woman; wherefore his effervescing lasciviousness, if it is not committed from purpose, or from what is confirmed, and if the adulterer repents of it, derogates only a small portion from conjugial love. It is otherwise with polygamic scortation; in this there is a love analogous to conjugial love, for it does not cool down, is not dissipated. and does not go off into nothing after effervescence, as the former does, but remains, renews and establishes itself, and so much it detracts from the love for the wife, and in the place of it induces cold for the wife: for he then regards the courtesan bed-fellow as lovely from a freedom of the will, in that he is able to recede, if he likes, which freedom is inborn in the natural man, and because thence it is grateful, it sustains that love; and besides, with a concubine there is a nearer unition with allurements than with the wife: but, on the other hand, he does not regard the wife as lovely, in consequence of the debt of cohabitation with her enjoined by the covenant of life, which he then perceives as forced the more from the freedom with the other;

that love for the consort grows cold, and the consort herself becomes vile in his estimation, in the same degree in which love for a courtesan grows warm, and the courtesan herself is held in estimation, is evident. As respects the OTHER that concubinage simultaneous or conjoint with a wife deprives the man of all faculty and inclination for conjugial life, which is in Christians from nativity, it may be seen from these things: that as far as love to the consort is transcribed into love to the concubine, so far love for the consort is impaired, is exhausted and emptied, as was just now shown above; that this is done by the closing of the interiors of his natural mind, and the opening of the lower things of it, may be evident from the seat of the inclination for loving one of the sex with Christians, in that it is in his inmosts, and that this seat may be closed, but not extirpated: the reason that the inclination for loving one of the sex, and also the faculty for receiving that love, is implanted in Christians by nativity, is because that love is from the Lord alone, and has become of religion; and in Christianity the Divine of the Lord is acknowledged and worshipped, and religion is from his Word; thence there is an insemination of it, and also transplantation of it from generation to generation.

It was said, that this Christian conjugial perishes by polygamic scortation; but it is meant, that with a Christian polygamist it is shut up and intercepted, but still is capable of being resuscitated in his posterity, as is the case with the likeness of the grandfather and ancestor returning in the grandson and great-grandson: thence it is, that that conjugial is called the jewel of Christian life; and above, n. 457, 458, the jewel of human life, and the repository of the Christian religion. That this conjugial is destroyed by polygamic scortation with the Christian who is in it, is very manifest from the circumstance, that he cannot love a concubine and a wife equally as a Mahometan polygamist; but that as far as he loves the concubine, or becomes warm towards her, so far he does not love the wife, or so far he becomes cold towards her; and, what is more detestable, so far also in heart he acknowledges the Lord only as a natural man, and as the son of Mary, and not at the same time as the Son of God, and also so far he lightly esteems religion. But it should be well known, that this is the case with those who add a concubine to the wife, and actually conjoin themselves with both; and not at all with those who, from legitimate, just, and truly serious causes, separate themselves, and. as to actual love, disjoin themselves from the wife, and take in her place a woman for use; concerning this kind of concubinage it now follows.

467. THAT CONCUBINAGE APART FROM THE WIFE, WHEN IT IS ENGAGED IN FROM LEGITIMATE, JUST, AND TRULY SERIOUS CAUSES, IS NOT UNLAWFUL. What causes are understood by legitimate ones, what by just, and what by truly serious, will be told in their order; the mere mention of the causes is here premised, in order that this concubinage, which is now treated of in what follows, may be distinguished from the former concubinage.

468. VI. THAT THE LEGITIMATE CAUSES OF THIS CONCUBINAGE ARE THE LEGITIMATE CAUSES OF DIVORCE, WHILE THE WIFE IS NEVERTHELESS RETAINED AT HOME. By divorce is meant the abolition of the conjugial covenant, and thence plenary separation, and, after this, the entire liberty of marrying another wife; the sole cause of this total separation or divorce is scortation, according to the precept of the Lord, Matt. xix, 9. To the same cause also refer themselves the manifest obscenities, which banish modesty, and fill and infest the house with flagitious bawdries, from which exists scortatory impurity, into which the whole mind is dissolved. To these is added malicious desertion, which involves scortation, and causes the wife to commit adultery, and thus to be put away, Matt. v. 32. These three, because they are legitimate causes of divorce, the first and third before a public judge, and the middle one before the man himself as judge, are also legitimate causes of concubinage; but this when the adulterous wife is retained at home.

That scortation is the sole cause of divorce, is because it is diametrically opposite to the life of conjugial love, and destroys it even to extinction; see above, n. 255

469. The causes that the meretricious wife is still retained at home by many men, are, 1. That the man fears to go to trial with a wife, to accuse her of adultery, and thus to publish abroad the crime; for if ocular testifications, or those equal to ocular, should not cause her to be convicted, he would be covered with secret reproaches in companies of men, and with open, in companies of women. 2. He fears, too, the cunning vindications of his meretricious wife, and also the contenancing of her by the judges, and thus the prostitution of his name. 3. Besides these things, there are advantages of domestic uses, which dissuade a separation from the house: as, if they have young children. towards whom the love even of a harlot is maternal; if official positions intercede and conjoin, which cannot he severed; if the wife has support and protection from her kindred and relations, and hope of a fortune from them; if he cherished lovely intimacies with her in the beginning; and if, after she has become a courtesan, she cunningly knows how to soothe the man with engaging pleasantries, and counterfeit civilities, that she may not be blamed;

besides other things, which, because they are in themselves legitimate causes of divorce, are also legitimate causes of concubinage; for the causes of retaining at home do not take away the cause of divorce, when she has committed whoredom; who, unless he is vile, can keep the laws of the conjugial bed, and share the couch, with a harlot? Though this may be done here and there, it proves nothing.

470. VII. THAT THE JUST CAUSES OF THIS CONCUBINAGE ARE THE JUST CAUSES OF SEPARATION FROM THE BED. There are legitimate causes of separation, and there are just causes; legitimate causes are established by edicts adjudged by judges, and just ones by edicts adjudged by the man alone. The causes, as well the legitimate as the just, of separation from the bed, and also from the house, are recounted in a compendium above, n. 252, 253; of which the VITIATED STATES OF BODY are diseases, by which the whole body is so far infected that what is deadly may be brought on from contagion; such are malignant and pestilential fevers, leprosies, venereal diseases and cancers: also, the diseases from which the whole body becomes so far weighed down, that there is no consociability, and from which are exhaled detrimental effluvia and noxious vapors, whether from the surface of the body, or from its interiors, in particular from the stomach and lungs:

from the surface of the body are malignant pocks, warts, pustules, scorbutic consumption, virulent scab, especially if the face is polluted by them: from the stomach, eructations constantly foul, stinking and rank; from the lungs, corrupt and putrid breaths exhaled from imposthumes, ulcers or abscesses, or from vitiated blood or serum. Besides these, there are also other diseases of various names, as lipothamia, which is a total languidness of body, and defect of strength; palsy, which is a loosening and relaxing of the membranes and ligaments subservient to motion; epilepsy; permanent infirmity from apoplexy; certain chronic diseases; the iliac passion; hernia, besides other diseases, which pathology teaches. The VITIATED STATES OF MIND, which are just causes of separation from the bed and from the house, are mania, frenzy, raving, actual foolishness and idiocy, loss of memory, and other like things. That these causes are just causes of concubinage, because they are just causes of separation, reason sees without a judge.

471. VIII. THAT THE SERIOUS CAUSES OF THIS CONCUBINAGE ARE REAL AND NOT REAL. Since, besides the just causes, which are just causes of separation, and thence become just causes of concubinage, there are also serious causes, which depend on judgment and justice with the man, therefore these also are to be mentioned;

but because judgments of justice may he perverted, and be converted by confirmations into appearances of what is just, therefore these causes are distinguished into serious causes real and not real, and are described separately.

472. IX. THAT THE REALLY SERIOUS CAUSES ARE THOSE WHICH ARE FROM WHAT IS JUST. For the purpose of knowing these causes, the recounting of some which are really serious is enough; as, no storge, and thence a rejection of infants, intemperance, drunkenness, uncleanness, impurity, unreasonable desire of publishing the secrets of the home, wrangling, striking, revenging, doing mischief, stealing, cheating; internal dissimilitude, from which is antipathy; wanton requirement of the conjugial debt, from which the man becomes a cold stone, application to magic and tricks of deception; extreme impiety, and other like things.

473. There are also milder causes, which are really serious, and which separate from the bed, and yet not from the house; as, cessation of prolification with the wife from advanced old age, and thence impatience of, and opposition to, actual love, the ardor still continuing with the man; besides similar things, in which the rational judgment sees what is just. and which do not injure the conscience.

474. X. THAT THE SERIOUS CAUSES, NOT REAL, ARE THOSE WHICH ARE NOT FROM WHAT IS JUST, ALTHOUGH FROM THE APPEARANCE OF WHAT IS JUST. These are known from the really serious causes recounted above, and, if not rightly explored, they may appear as just, and yet are unjust; as, that times of abstinence are required after childbirth, the transitory sicknesses of wives, the waste of the prolific seed arising from these sicknesses and other causes, polygamy being permitted to the Israelites, and other like causes of no value from justice; these are made up by the men after cold has been contracted, when unchaste lusts have deprived them of conjugial love and have infatuated them with the idea of its likeness to scortatory love. These men, when they enter into concubinage, that they may not suffer in reputation, make such spurious and fallacious causes sound and genuine; for the most part also they circulate pretended ones concerning the wife, which are also assented to and sounded abroad by their friends, according to favoring influence.

475. XI. THAT THOSE, WHO, FROM LEGITIMATE JUST, AND REALLY SERIOUS CAUSES, ARE IN THIS CONCUBINAGE, MAY BE AT THE SAME TIME IN CONJUGIAL LOVE. It is said that they may at the same time be in conjugial love, and it is meant, that they may keep this love stored up with themselves; for this love, in the subject in which it is, does not perish, but is quiescent.

The causes that conjugial love is preserved with those who prefer marriage to concubinage, and enter into concubinage from the above-mentioned causes, are these; that this concubinage is not repugnant to conjugial love; that it is not a separation from it; that it is only a covering of it around; and that this covering is taken away from them after death. I. That this concubinage is not repugnant to conjugial love, follows from what was demonstrated above--that this concubinage, when it is engaged in from legitimate, just, and really serious causes, is not unlawful, n. 467 to 473. II. That this concubinage is not a separation from conjugial love; far when legitimate, or just, or really serious causes intercede, persuade and compel, conjugial love is not separated with the marriage, but is only interrupted; and love interrupted, and not separated, remains in the subject: this case is like that of a person who is in the performance of a function which he loves, and is withheld from it by company, or by public shows, or by travelling; still he does not lose the love of the function: and it is like that of one who loves generous wine: still, while he drinks that which is not noble, he does not lose the taste and appetite for the generous. III. That this concubinage is only a covering around of conjugial love, is because the love of concubinage is natural, and the love of marriage spiritual, and natural love covers over the spiritual, while the latter is intercepted;

that it is so, the lover does not know, because spiritual love is not sensibly perceived of itself, but by means of natural, and it is felt as delight, in which is blessedness from heaven; but natural love, by itself, is felt only as delight. IV. That this covering is taken away after death, is because then man from natural becomes spiritual, and instead of a material body enjoys a substantial one, in which natural delight from spiritual is felt in its eminence, that it is so, I have heard from communication with some of the spiritual world, even from kings there, who in the natural world had been in concubinage from really serious causes.

476. XII. THAT WHILE THIS CONCUBINAGE LASTS, ACTUAL CONJUNCTION WITH THE WIFE IS NOT LAWFUL. The reason is, because then conjugial love, which in itself is spiritual, chaste, pure and holy, becomes natural, is contaminated, and becomes obsolete, and thus perishes; wherefore, in order that this love may be preserved, it is expedient, that concubinage from really serious causes, n. 472, 473, should be engaged in with one woman, and not with two at the same time.

LAWS OF ORDER

FOR

THE PRESERVATION OF THE CONJUGIAL.

CHAPTER I.

THE HISTORY OF THE CONTROVERSY.

In his popular Letters on Spiritual Subjects the late Dr. W. H. Holcombe voices the sentiments of many nominal Newchurchmen, when, referring to the latter part of the work on Conjugial Love, he exclaims "This is the skeleton in the New Church closet, which all of us are afraid of, and which all of us wish had never been created. The Old Church people and other people have found it out and parade it against the general truth and purity of Swedenborg's teachings."

And the same writer proceeds to state that "independent thinkers, who take the good and throw the ball away, in Swedenborg and everywhere else, have no special difficulty about this matter. This man, they say, is here false to himself and to the supernal loveliness of his teachings everywhere else." Dr. Holcombe, therefore, calmly "draws his penknife through the second part of Conjugial Love."

And the late Rev. B. F. Barrett, rising in defense of Dr. Holcombe, frankly asks, "Do we not all practically repudiate this teaching, and at heart (whatever lips or pens may affirm) deny that it is from the Lord out of heaven? And would not the Cause we hold so dear,--the sacred cause of the New Church,--be the gainer rather than the loser, if we all should repudiate Swedenborg's teaching on this subject as boldly and emphatically as Dr. Holcombe has done?" (New Church Independent for 1885, pp. 321, 322.)

Expressions such as these call vividly to mind one of the closing memorable relations in Conjugial Love, where Swedenborg tells of a paper in heaven on which were written certain arcana of the Revelation given to the New Church:

And, lo! the paper, on which those arcana were written, was let down from heaven; and in its progress, while it was yet in the spiritual world, it shone as a star; but when it descended into the natural world the light disappeared, and it was darkened in the degree that it descended. And when it was let down by the angels into companies where there were some skilled and learned clergymen and laymen, there was heard a murmur from many, in which there were words such as these: "What is this? Is it anything? What does it matter if we know these things or not? Are they not abortions of the brain?" And it seemed as if some took the paper, folding it, twisting and untwisting it with their fingers, in order that they might obliterate the writing;

and it seemed as if some were tearing it to pieces, while others wanted to trample it with their feet. But they were restrained by the Lord from committing that crime, and the angels were commanded to withdraw the paper and to keep guard over it. And because the angels became sad and wondered how long this was to be, it was said to them "Until a time, and times, and the half of a time." (C. L. 533.)

The vision was a prophecy, describing the treatment that would be meted out to the Writings of the New Church by the skilled and learned in the Christian world. The prophecy, as is known, has been amply fulfilled, and this most especially in the case of the work on Conjugial Love. More than any other of the Writings, this work has been contemned and attacked, and this not only by the open enemies of the Church, but even by Professed Newchurchmen. Truly this pure and holy book has been "torn asunder," and the second part, which is an integral part of the whole, has been termed "the skeleton in the New Church closet;" has been rejected as a foul and hideous thing, as an immoral book" to be ashamed of, to be repudiated.

There have been many nominal Newchurchmen, who have thus openly reviled and rejected the work, who have as it were torn it to pieces and trampled it with their feet, but such have not been able to seduce the affirmatively disposed members of the New Church.

There have been others, however, who have received the paper that was sent down from heaven, and who have been as it were "folding, twisting and untwisting it with their fingers, in order that they might obliterate the writing." These are the ones who do not openly reject, but seek to explain away the teaching by specious reasonings. These are the ones with whom we are at issue, for these are able to obscure the light of heaven and to mislead the simple, "for a time, and times, and the half of a time."

"Unto the pure all things are pure; but unto them that are defiled and unbelieving there is nothing pure." (Epistle to Titus, i: 15.) It is well known that evil blunts the power of rational judgment and perception. An evil and adulterous generation cannot internally perceive any difference between marriage and adultery, and still less can it discriminate between the various forms of fornication and concubinage as described in the work on Conjugial Love. To the enemies of the New Church these things have all been one, and, consequently, whatever the New Church has appeared on earth, the servants of the Dragon, and especially the holier-than-thou clergy of the Old Church, have raised the scandal that Newchurchmen seek to shield and excuse the practice of free-love under the cover of fine religious distinctions.

The work on Conjugial Love has been held up for execration, as promising to Swedenborgians a kind of Mohammedan heaven, where the angels revel in gross, carnal lusts among a multitude of wives and concubines.

It is a significant fact that the persecution of the New Church began to manifest itself in this world as soon as the work on Conjugial Love had been published, and that it was against this work that the draconic fury was first directed. The hook was printed at Amsterdam, in the summer of 1765, and on its first appearance in Sweden fifty copies were confiscated at the custom house by order of Bishop Filenius, Swedenborg's kinsman and bitter enemy. About the same time began the great religious persecution against Dr. Beyer and Dr. Rosen, by the Lutheran Consistory of Gothenburg. Swedenborg, in a letter to Dr. Beyer, describes the action of bishop Filenius as unjust, inasmuch as the book "does not treat of theology, but chiefly of morals," and states that the confiscation "is representative of the persecution by the dragon and the stinging of the locusts in the Revelation." (Documents concerning Swedenborg, Vol. ii, p. 306.)

It would be interesting to review the history of the attacks that have been made upon Conjugial Love by its Old Church assailants; to examine in detail the malicious slanders and perversions that have issued forth during the course of a century from such "purists" as

Wesley, Priestly, Grundy, Pike, Beaumont, Brindley, Pond and Wood, not to speak of a hundred others of less prominence, and the masterly defensive arguments of Newchurchmen such as Clowes, Noble, Smithson, Bush, Hayden and others, but the scope of the present work permits us only to call special attention to Robert Hindmarsh's Vindication of the character and writings of Emanuel Swedenborg against the slanders and misrepresentations of the Rev. J. G. Pike, of Derby, England (1821), and to Woodville Woodman's volume on Marriage and Its Opposites (London, 1865), which latter work deals most exhaustively with the whole subject, from the point of view of an Apologist. The assaults by the Old Church upon Conjugial Love have been well characterized, as follows, by William White, in his first biography of Swedenborg:

This portion of the treatise on Conjugial Love has subjected Swedenborg to some "gross calumny," which, if sincere, could only have arisen from a very superficial acquaintance with the principles of the author; and yet it is hardly possible for a man to write on such subjects, without provoking the censure of the sickly virtuous and the hypocritically pure. Religious people too generally treat the dire sexual evils which infest and corrupt society with silence and aversion, passing them by as the priest and the Levite did the wounded traveller. When the spirit of Jesus more fully actuates the Church, and the love of the neighbor prompts to heal the world's evils by all-efficient means, then, we have no doubt, Swedenborg on "Scortatory Love" will be taken into consideration.

On the whole the slanders against Conjugial Love have been remarkably effective in closing the minds of the multitude against the light of the New Revelation. And they have produced still another and more internal effect. At an early period the more weak-kneed members of the New Church from "fear of the Jews" became panic-stricken on account of the attacks on Conjugial Love. They do not seem to have been made of the stuff of martyrs, and they began to evolve all sorts of arguments in order to construe the teachings of the Church, on the subject of the Intermediates in Conjugial Love, into some kind of conformity with the hypocritical standards of morality in vogue with the dead Christianity round about them. They wanted the New Church to become popular and "respected" in the community, and after a century of persistent courting they have succeeded so far as to create the general impression, that Swedenborgians are a kind of harmless intellectual--"cranks!"

As Conjugial Love was the first object of attack from without, so also it formed the subject of the first dissension or controversy within the organized New Church.

This event occurred in the year 1789, soon after the first meeting of the General Conference of the New Church of Great Britain, when Robert Hindmarsh, the founder of the external organization, together with five other prominent members of the Church (Henry Servante, C. B. Wadstrom, Augustus Nordenskjold, George Robinson and Alexander Wilderspin), were solemnly separated from the society in Great East Cheap, London. No charge of personal immorality was raised against the excommunicated members. They were separated simply on account of their intellectual belief, a belief through which, in the opinion of their fellow-members, "the floodgates of immorality were in danger of being thrown open, to the inevitable destruction of the New Church."

What, then, was this dangerous belief? Recording to Mr. John Isaac Hawkins, the last surviving member of the Great East Cheap Society, it consisted in "a perverted view of Swedenborg's doctrine of concubinage, in his work on Conjugial Love whereby some held that, if a husband and wife did not agree, they might separate, and the man take a concubine." Or, as stated more definitely, in the year 1789, by Augustus Nordenskjold in his Form of Ecclesiastical Organization in the New Jerusalem:

As it will happen, of course, that for long times to there will be found unmarried men in our Church who are not able to marry,--

and married men who have been received among us, but who have unchristian wives, rejecting the New Doctrine, and who thus must live in an unharmonious marriage,--it follows that when such men are driven so strongly by the inborn amor sexus that they cannot contain themselves. it is inevitable, for the sake of order, that they be permitted, the former to take a mistress, and the latter a concubine. (For a more complete account of this controversy see the Life of Robert Hindmarsh, p. 25, by the present writer.)

While we cannot approve of the introduction of any statement such as the one above in a "Form of Ecclesiastical Organization," still it was evidently meant as a provision for the maintenance of freedom in the New Church. But the idea that members of the Church might under any possible circumstances avail themselves of such freedom, and thus, perchance, give occasion for scandal, this idea was inexpressibly shocking to the fellow-members of Nordenskjold and Hindmarsh, and ever since their time the work on Conjugial Love has been more or less consciously regarded as "the skeleton in the New Church closet,"--a book which must be kept out of sight as much as possible, lest it fall into the hands of outsiders who might "misunderstand" it and raise the cry of scandal against the New Church.

Throughout the history of the New Church there have always been a few, however, who have not sought to explain away or repudiate the intermediate laws, but who have upheld the work on Conjugial Love as Divine throughout, and as meant, in all its teachings, most especially for those who read and receive the teachings of the book. Of this opinion were those Newchurchmen, who, in the year 1876, organized the Academy of the New Church.

From the beginning, the Academy raised the standard of loyalty to the Heavenly Doctrines, and this loyalty necessarily involved the complete acceptance of the work on Conjugial Love as a Divine Revelation, as the Word of the Lord in His Second Coming, given to the New Church, to be received in faith and obeyed in life. It was recognized, also, that the intermediate laws, revealed in that work, could not be obeyed by those to whom they apply, so long as Newchurchmen formed their conscience on this subject from the false standards of the Old Church. The Academy, therefore, set before itself these two fundamental aims: to maintain the authority and integrity of the Heavenly Doctrine, and to maintain freedom of conscience in the New Church.

The Heavenly Doctrine teaches that marriage between those of different religions is heinous, and that the angels cannot dwell with such married partners as are in discordant religions.

The Academy, consequently, taught that it is a fundamental duty of members of the New Church to marry within the Church, in order that the first essential of conjugial love may exist and be preserved. This teaching aroused strenuous opposition, inasmuch as the majority of Newchurchmen have believed in and practiced the contrary principle. And when, in addition to this, the Academy upheld the intermediate laws in the second part of Conjugial Love, as applicable to such members of the Church as needed them, a storm of anger and slander broke out. The members of the Academy were accused of upholding the teachings in Conjugial Love in order to shield practices of free-love, and for more than a quarter of a century such scandals have been freely circulated.

The sinister phenomenon of this kind of propaganda against the Academy, is, after all, only a repetition of the persecution to which every New Church, and every new movement in a Church, has been subjected in the past. The primitive Christians, for instance, were thus slandered, especially by the Jews, who sedulously spread abroad the story that the love-feasts of the Christians were libidinous orgies of promiscuous sexual intercourse, and that at the celebrations of the Eucharist a heathen child was sacrificed and eaten!

No slander was too hellish for the Jewish imagination and invention, or too absurd for the heathen credulity and rage.

It was similar at the time of the Reformation, when Luther preached the abolition of clerical celibacy and moreover took for his wife a former nun. The infernal slanders against Luther and his chaste and noble wife, Catharina von Bora, which were then invented by his theological opponents, are still, after a period of four hundred years, being circulated throughout the Roman Catholic Church.

And, most marvelous of all, the same slanders, scandals, insinuations and malicious misrepresentations, which a hundred years ago were spewed out by the Dragon against the early members of the New Church, are now being circulated by members of the New Church itself against brethren of their own faith, men and women, against whom no one would dare to raise an accusing voice in the presence of a court of justice.

And, most marvelous of all, the same slanders, scandals, insinuations and malicious misrepresentations, which a hundred years ago were spewed out by the Dragon against the early members of the New Church, are now being circulated by members of the New Church itself against brethren of their own faith, men and women, against whom no one would dare to raise an accusing voice in the presence of a court of justice.

The slanders against the Academy broke out in the year 1878, and in the following year, at a meeting of the Ministers of the New Church in America, held at Brooklyn, May 21-27, a "Report" was "unanimously" adopted, as an expression of the understanding of the Ministers on the subjects of fornication and concubinage. This Report, which was afterwards published in the form of a pamphlet, was clearly a compromise between two contending parties, inasmuch as we find therein on the one hand the most unqualified condemnations of the practices in question; and, on the other hand, rational discriminations such as the following:

Very many good people have never thought it right to attend to the subject at all, much less to consider it deliberately in the light of reason and Christianity. They have condemned all lustfulness indiscriminately, and considered any one as already polluted who ventured to point out that there are degrees in that evil, some of which may be pardonable.

With this declaration may be contrasted the question thus stated and answered in the very same document:

But does Swedenborg teach that among the "extra-conjugial loves" there are any so mild as to be of the Divine Order or does he teach that they are all to be shunned, as he says the angels shun them, as the loss of the soul, and the lakes of hell? These mildest forms are called in general fornication, pellicacy and concubinage.

The Ministers then, in the same remarkable document, proceed to show that these "mildest forms," which are to be shunned "as the loss of soul and the lakes of hell," nevertheless are "pardonable and not unlawful:" that they "will not he imputed to a man as intentional sin against marriage," and that by means of them "his love of marriage may be preserved."

Imagine! The love of marriage preserved in the lakes of hell! The loss of the soul pardonable, not unlawful! But it will not be necessary to deal further with the "Report" of 1879, inasmuch as it is in substantial agreement with, and to a great extent reproduced verbatim in the "Report" of 1903.

Like all compromises, the Report of 1879 effected nothing permanent in the way of reconciliation between the two opposing tendencies in the Church, and the storm of controversy and slander broke out anew, when, in the year 1888, the subject of concubinage and fornication began to be discussed editorially in the New Church Life, the recognized exponent of the principles of the Academy. Questions were asked by readers of that journal, and answers were given with a frankness which was based upon the conviction that "to the pure al things are pure." It may be admitted, however, that a mistake was made in allowing the inquirers too great a scope for questions of a rather personal nature, and that the answers went too far into particular applications. The Doctrines themselves do not do this, but speak in general terms, leaving the application to the judgment of the reader.

Finally an editorial statement appeared, upon which, when isolated from its general context, the enemies of the Academy could fasten their accusations,--

the statement that, while marriage is not allowable between persons of different religions, yet "there is no reason why pellicacy, which 'makes a distinction between the souls of two, and conjoins only the sensuals of the body," should not be carried on with one outside of the Church." (New Church Life, 1890, p. 86.)

The editor of the Life, throughout the discussion, had emphasized the teaching that the laws of permission are applicable only where the conditions answer to those described in the Doctrines; but, supposing this to be well understood, he did not include the qualifying clause in his concluding sentence. But the English Conference of the New Church now recognized an opportunity to deal a would-be deadly blow at the Academy, the one object of its odium theologicum. The sentence was torn apart from its connection; the Life was represented as teaching that there is no reason why pellicacy might not be carried on by any Newchurchman with one outside of the Church; and, finally, at the Conference of 1890, that body, by an overwhelming majority vote, adopted a resolution declaring that "the teachings set forth in the editorial remarks at the close of an article in New Church Life for June, 1890, entitled 'Laws of Marriage and Pellicacy,' is utterly opposed to the Doctrines of the New Church; and that the circulation of such teaching brings scandal upon the Church and encourages wickedness."

The vast majority of the members of the Conference had never seen the article in the Life, but this seemed to be of no importance to them.

In the true spirit of the Inquisition the New Church Conference of Great Britain next adopted a Resolution, whereby the agent of New Church Life in England was "affectionately, but urgently, requested to repudiate the teaching" of New Church Life on this subject, "and also to withdraw from the Institution which publishes that periodical as its official organ,"--a resolution which the Rev. Thomas Child (a determined opponent of the Academy, at once pronounced "an abominable piece of tyranny." The whole action of the English Conference was generally deprecated by the enemies of the Academy in the United States, not so much on account of any inherent injustice of the proceedings, but rather because it placed the members of the Academy "in the position of martyrs."

The discussion on the subject of pellicacy and concubinage was continued for a year or two longer in the pages of the New Church Life and of the New Church Monthly, where the reader will find many valuable articles bearing on the issue. The literature on the subject was further enriched by the anonymous publication of an excellent little volume, entitled

A Correspondence between the Minister and the Conference Representative of a Society of the New Church, and a then Member of the same Society, on the subject of the Resolution passed by the Conference respecting certain teachings of 'New Church Life." (Colchester, 1891, pp. 111.) The arguments presented by the "Member," showing that the intermediate laws are meant for members of the New Church, were so logical, so unanswerable, that the "Minister" and the "Representative" were forced to beat an ignominious retreat, convicted yet unconvinced.

Among the articles on this subject in the New Church Monthly, we would call special attention to the correspondence between the Rev. John Presland, President of the Conference, and the Rev. John Faulkner Potts, in which the latter expressed himself as follows in regard to the action of the Conference:

Among the articles on this subject in the New Church Monthly, we would call special attention to the correspondence between the Rev. John Presland, President of the Conference, and the Rev. John Faulkner Potts, in which the latter expressed himself as follows in regard to the action of the Conference:

The men against whom all this bitter hostility, and I am afraid I must say, hatred, is manifested, have merely held fast to the best of their ability to the doctrine of the New Church as it is revealed to us by the God of Heaven Himself in the Writings. This is all that they have done to merit the dislike and hostility of their brethren in the New Church. Doubtless they are not perfect in their doings and sayings--which of us is?but that is their pure and unadulterated purpose, to sacrifice themselves in fidelity to the doctrine of the New Church. Instead of being loved and honored for it, as they well deserve to be, this wicked persecution is directed against them by their own brethren of the New Church.

It would be wicked even on the ground of its utter want of charity; but the addition to that of deliberate slander makes the wickedness ten-fold more grievous.

The President of the Conference having requested Mr. Potts to bring the resolution before the members of his society, "in order that they may guard themselves against the pernicious teaching it condemns," and having intimated that the Council of the Conference would "take note" of any further attempt to identify the New Church with the "perversions" of New Church Life, Mr. Potts replied:

By the publication of your second circular on the subject you have forced me to take action, because you have put me forward before the Church as one who repudiates the teachings of the Academy on the subject of pellicacy, which is tantamount to saying that I repudiate the doctrine of the New Jerusalem on that subject. I will never allow myself to be identified with the repudiation or invalidation, in the smallest degree, of any point in the doctrine of the New Jerusalem. For that doctrine I have lived, and for that doctrine I will, if necessary, die. Should therefore be involved in the vile slander which the Conference has now endorsed and deliberately formulated and encouraged I tell you at once I fear nothing of that kind on my own account: the only grief I have about it is that the Conference has committed this crime against truth, charity, anti the commandments of God. This is indeed hard to hear, because it involves the fact that the Conference is ceasing to be of the New Church.

The President of the General Conference at this point discovered that he "could not spare the necessary time" required for further discussion of the subject. (New Church Monthly, 1890, pp. 55-59)

The position of the Academy in regard to the intermediate laws was re-affirmed by the Bishop of the General Church of the New Jerusalem, in an address on "The Principles of the Academy," delivered at the General Assembly held in Berlin, Ont., June, 1899. It is stated in this address that "The laws, in the latter part of the work on Conjugial Love, extending from n. 444 to 476, inclusive, are laws of order, given for the freedom and preservation of the conjugial."

This statement gave great offense to certain members of the General Convention, who thereupon united in a memorial or petition to the Council of Ministers of the Convention. requesting, first, that the Council "recommend to the General Convention that it henceforth refrain from all formal expressions of fraternal relationship with the General Church of the New Jerusalem, commonly known as the Academy;" and, second, that the Council "recommend to the General Convention, that it give some formal and explicit expression to what it believes to be the teaching of the New Church on the subject treated of in Nos. 444 to 476 of the work on Conjugial Love."

This petition was received by the Council of Ministers at its meeting in Philadelphia, in May, 1902, and two committees were appointed, one to reply to the petitioners in respect to the General Church, and another to "formulate the teaching of the New Church" in respect to--a doctrine which has been formulated by the Lord Himself in His Second Coming!

Without waiting for the report of the first committee, the Council and the Convention at their meetings in Philadelphia acted as if assuming that the charges against the General Church were true: the courtesies usually extended to visiting ministers of the General Church were deliberately omitted, and in the following year, at the meeting in Chicago, the Council formally refused to extend the courtesies of the floor to the one minister of the General Church who then happened to be present. Thus, as expressed by one of the spokesmen for the majority, "in view of the undecided question still before the private sessions of the Council, and in deference to the 149 signers of a certain petition," the Council deliberately cut off all possibility of neighborly relations with an hitherto friendly body of the New Church, a body to which the Convention, in 1898, had sent representative messengers, and with which, subsequently, it had exchanged messages of mutual good-will.

The Council afterwards voted "that with respect to that portion of the petition regarding fraternal relations with the General Church no action be taken,"--totally oblivious of the fact that action had been taken, not once, but twice, in the year 1902, and, again, in the year 1903.

It is to be feared that the Council was still influenced by the "deference" to the 149 petitioners, when, at the same meeting in Chicago, in June, 1903, the ministers by a majority vote adopted the "Resolution and Report" on the subject of fornication and concubinage. Had they taken more time for deliberation, and had they been in perfect freedom from outside influences, they would, perhaps, have been more influenced by deference to the revealed Doctrine of the New Jerusalem, than appears from their published formula of faith on this subject.

CHAPTER II.

THE "RESOLUTION AND REPORT."

The pamphlet published by the Ministers of the General Convention consists of two parts, the first being "A Resolution" adopted by the Ministers, and the second "A Report" presented by the Committee which had been appointed in 1902 to investigate the teachings concerning fornication and concubinage. This "Report" was also adopted by the Council of Ministers of the Convention.

The "Resolution" reads as follows:

Resolved, That whereas portions of the work on "Conjugial Love" have raised grave questions in the minds of members of the Church, it is deemed expedient that we ministers of the General Convention of the New Jerusalem should and we hereby do declare our acceptance of the interpretation of the passages in question which Swedenborg himself gives in the work entitled "The True Christian Religion." No. 313, and "The Doctrine of Life for the New Jerusalem," No. 78 in explanation of the commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery;" and that we further declare willful indulgence by a Christian in all practices of impurity, including fornication and concubinage, a transgression of this commandment, and to be regarded as sinful in the sight of God.

Though the "Report" was published "for private circulation," yet in fairness to the Council of Ministers of the General Convention, and in view of the fact that The New Christianity, by permission, has already made public all but a few lines of the "Report," we here reproduce it verbatim ac literatim.

A REPORT ADOPTED BY THE MINISTERS OF THE CONVENTION.

THIS report was prepared by a committee of the Council of Ministers of the General Convention and was adopted by the Council June 26, 1903, in response to a request, as an expression of what it believes to be the teaching of the New Church upon the subject treated of in "Conjugial Love," Nos. 444 to 476.

I. POWERS OF THE COMMITTEE DEFINED.

The committee disclaims for itself or for the Council the right to define the law of the New Church on any subject, for it has no such authority. The committee or the Council, while as in the present case it may speak with the earnestness of firm conviction, still can only give its understanding of the truth revealed by the Lord in His Word, and through His servant Emanuel Swedenborg. Read in "The True Christian Religion" (489), the charge to "put faith in no council, but in the Lord's Word which is above councils."

This subject was considered at length by the ministers of the New Church as long ago as 1879, and the report produced at that time, though more limited in its scope, was in substantial agreement in its conclusions with the present report. We have taken the liberty in places to adopt the language of the earlier statement with only this general acknowledgment.

II. PARTICULARS IN THE LIGHT OF GENERAL PRINCIPLES

Particular truths, to be understood, must be seen in the light of general principles, and the passages in question, in the light of general principles concerning marriage and its opposite. In the section of "Conjugial Love" which treats of marriage in its true order. Swedenborg writes as follows:"The Lord provides similitudes for those who desire love truly conjugial, and if they are not given in the earths He provides them in the heavens. The cause is, that all marriages of love truly conjugial are provided by the Lord: ... but in what manner they are provided in the heavens, I have heard described by the angels thus: That the Divine Providence of the Lord is most particular and most universal concerning marriages and in marriages, because all the enjoyments of heaven stream forth from the enjoyments of conjugial love, as sweet water from the stream of a fountain; and that, on this account, it is provided that conjugial pairs be born, and that these be continually educated, under the auspices of the Lord, for their several marriages, both the boy and the girl being ignorant of it; and after the completed time, then that marriageable virgin, and then that young man fit for nuptials, meet somewhere as if by fate, and see each other; and that then, as from a certain instinct, they instantly know that they are partners, and, as if from a certain dictate within, think in themselves, the young man, that she is mine, and the virgin that he is mine; and after this has been seated for some time in the minds of both, they deliberately speak to each other and betroth themselves.

It is said, as if from fate, instinct, and dictate; and it is meant, from Divine Providence; because, while this is not known, it appears thus; for the Lord opens internal similitudes, that they may see each other." (229.) Such "similar and homogeneous marriages are provided upon the earth," he says, "for those who, from an early age have loved, have wished, and have asked of the Lord, a legitimate and lovely connection with one, and have scorned and shunned wandering lusts." (49)

He further tells us that "no others can be in love truly conjugial, but they who receive it from the Lord, who are those that come directly to Him, and live the life of the church from Himself; because this love, considered in its origin and its correspondence, is heavenly, spiritual, holy, pure, and clean, above every love which is with the angels of heaven and the men of the church: and these its attributes cannot be given but to those who are conjoined to the Lord, and from Himself consociated with the angels of heaven; for these shun extra-conjugial loves, which are conjunctions with others than their own proper consorts, as the loss of the soul, and the lakes of hell; and in proportion as a consort shuns such conjunctions, even as to lusts of the will and purposes therefrom, so far love truly conjugial is purified with them, and becomes successively spiritual, first while they live on earth, and afterwards in heaven." (71.)

In "The True Christian Religion," Swedenborg treats of the command, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," and says, "In the natural sense this commandment refers not only to the committing of adultery, but also to willing and doing obscene things, and therefore to thinking and speaking lascivious things. That merely to lust is to commit adultery, is evident from the words of the Lord: 'Ye have heard that it was said to them of old time. Thou shalt not commit adultery. But I say unto you that whosoever looketh on a woman not his own to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart.'" (T. C. R. 313.)

In "The Apocalypse Explained," in treating of the same command, he says, "Forasmuch as adultery is hell with man, and marriage is heaven with him, it follows, that in proportion as man loves adultery, in the same proportion he removes himself from heaven, consequently that adulteries shut heaven and open hell: this they do in proportion as they are believed to be lawful, and are perceived as delightful above marriages.... Inasmuch as adultery is hell, it follows, that unless man abstain from adulteries and shun them as infernal, he closes heaven against himself, nor can he receive the least influx thence." (A. E. 982. See also A. C. 8904.) Angels said, "that it is impossible for them to think from any intention concerning a wife or woman beyond their own, because this would be to convert heaven into hell; wherefore an angel, whilst he only thinks of such a thing, falls from heaven." (A. E. 1004.)

Other passages are not to be understood in a sense contrary to this general truth, or as implying otherwise than that every shade of impurity is evil in the sight of the Lord.

III. THE PARAGRAPHS UNDER CONSIDERATION

The paragraph under consideration treat of fornication, which is "the lust of a youth or of a young man with a woman, a harlot, before marriage" (444); and of concubinage which is "the conjunction of a married man in like manner stipulated for with a woman" not his wife. (462.) Two forms of fornication are recognized and distinguished from each other; one which is "inordinate" and "promiscuous," and the other, called pellicacy, which is restricted to one harlot, and does not give access to "the four kinds of lusts, which are in the highest degree destructive of conjugial love, and which are the lust of defloration, the lust of varieties, the lust of violation, the lust of seducing innocences." (459.)

Of concubinage there are also recognized two forms which are distinguished from each other. First, "concubinage conjointly with a wife." which "is detestable;" "it is scortation, by which the conjugial, which is the jewel of Christian life, is destroyed" (466); to one who practices this concubinage "heaven is shut up," and he becomes "spiritual insanity." (464.) There is also "concubinage apart from the wife," when by "legitimate, just, and real, serious causes" a man is separated from his wife and as to these things is nearly in the position of an unmarried man. (475.) What are meant by "legitimate, just, and real, serious causes" is carefully explained. "Legitimate" causes are such as afford legal ground for divorce; "just" causes are diseases which of necessity produce separation; and "real, serious" causes are perverse habits of life, like drunkenness and other wickedness, which necessarily separate partners. (470, 471, 472.) Swedenborg does not recognize trivial, imaginary, or temporary causes of separation, and gives special warning against making excuse of causes which seem serious but are not really so. (474.)

This classification here given and the distinctions drawn make possible a comparison between the two forms of fornication and between the two forms of concubinage, and between these and other forms of violation of the perfect law of marriage. It is said that, "the love of the sex with some, cannot without damage be totally restrained from going forth into fornication" (450); that there are some who "on account of salacity cannot govern their lusts." (459.)

For such persons pellicacy, under certain conditions of restriction and limitation, is "preferable to roaming lust," and is a "refuge and asylum" where they may be preserved from worse evils. (459, 460) For such persons also, when there is a separation of partners for the causes named, concubinage is said to be "not damnable" (indemne, used in opposition to damnabilie) and "not unlawful." (463, 467.) Persons of this class who are in such concubinage may be at the same time in conjugial love, by which "is meant, that they may keep this lore stored up with themselves, ... quiescent, ... interrupted." (475.)

We believe this is a fair statement, in few words, of the meaning of the paragraphs under consideration. We desire to direct attention to a few points in the teaching.

1. The practices in question are evil.

It should be noted that the chapters concerning fornication and concubinage are not found in the part of the book which treats of "The Delights of Wisdom concerning Conjugial Love," but in a separate section of the book, described in its title as "Pleasures of Insanity concerning Scortatory Love." The very title warns us that in these chapters we are reading not of marriage love, but of its perversions; not of heaven, but of hell. If there are degree among the evils described, they still are evils.

The passages before us state explicitly that the practices in question are evil: "There are degrees in the qualities of evil, as there are degrees in the dualities of good.... Fornication, because it is lust, and the lust of the natural man not yet purified, is an evil; but because every man is capable of being purified, therefore so far as he approaches a purified state, so far that evil becomes a lighter evil, for so far it is wiped away: thus as far as fornication approaches conjugial love, which is a purified state of the love of the sex.

The evil of fornication is more grievous so far as it approaches the love of adultery." (452.) "The love of pellicacy is unchaste, natural, and external love, but the love of marriage is chaste, spiritual and internal." (460.) Swedenborg nowhere states that any form of fornication or concubinage is good.

2. To whom these things are said and to whom they are not said.

"The love of the sex with some," we read, "cannot without damage be totally restrained from going forth into fornication." (450.) The same persons are described as those, who "on account of salacity cannot govern their lusts." (459.) It was for such persons that the paragraphs before us were written, indicating means by which they may be kept from worse evil, and by which the possibility of pure and holy life may be preserved from destruction. It would be a gross abuse of the teaching for those to take it to themselves as a permission of indulgence who are given by the Lord (if they will use it) the strength to keep their lives more pure. "These things are not said," we read, "to those who are able to restrain the heat of lust." (459.) This turns our thought to the one source of strength.

If it is true, and this is distinctly taught, that all impurity is evil, then it is also true that there is strength to resist it, through faith in the Lord and in His saving power. "The Lord shall preserve thee from all evil." (Ps. cxxi. 7.) He overcame all the hells. (A. C. 1690; A. E. 359.) He is the rock against which the gates of hell cannot prevail. The lifting up of the brazen serpent by Moses in the wilderness, represented the glorification of the Lord's humanity even to the flesh and bones, and to all things of sensual and corporeal life. (A. E. 581; A. C. 5978; L. J. post. 87.) The healing of those who were bitten by fiery serpents, when they looked upon the serpent of brass, represented "protection" and "eternal life" from the Lord's Divine Humanity. (A. E. 70; A. C. 8624.)

The Lord overcame the evils of the sensual nature, and glorified this plane of His Humanity, for the very purpose that He might conquer for men in these same temptations, and give them His Divine protection. (A. C. 3490.) That He does give it, is a matter of experience.

3. The standard of purity for the church.

If the church stands, as we believe it does do and should do, for an acknowledgment of the Lord and a life guided by His commandments and strengthened by His saving power, the above considerations show what must he the standard of purity for the church; especially for the New Church which knows the meaning of the Lord's temptations and victories and glorification as it has never before been known. The church must set before herself the standard of strict and perfect purity, and must show men the saving power of the Lord which gives strength to attain it and to preserve it. The Lord gives to the church the heavenly ideal: her people must keep the ideal before them and not excuse or justify in themselves any departure from it. It is their duty to the Lord and to the world. To all lower standards we may apply the Lord's words concerning the Jewish precept of divorce: "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives: but from the beginning it was not so:"--and it might not he so in a true spiritual church. (Matt. xix. 8.)

It is significant that in the treatment of this subject in "The Doctrine of Life for the New Jerusalem," and in "The True Christian Religion" which contains "the universal theology of the New Church," there is do suggestion of any departure from purity as allowable, but on the contrary there are the strongest, most searching charges of strict purity in act and thought and desire. In "The Doctrine of Life" we read, "From these considerations it may be concluded and seen, without a doubt, whether a man is a Christian or not;

yea, whether or not he has any religion. He who does not regard adulteries as sins, in faith and life, is not a Christian; nor has he any religion. But, on the other hand, he who shuns adulteries as sins, especially if on that account he is averse to them, and still more he who abominates them on that account, has religion; and if he be in the Christian Church, he is a Christian." (D. Life 77) It should be noted also that in the same chapter with this statement, occurs the definition of adultery which makes it include not only the committing of whoredom, but also the doing of obscene acts, speaking lascivious words, and thinking unclean thoughts. No possible departure from this purity is mentioned by Swedenborg except where his treatment of the subject passes beyond marriage among spiritual men, to marriage as it exists in the world among those in evil and natural states. The standard for the church and for all who would lead spiritual lives must, we believe, be the standard of strict purity. It is written of the New Jerusalem. "There shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth." (Rev. xxi, 27.) "With men it is impossible, but not with God: for with God all things are possible." (Matt. x. 27.) This does not necessarily mean that members of the church should assume to sit in judgment upon their brethren, but it does mean that by wilfully departing from purity a man judges himself and so far removes himself from the Lord and spiritual life. "Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see God." (Matt. v, 8.)

In one way the passages before us do relate to the church and to spiritual men, and. we believe, in only one way. They show the Lord's mercy and wisdom in dealing with those who are in weak natural states, and so they show the duty of the church to be charitable in judgment, and to use her power to encourage and uplift the weak, discriminating between degrees of evil, that she may help more wisely.

This lesson to the church becomes more clear as we consider the teaching in regard to the Lord's dealing with those who are in this evil.

4. Deeds judged by their intent.

In regard to marriage and its violations Swedenborg teaches, as in regard to all things of life, that the Lord judges every action by its intent. (71; A. R. 76.) With the Apostle John, Swedenborg teaches that while "All unrighteousness is sin," "there is a sin unto death," "and there is a sin not unto death." (1 John v, 16, 17.) He teaches that the Lord does not condemn without inquiring into the deep purposes of the heart; and that, when this searching is made, some of the verdicts of men may be reversed--some of the judges may be themselves condemned, and some of the judged may be set free, though warned to sin no more. "What man knows," he asks, "who is a scortator in heart, and who is a consort in heart? and yet the thoughts of the heart, which are the purposes of the will, judge every one." (523.) "Neither from the appearances of marriages, nor from the appearances of scortations is a conclusion to be formed concerning any one, that he has conjugial love or not: wherefore, judge not, that ye be not judged. Matt. vii, 1." (531.)

5. The Lord's mercy with those who are in evil.

In regard to the Lord's dealing with those who are in evil of impurity. the paragraphs under consideration show that some violations of the perfect law of marriage are more grievous and some lighter, and that the Lord permits the lighter evils to be a means of saving some men from evils which are more grievous, and if possible of leading them away from evil to good. In this we find an application of the general law stated in the "Divine Providence," as follows: "Man from his hereditary evil is always panting for the lowest hell, but the Lord by His Providence is continually leading him away, and withdrawing him from it, first to a milder hell, then away from hell, and finally to Himself in heaven." (D. P. 183. See also A. C. 6489)

IV. RECAPITULATION.

No one has shown so clearly as Swedenborg the Divine origin of marriage and the blessing which it contains. This was a part of the truth which he declared to the angels to be "revealed in the world by the Lord." (534.) True marriage is "heaven with man" (A. E. 981; D. Life 76): it is "the precious pearl of human life, and the repository of the Christian religion." (457.) The command, Thou shalt not commit adultery, forbids not only acts and words, but also desires and thoughts that are impure. (T. C. R. 313; D. Life 74) Conjunctions with others than their own proper consorts are shunned by those in true marriage love, "as the loss of the soul and the lakes of hell." (71.) "An angel, whilst he only thinks of such a thing, falls from heaven." (A. E. 1004.)

Swedenborg never departs from this holy and exalted view of marriage. He shows the Divine command to require the strictest purity of act and thought and desire. He tells of the Divine power at hand to give strength even in the temptations of bodily sense and appetite, and the completest victory over every thing that would defile, if we do our part in the Lord's strength. He tells of the mercy of the Lord towards those who have not the knowledge or strength to avail themselves of the Divine help, and points out means by which they may be protected. But to the church he holds up the highest possible ideal of purity and of marriage, and bids us to stand true to it, confident in the saving power of Him who said. "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth." (Matt. xxviii, 18.) "Be of good cheer; I have overcome the world." (John xvi. 33.)

CHAPTER III.

THE INCONSISTENCIES OF THE "RESOLUTION AND REPORT."

Inconsistency appears to be the most general feature of the "Resolution and Report" adopted by the ministers of the General Convention at their meeting in the year 1903,--inconsistency from the beginning to the end of their document.

Consider for a moment the introductory statement of the "Report," in which the Committee defines the powers given to it.

In one breath the Committee declares that it has no right define the law of the New Church on any subject. In the next it promises to give its understanding of the truth "with the earnestness of firm conviction," which, of course, means nothing else than that the Committee proposes to express most firmly its own definition of the truth which is the law of the New Church. And immediately afterwards the "Report" quotes the warning against Councils,"put faith in no council,"which certainly appears as a deliberate recommendation to the Church to put no faith in this or any other doctrinal Resolution and Report of the Council of Ministers of the General Convention!

If no faith is to be placed in the doctrinal findings of ecclesiastical councils, why then does the Council of Ministers year after year submit matters of doctrine to be decided by majority votes? And if the Council truly believes that it has no right or authority to define the law of the New Church on any subject, why then does it employ language such as that which is used in the "Resolution?"

"WE further declare" that this and that is "a transgression" of the sixth commandment, and that it is "to be regarded as sinful in the sight of God." What is this but a usurpation of the power to "define the law of the New Church?" What is it but a demand that the Doctrine of the Church and the letter of the Commandment are to be interpreted as the Council interprets them and that no other interpretation is to be tolerated?

The meek disclaimer of authority to define the law of the Church seems to have been introduced into the Report for the purpose of quieting an uneasy conscience. When, in the year 1902, the Council decided, by a majority vote, that the Writings of the New Church are not the Word of God, the unlawfulness of this transaction was pointed out, and it was shown that the interpretation of Doctrine in the New Church should be a matter of rational discussion and of free and gradual growth, not to be stifled by the interference of external influences such as the decisions of Councils.

The Ministers of the Convention, by the introductory statement in their "Report" of 1903, admit the justice of this criticism, and yet they immediately proceed to do the very thing which they claim they have no right to do.

Freedom of conscience in the New Church is seriously imperilled by this habit of adopting doctrinal resolutions, to which the Council of Ministers is addicted. Even if such resolutions were perfectly correct in doctrine and were adopted by a unanimous vote, they would still be dangerous because imposing the weight of external authority upon the understanding of internal things. How much more dangerous, then, when such resolutions are neither unanimous nor correct in doctrine.

To a superficial observer the "Resolution" may seem to appeal to the loftiest sentiments of "strict and perfect purity." It declares "wilful indulgence by a Christian in all practices of impurity, including fornication and concubinage, a transgression of the commandment, 'Thou shalt not commit adultery," and to be regarded as sinful in the sight of God." What pure-minded person would not heartily sympathize with a condemnation of all practices of impurity, all forms of adultery? And how many, while glowing with a righteous indignation against adultery, will stop to consider more closely that little sentence "including fornication and concubinage?" Fornication! Promiscuous whoredom!

And concubinage! A married man living at the same time with his wife and with some filthy harlot! Of course, such wickedness is to be condemned as sinful in the sight of God.

Nevertheless, a thoughtful reader will necessarily wonder at the purport of the Resolution. Have the ministers of the Convention but lately discovered that these things are sinful, that they must place themselves on record as accepting the sixth commandment? No, the Resolution shows that it has been occasioned by certain "grave questions in the minds of members of the Church," questions that have been raised by "portions of the work on Conjugial Love."

If, then, the reader looks up these portions of Conjugial Love, he finds that a clearly defined discrimination is there made between two very different forms of fornication and concubinage: one form of fornication which is declared to be "grievous" and another which is described as "light," and one form of concubinage which is declared "unlawful for Christians and detestable." and another which is described as "not harmful," "not unlawful" and as "analogous to marriage."

Against which of these two forms of fornication and concubinage is it that the Resolution is directed? Is it against the grievous, unlawful, and detestable kind? No, for on this subject there has never been any question whatever in the mind of any member of the New Church.

There is left, therefore, no other alternative than the conviction that the one end and purpose of the "Resolution" was to declare as adulterous and as sinful in the sight of God that kind of fornication which the Lord Himself in His Second Coming declares to be "light, in proportion as it looks to conjugial love," and that kind of concubinage which "when entered upon from legitimate, just, and really serious causes, is not unlawful."

The Ministers of the General Convention seek to explain away the distinction made in Conjugial Love between these two kinds of fornication and concubinage, by demanding that the chapters in that work, where these distinctions are made, are to be interpreted by certain passages in two other works, where these distinctions do not appear, at least at first glance. The Resolution states: "We hereby do declare our acceptance of the interpretation of the passages in question which Swedenborg himself gives in the work entitled 'The True Christian Religion,' No. 313, and in 'The Doctrine of Life for the New Jerusalem,' No. 74, in explanation of the commandment 'Thou shalt not commit adultery,' and on the basis of this interpretation they proceed to condemn "fornication and concubinage" indiscriminately as a transgression and as sinful in the sight of God.

What, then, is taught in the passages which are supposed to "interpret" the teachings in Conjugial Love? The number in The True Christian Religion reads as follows:

THE SIXTH COMMANDMENT. "Thou shalt not commit adultery." In the natural sense, this commandment refers not only to committing adultery, but also to willing and doing obscene things, and therefore to thinking and speaking lascivious things. That merely to lust is to commit adultery, is evident from these words of the Lord: "Ye have heard that it was said by them of old time, Thou shalt not commit adultery. But I say unto you, that whosoever looketh on the woman of another to lust after her, hath committed adultery with her already in his heart." (Matth. v:27, 28.) This is because the lust becomes as a deed when it is in the will; for allurement enters merely into the understanding, but intention enters into the will, and the intention of lust is a deed. But more may be seen concerning these things in the work On Conjugial Love On Scortatory Love, published at Amsterdam in the year 1768, which treats of the Opposition of Conjugial Love and Scortatory Love, n. 423-443; "of Fornication," n. 441-460; "of Adulteries and their kinds and degrees," n. 478-499; "of the Lust of Defloration," n. 501-505; "of the Lust of Variety," n. 506-510; "of the Lust of Violation," n. 511, 512; "of the Lust of Seducing Innocences," n. 513, 514; "of the Imputation of each Love, Scortatory and Conjugial," n. 523-531. All these are meant by this commandment in the natural sense.

And the following is the teaching in The Doctrine of Life, n. 74:

In the sixth precept of the Decalogue, in the natural sense, by committing adultery is meant not only to commit whoredom, (scortari), but also to do obscene things, to speak lascivious things, and to think filthy things. But in the spiritual sense, by committing adultery is meant to adulterate the goods of the Word and to falsify its truths. And in the supreme sense by committing adultery is meant to deny the Divine Human of the Lord and to profane the Word: these are adulteries of every kind. The natural man may know from rational light that by committing adultery is meant also to do obscene things, to speak lascivious things, and to think filthy things. But he does not know that by committing adultery is also meant to adulterate the goods of the Word and to falsify its truths. And still less does he know that by it is meant to deny the Divine Human of the Lord and to profane the Word. Hence he does not know that adultery is so great an evil, that it may he called the diabolical itself; for he who is in natural adultery is also in spiritual adultery, and vice versa. That this is so will be demonstrated in a special little work On Marriage. But those are in adulteries of every kind at once, who do not from faith and life hold adulteries to be sins.

It will be seen that in the two passages quoted, reference is made to the work on Conjugial Love. In the latter passage it is referred to as a contemplated work, in which the propositions in the Doctrine of Life are to be "demonstrated," that is, further proved, explained, or interpreted.

And nearly half of the passage in The True Christian Religion consists of references to Conjugial Love where "more may be seen concerning these things."

In view of these facts, is it not evident that the Ministers of the Convention have pursued a totally wrong method in their "interpretation?" It is the brief statements that are to be interpreted by the lengthy chapters which give further explanation and shed a far more complete light upon the subjects involved, and not vice versa. What is to become of Theology in the New Church, if the method of interpretation, adopted by these ministers, is to be generally followed? Instead of accepting the Writings as the interpretation of the letter of the Word, we would have to interpret the Writings by means of the letter. A more irrational way of proceeding cannot be imagined.

That the ministers have attempted to limit the teachings in Conjugial Love within a very short-sighted measurement of the two passages which have been quoted, is evident from the statement in the "Report," that "other passages are not to be understood in a sense contrary to this general truth," that is, contrary to the notion of the ministers that every form of fornication and concubinage is a form of adultery. The fact is that they have misunderstood not only the general doctrine, but also the particular passages in question.

A more careful study of the teaching in T. C. R. 313, would have shown them that this passage observes the same discrimination that is made everywhere in Conjugial Love, the discrimination between "the allurement which enters merely into the understanding," and "the intention which enters the will;" and it is added that it is the intention which is the deed. If the intention is one that looks towards adultery, by excusing it and not regarding it as a sin, then that intention is adulterous, and the consequent thought, word, or deed, adultery. Otherwise it is not adultery, or of adultery, but is merely "an allurement" arising from the natural appetites and promptings of the flesh. And though such allurements cannot always and at once be resisted by every one, still the rational understanding holds them apart from the love of adultery, when it regards adultery with horror, as a deadly sin against: God. (Compare C. L. 493, 494)

Does Conjugial Love, then, excuse the allurements of extra-conjugial loves? By no means, for it teaches that such things should be shunned in thought as well as intention. But for those who cannot at once resist these allurements, Conjugial Love points out intermediate and ordinate means, whereby, "adulteries are guarded against." (C. L. 459.) These intermediate means of purification are the special objects of condemnation in the "Report," which herein is grossly inconsistent with itself, since it also refers to them as "not damnable," and "not unlawful."

CHAPTER IV.

THE "LAWS OF ORDER."

As has been shown above, the "Resolution and Report" of the Ministers of the General Convention was occasioned, in the first instance, by the statement in the Principles of the Academy, that "The laws, in the latter part of the work on Conjugial Love, extending from n. 444 to 476 inclusive, are laws of order, given for the freedom and preservation of the conjugial."

The frame of mind in which this statement was received by members of the General Convention is well portrayed in the following extracts from a letter from a prominent minister of that body, addressed to the Bishop of the General Church:

... I can say that I hope they [the statements in the Principles of the Academy] do not mean, or that I cannot believe that they mean, what they are understood to mean: that the numbers in question, C. L. 444-476, apply to sons who have the spiritual light and help which belong to Christian men, and that they apply even to members of the New Church,--in fact that they describe a phase of orderly development. I can hope that you do not mean this, and can refuse to believe that you mean it, but it seems to me that it must rest with you to say what you do mean, and what you do not mean, and that while people are left in doubt of your meaning, the door is left open to the worst interpretation.

However foul be the suspicions and insinuations that may conceal themselves within the very "worst interpretation" of the Bishop's statement, it is nevertheless curious that there should be any doubt as to his meaning, since he himself explains it as follows in the Principles of the Academy:

The work on Conjugial Love is a Divine Revelation, given for the use of the New Church. All the truths in this work, from beginning to end, whether concerning marriage, its opposite, or the things intermediate, are laws of Divine Wisdom, given of Divine Mercy to heal and restore, to bring back and establish conjugial love, as the fundamental of the life of Heaven in the Church. To deny the Divinity of any part of the work on Conjugial Love is a denial by the Lord Himself in His Second Coming.

It is evident that the writer of the above here states what he means to state, namely, that the Divine truths, revealed by the Lord Himself in the work on Conjugial Love, are laws of order, for the New Church, for the preservation, restoration and establishment of conjugial love among the members of that Church. But he does not say: that the states and conditions described in the latter part of Conjugial Love are in themselves things of Divine Order. That is what members and ministers of the General Convention have read into his statement; such fantasies, however, have not arisen from the statement but from the state of mind of those who could originate such a thought, who could be willing to look for "the worst interpretation."

The letter from the minister, which is quoted above, was followed by a correspondence with another prominent minister of the General Convention, from whose letters we quote the following:

As it now stands your statement that the teaching in Nos. 444 to 476 of the work on Conjugial Love are "laws of order for the preservation of the conjugial" is misunderstood, and I fear will be misunderstood as long as they stand in just this form. I think I understand your position. You do not mean, I suppose, to say that they are laws of order provided from the beginning for the preservation of the conjugial in man, but laws of permission that may be regarded as laws of order so far as our attitude toward the men of the world, outside the pale of a living Christianity, is concerned; hut not applicable, as I understand your earnest protest against certain misinterpretations that have been circulated to imply, to the members of the General Church, or to any other body of truly Christian men. I think, my dear Brother, that if you could make some clear and unmistakable statement like this, it would go far to settle the question in the minds of all who have been disturbed.

Laws of order are generally understood to be laws of divine order stamped upon the universe by the Lord Himself at the beginning before sin entered into the world, which laws are the outward expression in their application to us of the laws of the Divine life itself. To say that the permissions spoken of in 444 to 476 of Conjugial Love are laws of order in this sense, is to say, as it seems to some, that the Lord regards fornication and concubinage as orderly even in man's unfallen state;

while the truth, as I have supposed, is that these are merely permissions allowed an account of the weakness and fallen condition of human nature. This, taken in connection with the strong position taken some fifteen years ago in New Church Life on the subject, which made concubinage as allowable to the ministers as to the laity of the New Church, (which, of course, is true if it is allowable at all to those who are instructed in the doctrine of the Lord as taught in the New Church; but which indicates that those who taught it did not fully realize the saving power of the Lord in behalf of men),--this has given rise to the "worst interpretations" that have come to our ears.

But even these "interpretations," unfounded tho' they may be, are injurious to the Church, and would be much more so if they should attract the attention of the outside world, which, as is well known, cannot understand the teachings of Conjugial Love on this subject, and which would seize upon these statements as admissions of the worst charges that have been brought against the New Church. And here let me ask you,--tentatively, for I have never heard any one suggest such a thing,--if our Old Church friends might not argue that, if the permissions described in C. L. 444 to 476 are "laws of order for the preservation of the conjugial," it would not be the duty of every man, whose circumstances came within the lines laid down in those passages, to make use of concubinage in order to preserve the conjugial? Of course, you will not understand me as applying any such reduction to absurdity to your position.

It is somewhat surprising that the writer of the above should have any doubt as to the position of the General Church on this subject.

It may be shocking to him, but the members of that Church do hold that it is "the duty of every man, whose circumstances come within the lines laid down in those passages," (C. L. 444-476), "to make use of concubinage in order to preserve the conjugial." Why should this be regarded as a "reduction to absurdity" of their position? Why is Divine Revelation given, if not to be practised and obeyed? It is the duty of every man to strive by all means and with all his power to preserve within him the conjugial which is the precious jewel of Christian life. And if a man is so situated, by external circumstances over which he has no control, that he cannot preserve the conjugial within him except by availing himself of the allowances which the Lord holds out to him,--is it not his duty, then, to accept the only means of rescue that exists for him?

Past experience leaves no room for doubt that this statement will be seized upon by such members of the New Church as the signers of the "petition," to be held up for execration as "throwing open the flood-gates of immorality." Were we to utter in tones of thunder the qualifying clause--that this allowance is given only to the man "whose circumstances come within the lines laid down in those passages;"--were we to insert this in letters of fire between every line that we write, some of our opponents are sure neither to hear nor see it, but will immediately accuse us of encouraging free-love and promiscuous license for those who do not need, and who have no right to avail themselves of the intermediate laws.

But to return to "the laws of order." The writer of the letter last quoted states that the Bishop's statement has been understood by some as teaching "that the Lord regards fornication and concubinage as orderly even in man's unfallen state," or as "stamped upon the universe by the Lord Himself at the beginning before sin entered into the world." What justification can there be for any such misunderstanding of the statement, when, in the same publication, it is explained as meaning that these laws of order "are laws of Divine wisdom, given of Divine Mercy, to heal and restore, to bring back and establish conjugial love," the love that was lost when the Golden Age passed away? Expressions such as these cannot possibly refer to "man's unfallen state," or to conditions "stamped upon the universe by the Lord Himself at the beginning before sin entered the world." The Principles of the Academy states distinctly that the teachings in Conjugial Love, 444-576, are for the New Church, not for the Most Ancient Church before the fall!

If there be any obscurity in the minds of Newchurchmen as to what is meant by "laws of order," let them consider such universal teachings of the Heavenly Doctrines as the following:

Every law Divine is of order; insomuch that, whether you say the Law Divine, or a law of Divine order, it is the same (A. C. 7186).

All the laws of order, by which the Lord, as a king, governs the universe, are truths. (A. C. 2015.)

To "walk in the law of Jehovah" signifies to live the life of truth and good according to doctrine. (A. C. 8420.)

Order is from the Divine which proceeds from the Lord; the laws of order are truths from good in Heaven, and also truths separate from good in Hell. (A. C. 9049.)

But as to what concerns the order into which the Church has been established by God, the laws of this order are as many as there are Truths in the Word. (T. C. R. 55.)

Truths Divine are nothing else than Laws of Order from the Divine Human of the Lord; for all order is from Him, thus also all Laws of order. The whole heaven, consequently also the universe, is according to these Laws. The Laws of order or Truths, which proceed from the Lord, and according to which are the whole heaven and the universe, are what are called "The Word," by which all things were made. (A. C. 7206.)

But if this evidence is not sufficient, let him who doubts consider the following, which is repeated over and over again in the Writings of the New Church:

All order is from Jehovah, that is, the Lord, according to which all and singular things are governed by Him, but with a manifold difference, namely, from Will, from Good Pleasure, from Leave, and from Permission.

Those things which are of Will and Good Pleasure, these are from the laws of order as to Good, and so also are many things which are of Leave, nay, even some things which are of Permission. But when man separates himself from Good, he then subjects himself to the laws of order which are of truth separate from Good, which are such that they condemn, for every Truth condemns man and casts him into hell, but the Lord, from Good, that is, from Mercy, saves and lifts into heaven. (A. C. 2447 See also A. C. 1384, 1755, 9940; S. D. 892, 2296, 3845).

It cannot be denied, therefore, that the Divine truths, revealed in Conjugial Love, nos. 444-476, are "laws of order," as much as any other Divine truths. But the question arises,--and we surmise that this is the main question in the minds of the doubters,--Are these teachings "laws of order as to Good" or "laws of order which are of Truth separate from Good?"

What is the Doctrine? "Laws of order, which are of Truth separate from Good, are such that they condemn." Do the laws of order respecting pellicacy and concubinage condemn those who practice these things from legitimate, just, and really serious causes? No, for we are distinctly taught in these very laws that these practices do not condemn man and are not imputed to him after death. Pellicacy and concubinage are allowed in these laws of order, for the sake of the preservation of the conjugial with man.

Is it for hell that the conjugial is to be preserved? No, but for heaven, for eternal salvation. Hence it is evident that these laws are not "laws of order which are of Truth separate from Good." On the contrary, since they are revealed in order to draw man away from the hell of adultery, and nearer to the heaven of conjugial love, it is evident that these laws are laws of order as to Good, or, more definitely, laws of order which look to Good.

It is a mistake, therefore, to describe these laws as "laws of permission," for this designation is applicable chiefly to such laws as govern those who are in actual, intentional evil, the laws by means of which the Lord governs the hells. The expression "Permission," as used in the Writings, is predicated especially of actual and damnable evils, of such things as the Lord cannot avert or prevent without destroying human freedom. (D. P. 16, 234) Murder and adultery of the very worst kinds are of the Divine Permission, since man could not commit them did not the Lord permit.

We would observe, here, that the laws respecting pellicacy and concubinage are not termed "laws of permission" either in Conjugial Love or anywhere else in the Writings. The idea that they are laws of permission seems to have originated from a confusion of these laws with the laws of concubinage as permitted in the Israelitish Church.

Concerning the latter we read in Arcana Coelestia, n. 3246:

That the ancients, such as Abraham, Jacob and others, had concubines beside the wife, was from permission, for the sake of representation: the celestial church being represented by a wife, and the spiritual church by a concubine. It was from permission, because they were such that they had no conjugial love, nor was marriage with them marriage, but only a carnal copulation for the sake of procreating offspring; to such persons permissions could be given without injury to conjugial love and thence to the conjugial covenant; but it can never be permitted to those who are in good and truth and who are or are able to become internal men. For as soon as a man is in good and truth, and in internal things, such things cease. Hence it is that it is not allowable [non liceat] for Christians, as it was for the Jews, to adjoin any concubine to themselves besides the wife, and that this is adultery.

The keeping of a concubine conjointly with the wife, is nothing but adultery when practiced by a member of the Christian Church. It is not allowable for a Christian, and yet, as is well known, it is practiced frequently in the Christian world, and not without the Divine Permission: even the devils in hell are permitted to revel in their abominable evils. But the keeping of a concubine apart from the wife,--when the wife is dead or separated,--this is very far from being of the Divine Permission in the same sense as the Jewish polygamous concubinage, or the modern adulterous concubinage, since the Lord in His Second Coming in His Divine Revelation not only allows it, but also describes it as "not unlawful."

In the present work, therefore, we have discarded the inappropriate and misleading designation "the Laws of Permission," as not applicable to the laws respecting pellicacy and concubinage which are revealed in the work on Conjugial Love, and we have adopted, instead, the designation "Intermediate Laws," as the most proper appellation of the laws which govern the states and conditions described in that work as intermediate between the love of adultery on the one hand and conjugial love on the other.

CHAPTER V.

ARE THE INTERMEDIATE LAWS MEANT FOR MEMBERS OF THE NEW CHURCH?

Many and curious are the arguments that have been produced by members of the New Church, in order to show that the "Intermediate Laws" in Conjugial Love cannot be meant as laws for them or for anyone in their connection.

It has been urged, for instance, that this work can be of no authoritative value in the New Church, inasmuch as, according to Swedenborg's own testimony to Dr. Beyer, "it does not treat of theology, but chiefly of morals." On this ground, it has been held, Conjugial Love cannot be considered an integral part of the Heavenly Doctrine of the New Jerusalem. To this objection we need only reply that the Heavenly Doctrine as a whole does not consist merely of systematic theology, pertaining to matters of intellectual faith, but it consists also, and chiefly, of teachings applicable to the moral life. That Conjugial Love treats chiefly of morals, is freely granted, but so also does the second table of the Decalogue. Would any Newchurchman on this account urge that this table is not an integral part of Divine Revelation and therefore not binding to him?

Others have argued that the intermediate laws were applicable only in Swedenborg's own life-time, the period of Louis XV. and Madame Pompadour, or that they were meant chiefly for his own countrymen,--among whom, it has been pointed out, the proportion of illegitimate births has been remarkably high,--and that it was for this reason he signed himself, on the title-page of the book, "by Emanuel Swedenborg, a Swede."

It is difficult to treat these objections seriously. Anyone at all conversant with the actual facts of History; any one who does not wilfully shut his eyes to the budget of crimes against the sixth commandment, as reported, day by day in every journal in Christendom, knows that adultery is as general now as in the eighteenth century, even though the crowned heads of Europe no longer dare to flaunt their vices before the public. And as to Swedenborg's countrymen, the high percentage of illegitimate births in Sweden does not prove the greater prevalence of adultery there, any more than the practice of preventing births proves the existence of greater moral purity in France, England or America.

The fact that Swedenborg, on the title-page of Conjugial Love, signed himself "a Swede," certainly cannot be brought to the discredit of his countrymen, for the title-page is the title-page of the whole book, and not of the latter part alone.

He signs himself "a Swede" also on the title-page of the Brief Exposition of the Doctrine of the New Church. Does any one seriously imagine that these two works are meant only for the Swedes and not for the New Church throughout the world?

We may dismiss these and similar objections without further arguments, in order to consider the more serious objection of those who contend that the teachings respecting pellicacy and concubinage are meant only for the instruction of wicked and openly immoral persons, but are on no consideration intended for members of the New Church, nor even for earnest Christians in the Old Church.

The "Resolution" of the Ministers of the General Convention declares "wilful indulgence by a Christian in all practices of impurity, including fornication and concubinage, a transgression of the [sixth] commandment, and to be regarded as sinful in the sight of God." And the "Report" states that "No possible departure from this purity is mentioned by Swedenborg except where his treatment of the subject passes beyond marriage among spiritual men, to marriage as it exists in the world among those in evil and natural states. The standard for the Church and for all who would lead spiritual lives must, we believe, be the standard of strict purity."

And the two ministers from whose letters extracts have been made above, reject as utterly impossible the idea that the teachings in Conjugial Love, 444-476, "apply to persons who have the spiritual light and help which belong to Christian men, or that they apply even to members of the New Church," "or to any other body of truly Christian men."

Well, then, to whom do these teachings apply? Do they actually apply to anybody, or are they only ethical abstractions, for the intellectual amusement of Swedenborg and his readers? The Ministers of the Convention eliminate all good Christians, within or without the New Church, and leave only those who are "in evil and natural states," those who are not willing to "lead spiritual lives," as the only ones who may apply to themselves these teachings of the Lord for the improvement of their lives, for the establishment and preservation of the conjugial with them.

But at this point we are confronted with a number of questions, which we would submit to the serious consideration of the Ministers of the Convention.

1) Is it likely that an evil man entertains any earnest desire to escape from his evil state by taking refuge in a condition less grievous?

2) Is it reasonable to think that an evil man can enter into pellicacy or concubinage from "legitimate, just, and really serious causes?" Is such a man apt to do anything from such causes?

3) Is it possible for an evil man to enter into any such relations, having in view the single end and purpose of preserving from threatened destruction the conjugial within him?

Is there with such a man anything "conjugial" to be preserved, and would he care to preserve it?

4) If a man is in the desire of preserving the conjugial, is it not an indication that he is in the desire for eternal salvation? Does an evil man have any such desire?

5) Would it be possible for an evil man,--a man who is in the love of adultery,--to discriminate between what is adulterous on the one hand, and what is conjugial on the other? or between the two kinds of fornication and concubinage, the kind that is unlawful and the kind that is not unlawful? The work on Conjugial Love distinctly teaches that it is impossible for such to make these discriminations. Indeed, it seems to be difficult to do so even for certain members of the New Church. How, then, could it be possible for persons who have no religion and no desire to lead spiritual lives?

To all these questions there can be but one answer: No! These things are not possible to evil men, and therefore the laws of order revealed in the work on Conjugial Love are decidedly not applicable to men who are wicked and irreligious.

On the contrary, it is most evident that these laws are applicable only to Christian men, who have a desire for regeneration and salvation, but most especially to such members of the New Christian Church as, by force of unfortunate circumstances, are situated in the conditions described in Conjugial Love, nos. 444-476.

For it is certain that only an earnest Christian can have the desire to preserve the conjugial, and only a Newchurchman can know what is meant by the conjugial, in its relation to eternal salvation.

Only a Christian can act from just and legitimate causes, and only a Newchurchman, from the study of the Writings of the New Church, can distinguish between natural law and justice and spiritual law and justice, between evil that is of sin and evil that is not of sin, or between what is good, evil, and intermediate.

And, finally, it is certain that only a Newchurchman, or one who is becoming a Newchurchman, is likely to READ the work on Conjugial Love in an affirmative spirit, so as to understand it and receive it in faith and life, or be willing to be guided by it in states of great natural mistress and mental anxiety and perplexity.

In this connection we must call attention to the statement in the closing paragraph of the "Report," where the ministers say that "Swedenborg tells of the mercy of the Lord towards those who have not the knowledge or strength to avail themselves of the Divine help, and points out means by which they may be protected.

But to the Church he holds up the highest possible ideal of purity," etc.

We invite the Ministers to explain this statement, which certainly is confusing and possibly confused. Swedenborg "points out" certain means of protection to those who "have not the knowledge or strength to avail themselves of the Divine help." If, then, such persons by the reading of Conjugial Love become acquainted with these means of protection, how can it be said that they "have not the knowledge" of the Divine help? And if they not only know, but also accept the means of protection thus pointed out by the Lord through Swedenborg, how can it be said that they do not have the "strength to avail themselves of the Divine help?" Is not the Divine protection the same as the Divine help? And, again, to whom does Swedenborg "point out" these means of protection? Is it to those who read and accept Conjugial Love, or to those who neither read nor accept? Those who read and accept, what are they, if not members of the Church?

From all that has been said it is most evident that these laws are intended for those who are willing to be guided by them, that is, the members of the New Church. But the question then arises. Is it possible for a Newchurchman, a sincere and genuine Newchurchman, to be in a condition of such extreme necessity as to actually need avail himself of these laws?

The Ministers of the Convention teach that such a condition can exist only among those who are in "evil and natural states," but not among members of the New Church. They believe that "In one way the passages before us do relate to the church and to spiritual men, and, we believe, in only one way. They show the Lord's mercy and wisdom in dealing with those who are in weak natural states, and so they show the duty of the church to be charitable in judgment, and to use her power to encourage and uplift the weak, discriminating between degrees of evil, that she may help more wisely."

Is there not some appearance of self-righteousness in this assumption that members of the New Church may not be in "evil and natural states," or even in "weak natural states," as long as they live in this evil and natural world? Does not the Lord say to all of us, "He that is without sin among you, let him first cast a stone?"

It is the merest self-deception to imagine that all Newchurchmen are completely regenerated and spiritual men, men of "perfect" purity. Even the most advanced among them were at one time young in the faith and life of the Church, and the more they advance, the more evil they seem to themselves.

And are there not still neophytes in the Church, young men who are not born regenerate, but who are struggling with the burden of Old Church heredity, Old Church education, and Old Church associations,--in other words, entirely surrounded by the influences of a corrupt and adulterous generation? If to this is added the consideration that Newchurchmen are not constituted physically different from their fellow men: that it is quite possible for a Newchurchman to labor with superabundant salacity, caused by an overflowing activity of the spermatic arteries,--it becomes quite evident that there may be in the New Church some men who are so situated that the love of the sex, with them, cannot, without injury to their conjugial, be totally restrained from going forth into pellicacy or concubinage. In fact, the Writings distinctly tell us that "the fountain of potency can with few be kept shut up and reserved for a wife"" (C. L. 459), a fact which makes it still more probable that there may be at least some such among the members of the New Church.

Are these, then, to be forbidden or to hold themselves forbidden the means of rescue which the Heavenly Doctrine points out to all who are thus circumstanced? Is a Newchurchman to accept bodily disease and possible insanity, (not to mention the grave danger of falling into secret evils), rather than to enter temporarily into a state of pellicacy or concubinage, whereby the body and mind may be relieved and the conjugial preserved for the eternal life?

A Newchurchman, who is forced to avail himself of the intermediate laws, is not necessarily more impure than some of his brethren who are not carrying burdens such as his. Nay, he may be more humble, more awake to the evils of the proprium, and therefore actually more pure within, than some who may imagine themselves chaste and pure simply because by birth "their lope of the sex is so scanty" that they know not the power of that love.

It has been suggested by an eminent minister of the New Church that a Newchurchman, laboring under such necessities, should "withdraw from the Church" as soon as he enters into a relation of pellicacy, and that he should remain outside, so long as that state of necessity endures, lest by his presence he may defile and scandalize the Church.

This suggestion is so cruel, and, in fact, scandalous, that it cannot have been meant in sober earnest. Why should such a man withdraw from the Church? To withdraw from the Church internally would simply mean profanation. And to require him to withdraw from the external Church, because he finds it absolutely necessary to act in this particular according to the Doctrine of the Church, means nothing else than that the Church is ashamed of its Divinely-given Doctrine.

The whole notion that members of the New Church cannot need the Intermediate Laws comes from those pharisaical spirits in the other world who deny that they are in evil and natural states, and who therefore deny that the primary end and purpose of the Coming of the Lord and of the establishment of the Church, is to call sinners,--not self-constituted saints,to repentance.

The whole Divine Revelation, in the spirit as in the letter, is a call to repentance, and is meant most especially for the members of the New Church, because these, above all others, should be able to see not only the Truth but also themselves, such as they are in themselves. The Commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery," is a call to Newchurchmen to repent, to shun by all possible means the love of adultery which universally reigns in the Christian world and to which hereditarily they are as prone as to all other evils.

And the internal sense of this Commandment, as revealed in the work on Conjugial Love, is similarly a call to repentance, a call to shun everything that may hurt the conjugial, without which they cannot hope for eternal salvation. And those members of the New Church, who cannot otherwise preserve from injury the conjugial with themselves, perform an act of repentance, when they act according to the Intermediate Laws which have been revealed for their use, in order to enable them to keep the commandment, "Thou shalt not commit adultery."

CHAPTER VI.

IN HOW FAR ARE PELLICACY AND CONCUBINAGE EVIL?

"The practices in question are evil,"--so runs the heading of one of the subdivisions of the "Report" of the Ministers of the General Convention. And in their "Resolution" the Ministers identify them with what is "sinful in the sight of God," and characterize them as a "transgression" of the sixth commandment,--in other words, as forms of adultery.

That in themselves, as non-conjugial relations, they are evil, because necessitated by the existence of evil, is to be admitted without any hesitation. The Heavenly Doctrine teaches that the desire which impels some men to pellicacy, as the lightest form of fornication, "is an evil because it is lust, and a lust of the natural man not yet purified (C. L. 452). And though the same is not stated of concubinage, still is cannot be doubted that this also is necessitated by the lust of the natural man, and therefore comes under the general head of evil. If man had not fallen, if natural love had not become perverted, the evil of adultery would never have arisen, and, consequently, there would never have been any necessity for the lighter evils of pellicacy and concubinage as means of rescue from the more grievous evils.

Pellicacy and concubinage arise or are caused and necessitated by the lust of the flesh. They are not conditions in themselves pure, chaste, and orderly; they are caused by an unchaste, natural and external love; they are not conjugial relations; they are of the natural man only, because they proceed proximately from the natural love of the sex; they may exist natural-rational, but not spiritual. (See C. L. 447, et al.)

And therefore we are taught that "it is far better that the torch of the love of the sex be first kindled with one's wife," as was ordained by the Creator in the beginning. "Though in the season of youth few are able to keep the springing fountain of manhood closed and reserved for the wife," yet "it is better, indeed, that it should be reserved." And on this account the teachings concerning fornication "are not said to those who are able to restrain the heat of lust;" nor to those "who are able to enter into marriage as soon as they arrive at manhood, and thus are able to offer and devote to the wife the first-fruits of their strength."

These things, however, are said of pellicacy, i. e., the connection of an unmarried man with an unmarried woman who is not a virgin. It is evident that they do not apply to concubinage, which is the connection of a widower or of a married man who has separated from his wife, with a woman who is neither a virgin nor a wife.

The man who has been married is in a very different state from a youth, inasmuch as "he has already been initiated into the conjugial life." (C. L. 323). Having become habituated to the sexual act, the necessity in his case may be even more urgent than in the case of an unmarried man, and the "evil" of concubinage, when entered into from legitimate, just, and really serious causes, may be considered even more pardonable than that of pellicacy. Nevertheless, the law of concubinage, like that of pellicacy, is not at all intended for those who are able to contain themselves, and it is undoubtedly better, when possible, for one who has been married to retain the fountain of his manhood for the wife whom he hopes to meet in Heaven.

The warnings against unnecessary indulgence are therefore to be emphasized no less than the teachings concerning the allowances themselves. The Doctrine has been given for the sake of freedom in the New Church, but the greater the freedom, the greater is the danger of license, which is the abuse of freedom. To guard against such license, particularly with the young, is the duty of parents and teachers, and of the priesthood of the Church.

A Newchurchman, whether young or old, must regulate his life according to the Doctrine of the Church, and he cannot therefore, without committing an actual sin, enter upon any form of fornication or concubinage unless he does so for the reasons which the Doctrine describes, that is, the preservation of physical and mental health, and, above all, the preservation of the conjugial with him.

For unless he is looking towards these things, he is "looking towards adultery."

It is, therefore, an actual evil and a sin which must retard and hurt, and possibly destroy the conjugial with him, for any one to rush thoughtlessly into pellicacy or concubinage, merely for the gratification of lascivious lust. Every healthy man has sexual appetite,--there would be no manly potency without it,--but every man is not so burdened with salacity as to be unable to restrain it without recourse to the intermediate practices.

In the world at large, there are few, we are told, who are able so to restrain themselves, but in the New Church, we hope and believe, the ability of self-restraint will increase in each generation, as, by orderly living, and by the cultivation of love truly conjugial, there will be an increasing number of sound minds in sound bodies.

In order to regulate his life according to the Heavenly Doctrine, every member of the Church, who may be driven by native salacity, must, therefore, seriously examine himself, in order to ascertain if his condition is truly such as to make it necessary for him to avail himself of the allowances described in Conjugial Love.

A man of conscience cannot enter upon any such relation without extreme necessity, and without the most serious reflection and self-examination. Before taking such a step, he must first avail himself of all the natural and spiritual means of resistance which the Lord has provided. He must battle against his lust, he must shun lascivious influences and companions; he must seek strength in pure surroundings and especially in the uplifting sphere of the Church; he must go to the Lord in prayer and seek His help in the Word and in the Heavenly Doctrines. He must do all these things, and at the same time seek relief in physical exercise, and he should most certainly consult his physician to gain from him all the assistance that medical science may be able to render.

Nevertheless, though all this be true, we have no right to put greater emphasis upon the dangers and evils of pellicacy and concubinage than the Lord Himself has done in the Doctrine, or to dwell upon this to such an extent as to practically make the allowances unavailable for those who actually need them and who cannot find relief by any other means. The fact that freedom may be abused does not excuse the taking away of all freedom. The Lord has granted these allowances in order that the conjugial may be preserved,--a thing as sacred as life itself; but the "Resolution" of the Ministers, by its indiscriminate condemnation, takes away the freedom, makes it a sin and a transgression to preserve the conjugial by these means, and thus destroys the possibility of its preservation with those who allow their conscience to be guided by the "Resolution" instead of the Doctrine.

For, reason as you may, the fact remains that the Doctrine of the Church,--and thus the Lord who alone is able to judge the hearts and reins of men,--teaches that there are men who cannot restrain themselves, and that few are able to do so.

That this is a fact and not merely a theory, has been recognized by men of practical judgment throughout history. Paul certainly recognized it as a fact when he advised "the unmarried and widows" in the primitive Christian Church, that "if they cannot contain, let them marry, for it is better to marry than to burn." (1 Cor. 7:8, 9). This recognition, however, went but half-way, for it prescribes no remedy for those who are in such a situation that they cannot marry, or for those who are separated from their wives. The necessity of permitting a separate concubinage was therefore recognized even in the early Christian Church, as by the first Council of Toledo, (A. D. 400), which passed a decree declaring that "he who with a faithful wife keeps a concubine, is excommunicated, but if the concubine serve him as a wife, so that he has only one woman, under the title of concubine, he shall not be rejected from communion."

The Reformers, also, recognized that absolute continence is impossible with some men. Thus Martin Bucer, in his Judgment concerning Divorce, states "that some persons are so ordained to marriage that they cannot obtain the grace of continence, no, not by earnest prayer." And Luther, in his usual frank and emphatic way, declares that "as it is not in my power to cease to be a man, so it is not in my power to do without a woman; it is as necessary as to eat, drink, etc. He that resolves to be without a woman, let him lay by the nature of man, and make himself an angel or spirit." (Serm. De Matrim.)

The "plain facts" of the case have been well summarized by Charles Whitehouse, an English writer, quoted by the Rev. Woodville Woodman in his volume on Marriage and its Opposites, p. 198:

It would appear to demand courage to tell society that men are born with certain necessities and feelings, which must be responded to either lawfully or otherwise. That if men hunger or thirst, and sleep, so have they likewise the sexual passion, and that, as men will not starve without becoming desperate and criminal (in the eye of the law) to satisfy their hunger; so will they also, if they have not wives, seek mistresses.

And society being told this, what would they reply? That man should he the master of his passions, and not the slave of them.

And true it is, he should be so:--and of that satisfying hunger which has passed into excess of gluttony; of thirst, into the use of strong drinks; of sleep, into laziness; and of the sexual passion, into sensuality,--nothing too severe can be said by the moralist, or is more worthy of our disdain.

But the essential question which remains is this:--Is there not in all healthy people a craving necessity for these necessities to be satisfied up to a certain point, which, generally speaking, cannot be overcome? With regard to hunger and thirst, no doubt au affirmative answer will be given; with regard to the sexual appetite, it is the fashion to put it out of the same pale. Yet, in spite of all obloquy, we maintain that this appetite, though not so over-powering as the former necessities, is yet so urgent as to compel many men within a certain period of their lives, to satisfy it at all hazards.

The appetite or desire which finds its outlet in pellicacy or concubinage is of evil, because it is "a lust of the natural man not yet purified," but what does the Heavenly Doctrine teach respecting the nature of this evil?

Who does not know that whatever man does in the beginning, is from concupiscence, because from the natural man? And who does not know that that concupiscence is not imputed, while from natural he is becoming spiritual. The case is similar with the lust of fornication, while the love of man is becoming conjugial." (C. L. 455.)

Let us by all means remember that a thing may be evil, regarded in itself, or merely as an external act, and yet it may be right and necessary in the sight of God to commit this act.

A law, whether human or Divine, is what it means, and to obey a law is to do that which the lawgiver means men to do, that is, to act according to the spirit of the law and not merely according to its letter.

The Lord, when on earth, abundantly illustrated this principle, particularly in respect to the keeping of the Sabbath,--to the great offense of all pharisees, modern as well as ancient. The letter of the Law commands: "thou shalt do no work on the Sabbath." Yet the Lord taught that it is right to do good on the Sabbath day, even though this may involve work. And, similarly, it is right to disobey an evil parent, if the latter should command his child to do what is evil.

The tendency of natural thought is to turn away from the things of spiritual and rational charity and justice, and to place men under the rule of the literal and natural law. This tendency is illustrated by the "Report" of the Ministers of the Convention in its interpretation of the sixth commandment. The Ministers turn their back upon the work on Conjugial Love, where the Lord has revealed the internal sense of this commandment in its fulness, and are willing to accept only the brief explanation of the commandment in its natural sense, as outlined in the True Christian Religion.

But if they were to do the same in respect to all the rest of the commandments,--taking one or two passages only, and not the whole Doctrine,--where would it lead them?

The fifth commandment reads: "Thou shalt not kill," and this is explained as meaning, in the natural sense, "not to kill a man, not to inflict on him any wound of which he may die, and also not to mutilate his body" (T. C. R. 309) All these things are evils, and the Ministers of the Convention might therefore pass a resolution declaring "wilful indulgence by a Christian in all practices of killing, including execution of criminals and the slaying of men in self-defense or in war, a transgression of this commandment, and to be regarded as sinful in the sight of God."

Nay, if they were to put as rigid and literal a construction upon the fifth commandment as they have upon the sixth, they might as well include in their condemnation all surgical operations, whereby "wounds are inflicted" by which the patient may die, or whereby "his body is mutilated." Why not condemn also the killing of animals and the eating of flesh: this we know, was regarded as profane in the Most Ancient Church, and it was, therefore, originally of evil. But we are distinctly told that it is permitted at this day; and so far as a man does it from conscience, it is allowable." (A. C. 1002.)

Being an allowance, however, it must be regarded by the Ministers of the Convention as a form of murder, and as sinful in the sight of God!

It seems evident that the Ministers,or the "majority" of them,do not have a very clear idea of what is meant by evil. The key-note of the doctrine concerning evil will be found in the despised "Second Part" of Conjugial Love, the first chapter of which concludes with a Memorable Relation, describing the origin of evil, and here, also, will be found the key-note to the teachings concerning pellicacy and concubinage.

From creation there exists good, and also good in the greatest degree and in the least degree; and when this least becomes nothing there rises up on the other side evil; wherefore there does not exist any relation or progression of good to evil, but a relation and progression good to a greater and less good, and of evil to a greater and less evil,for they are opposites in each and every particular. And since good and evil are opposites there exists an intermediate, and in that intermediate there is an equilibrium, in which evil acts against good, but as it does not prevail, it stops in the endeavor.... The case is the same with love, especially with conjugial love and with scortatory love: the latter love is evil, but the former is good." (C. L. 444.)

This doctrine is illustrated by the history of the fall of the Most Ancient Church: it began with a gradual decline from the highest good to a lower good and finally to the least good, and then actual evil began.

Nevertheless, though actual evil did not exist in the beginning of the decline, the deliberate choice of a lower good was essentially evil, the origin of all evil. And so, also at this day, it would be evil for a celestial man deliberately to descend to spiritual good, or for a spiritual man to descend to natural good,--to act from a lower, baser motive or end than that which he has made his own through a life of regeneration Any deliberate lowering of the standard of good to which a man has attained, is a betrayal of that standard; it is evil for him to do so, even though that lower degree of good to which he has descended, is a positive good to those who cannot as yet act from higher motives.

But, on the contrary, it is good for a man to ascend from an evil state into a state less evil, when his purpose and intention is the attainment of an actual good. It is better for a man to enter into fornication than, to seduce innocent virgins and wives,--incomparably better, even though promiscuous fornication is actually evil and a sin. And it is better for a fornicator to limit himself to one mistress than to roam about with a multitude of harlots:---it is better to such an extent that, if his intention is one that looks towards the ultimate purity of married life, he by this act places himself outside of the evil of sin, and ascends into a sphere which is intermediate between good and evil, between what is conjugial and what is scortatory.

Over and over again we are taught in the Writings that pellicacy and concubinage, when entered into for the sake of preserving the conjugial, are intermediate between conjugial love and scortatory love.

The sphere of the lust of fornication, such as it is in its beginning, is mediate between the sphere of scortatory love and the sphere of conjugial love, and makes the equilibrium. (C. L. 455.)

It is better, indeed, that the fountain of manhood be reserved for a wife, but if this cannot he done on account of the unbridled power of lust, an intermediate method is needed, by which conjugial love may be prevented from perishing in the meantime; that pellicacy is this intermediate, may be concluded from the following considerations. (C. L. 459)

That marriage and adultery are opposites was first treated of in the chapter concerning their opposition. And how far they are opposite, and of what quality the opposition is, cannot be learned except from their intermediates, of which concubinage is one. (C. L. 462.)

Of the intermediate character of these practices, the "Resolution and Report" takes no account whatever. The Ministers of the Convention do not mention it by one word in the summary which they believe to be "a fair statement" of the "paragraphs under consideration."

The Resolution indiscriminately condemns these intermediate practices as a transgression of the sixth commandment, and as sinful in the sight of God, and the Report moreover calls attention to the fact that

The chapters concerning fornication and concubinage are not found in the part of the book which treats of "The Delights of Wisdom concerning Conjugial Love," but in a separate section of the book, described in its title as "Pleasures of Insanity concerning Scortatory Love." The very title warns us that in these chapters we are reading not of marriage love, but of its perversions; not of heaven, but of hell.

The Ministers, therefore, identify pellicacy and concubinage with the pleasures of insanity and scortatory love, with the perversions of marriage, and with hell. And again and again, they are referred to in the "Report" as "violations of the perfect law of marriage," as in the statement that

This classification ... makes possible a comparison between the two forms of fornication; and between the two forms of concubinage; and between these and other forms of the violation of the perfect law of marriage.

But the Doctrine of the New Jerusalem does not thus characterize these practices.

They are not of scortatory love, for in the very first number of the "Second Part" we read:

At this threshold it ought first to be disclosed what is meant by scortatory love in this chapter. The fornicatory love which precedes marriage is not meant: nor that which follows it after the death of a consort; nor does it mean the concubinage which is engaged in from legitimate, just and serious causes.... But by scortatory love, opposite to conjugial love, is here meant the love of adultery, when it is such that adultery is not regarded as a sin, or as evil and dishonorable against reason, but as what is agreeable to reason. (C. L. 423)

Being thus expressly excepted from what is scortatary, these kinds of fornication and concubinage cannot be termed "pleasures of insanity of scortatory love." And for the same reason they cannot be termed forms of adultery, since we are taught that

All scortation, which destroys the conjugial and extinguishes its love, is adultery, or of adultery. But that which does not destroy the conjugial, and which does not extinguish the love of it, is fornication springing from a certain instinct of nature towards marriage, when marriage, from various causes, cannot yet be entered into. (A. E. 1010.)

Though not of heaven, this kind of fornication and concubinage cannot be said to be "of hell," as the ministers term it, for the Doctrine of the Church, which is above the ministers, describes it as being "intermediate" between the sphere of conjugial love and the sphere of scortatory love, thus intermediate between heaven and hell.

The world of spirits is not the same as hell.

It is because of this intermediate character that the Doctrine compares the allowable kind of concubinage to the state of a person who

is in the performance of a function which he loves, and is withheld from it by company, or by public shows, or by travelling; still he does not lose the love of the function; and it is like that of one who loves generous wine: still, while he drinks that which is not noble, he does not lose the taste and appetite for the generous wine. (C. L. 475.)

Nor can pellicacy and concubinage be termed "sinful in the sight of God," since it cannot be sinful in His sight to strive by all possible means to preserve the love of the conjugial life. The Ministers of the Convention may describe it as "sinful," but the Heavenly Doctrine of the New Jerusalem describes it as "something moderate and ordinate," (C. L. 459), and states that the unlawful kind of concubinage differs as much from the kind that is not unlawful, "as a dirty linen cloth differs from one that is washed," (C. L. 463); and that

as far as man prefers conjugial love, so far also he is in it as to the understanding and as far as he not only prefers, but also loves it better, so far he is in it also as to the will; and then fornication, if he nevertheless continues in it, is to him a necessity, the reasons for which have been explored by him. (C. L. 452.)

And since the practices are not sinful in the sight of God, it follows that they are not "a transgression" of the sixth commandment. The Doctrine teaches that "it is not unlawful," and what is not unlawful cannot be contrary to the Law of God. Verily, brethren of the General Convention, "ye lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."

And, finally, that they are not a "perversion" or "violation" of conjugial love, as is claimed by the "Report," is evident from the teaching that they are "not repugnant to conjugial love," and that they do not involve "a separation from conjugial love," (C. L. 475), but, on the contrary, are "more nearly related to the conjugial life," and are "something as it were analogous to marriage." (C. L. 459.)

"Perversion" is predicated of abuse, and "violation," means profanation. Terms such as these can be applied only to intentional adultery, which is opposite to conjugial love. But in respect to pellicacy we are taught that "conjugial love may be inwardly stored up within it," (C. L. 449), and that "the conjugial can be preserved by means of it," (ibid, 459); and as to concubinage we are taught that those who are in that practice "may at the same time be in conjugial love." (475.)

Such, then, is the issue between the Doctrines of the New Church and the Ministers of the General Convention.

DISCRIMINATION, this is the key-note of all rationality, of all justice, of all charity and mercy, human or Divine. Discrimination, the faculty of critical judgment, the ability to distinguish between truth and falsity, between good and evil, and between the degrees of each, this is a gift which a member of the Lord's New Church ought to possess in a special and peculiar degree, since such discriminations are made on every page and in every line of the Divinely inspired Writings by which he is to be instructed. And, in regard to fornication and concubinage, the work on Conjugial Love is so emphatic in its discrimination between them and adultery, and the distinction is so well known even in the world outside the Church, that it is simply amazing that Ministers of the New Church, of "diverse evils" could have made such a pottage, and of "diverse goods" such a paste, as they have produced in their "Resolution and Report."

One might, indeed, wonder if they have read the following in the Heavenly Doctrine:

That the lust of fornication is not the lust of adultery every one sees clearly from common perception. What law, and what judge, imputes a like criminality to a fornicator as to an adulterer? Common perception sees this difference, because fornication is not opposed to conjugial love, as adultery is.

In fornication conjugial love may lie stored up, as what is spiritual may lie stored up in what is natural. (C. L. 449.)

Or, as expressed by the Rev. Augustus Clissold in his Reflections (p. 19):

To confound the guilt of one who has no passions to master, with another who has; or of one who is anxious for the married state, with that of another whose sole delight is to set it at nought, is unworthy, not of a Christian, but, in many respects, even of a heathen moralist.

"Common perception," or, what is the same, common sense, is able to see these distinctions. All judges in Christendom, nay even heathen moralists, are able to observe these discriminations. But these Ministers of the New Church, to whom the light of Heaven itself is open when they are willing to approach it, have in this matter observed neither common justice nor common sense.

CHAPTER VII.

THE INEFFICACY OF FAITH ALONE.

The "Report" distinctly rejects the practice of the intermediate laws as allowable to Newchurchmen, and substitutes, instead, a solifidian idea of "faith in the saving power of the Lord" as the only means of rescue from the evils of adulterous love, permissible to a Christian.

The ministers state, for instance:

If it is true, and this is distinctly taught, that all impurity is evil, then it is also true that there is strength to resist it, through faith in the Lord and in His saving power. The Lord overcame the evils of sensual nature, and glorified this plane of His Humanity, for the very purpose that He might conquer for men in these same temptations, and give them His Divine protection. (A. C. 3490.) That He does give it is a matter of experience.

"These same temptations!" Temptations to what? Temptations to preserve one's sanity or one's life? temptations to preserve one's conjugial through means which the Lord Himself declares to be "not unlawful," but which a whole church of misguided Newchurchmen confounds with adultery? It requires firm faith in the saving power of the Lord for any Newchurchman to avail himself of these means; and the temptation in his case is a temptation to conform to the standards of a false conscience, to deny the Doctrine, to reject the orderly remedy, and, perchance, to indulge promiscuously but secretly in the evils of adulterous love.

Temptation involves the desire to descend into a lower state, and unwillingness to rise to a higher state. If a man who does not need pellicacy, is tempted to indulge in it, then that man shuns evil, when he shuns pellicacy. But if, on the other hand, his sexual necessity is such that he cannot restrain himself; if, from lack of physical outlet, he labors under an overpowering desire to indulge in roaming lusts, or in adultery, or in self-defilement, then such a man conquers in temptation,by the saving power of the Lord--when, instead, he confines himself to one woman who is neither a virgin nor a wife.

The mistaken idea of the "Report" respecting the power of faith and respecting the "saving power of the Lord" is further expounded in a recent letter from one of the Ministers who have been quoted before. He writes as follows:

The essential teaching of the "Report" is that none of the permissions of evil spoken of in the second part of Conjugial Love are necessary or even allowable to those who believe in the saving power of the Lord; especially to those who understand the Lord's saving operations as they are revealed in the spiritual sense of the Word.

Surely you do not mean to question or deny this.

To deny it seems to me to deny that the Lord has come, not only once, but twice; it is to deny that He has met and overcome our enemies, that He holds them in eternal subjection, and that He will give us the victory over them if we will look to Him and shun all evils as sins against Him; in short, it is to deny the whole fabric of the Christian religion, the Word by which it is made known to men, and the Writings wherein the full nature and universal application of that saving power is made clear to our minds; in fact, it is to deny the Lord Himself in His final and crowning revelation of Himself to men as Jesus, or Savior.

Nor can I believe that you question the application of this truth of the saving presence of the Lord to the members of the New Church. I draw no fine distinction between fornication and concubinage, on the one hand, and other forms of impurity on the other, as applied to Newchurchmen. I recognize that these forms are less deadly in their effects than the other forms described. and do not, if indulged in under proper restrictions, destroy the conjugial like the others; just as the wild oats that a young man may sow in his youth do not destroy the remains implanted in infancy. But as the wild oats are neither good nor necessary for the young man, so, it seems to me, concubinage is neither necessary nor good for the Newchurchman. On the contrary, the resort to concubinage must hold conjugial love in abeyance; must weaken its power and lower the moral tone of the individual, while leaving him exposed to greater evils. I hold, therefore, that whatever concessions we may make to the man of the world, or to those men in the Church who cannot rise to a true and lofty apprehension of the subject, the New Church should set before itself and the world nothing less than a life of perfect purity under all circumstances.

Certainly those who have a full understanding and a realizing sense of the saving presence and power of the Lord ought not to adopt the permissions that are allowed to those who have no practical knowledge of the Divine helpfulness, and apply them to their own lives.

Whatever allowance we may make for other men, therefore, the New Church can have but one standard of purity, and that the highest. To attain that standard we need but two things--refusal to make any compromise with evil, and insistence on the saving power of the Lord.

It is clear that our friend misunderstands the whole subject on which he writes with such great earnestness (and evidently in so well-meaning a spirit).

He declares that he does not draw any "fine distinction" in regard to these questions, and he then proceeds to draw distinctions, though not as "fine," it must be admitted, as those drawn in the work on Conjugial Love.

He compares the concubinage which is entered into from "legitimate, just, and really serious causes" to the "wild oats" which are sown by a wayward and unthinking youth. He holds that "the resort to concubinage must weaken the power of conjugial love, and lower the moral tone of the individual," when the Doctrine, on the contrary, declares that such concubinage "preserves the conjugial," and consequently elevates the general moral tone with one who otherwise might descend into the evil of adultery. He terms that a "compromise with evil," which, as has been shown, is a shunning of the evil of adultery.

He maintains that legitimate concubinage leaves a man "exposed to greater evils," when the Doctrine distinctly declares that by means of it "adulteries are guarded against." And, worst of all, he prescribes faith-cure,--prayer cure,--Christian-Science-cure, as the remedy for a physical condition, for which the Divine Revelation prescribes a natural remedy.

Faith is a spiritual thing. Faith in the saving power of the Lord is given to lead men away from evils of the soul. According to the Doctrine of discrete degrees we are not to accept physical means for the cure of internal evils, nor spiritual means for the cure of physical ills. Medicine, or even concubinage, cannot cure the love of adultery; this love must be shunned by internal combats, but medicine or concubinage may remove the natural obstructions which prevent a man from coming into that state of freedom, in which he can overcome his evil lust.

The saving power of the Lord is what cures all diseases, but it does so by means of natural agencies. The saving power of the Lord does not by immediate influx make the blind to see or the deaf to hear. Even in the Lord's miracles means were used, though those means are unknown to us. Faith, no matter how strong, does not restore an amputated leg. Even Mrs. Eddy would not dare to claim it.

Nor does faith alone, even though it may call itself "faith in the saving power of the Lord," change the form or the number of the spermatic arteries, or prevent them from supplying a superabundance of seminal fluid to some men.

This brings us to a consideration of the physical necessity which constitutes the ultimate basis for the allowable kind of fornication and concubinage,--the reason why, "with some men, the love of the sex cannot without injurious results, (damnis), be totally coerced from going forth into fornication." On this subject we are taught in Conjugial Love.

It is unnecessary to recount the injuries which too great a restraint of the love of the sex may cause and operate with those who, from superabundance, labor under venereal excitement. From this source, with such persons, are the origins of certain diseases of the body, and disorders of the mind, not to speak of secret evils which are not to be named. It is otherwise with those who have so scanty a love of the sex that they are able to resist the efforts of its lust. (n. 450.)

These injuries, and their causes, are well known to all physicians, though not to all ministers, but the following from Swedenborg's work on The Generative Organs may serve to illustrate the teaching in Conjugial Love:

From the foregoing considerations we may infer in some slight degree what are the causes of excessive salacity and of natural impotence....

In salacious persons the pruriency, and also of excessive chastity and spermatic vessels are larger than common, and spring from more numerous sources; the pampiniform vessels, also, are more numerous, complete, distinct and swollen, and do not communicate so continuously with the veins above and below the corpus pyramidale; besides which the blood is more abundant, and more fully charged with spirit; for example in young persons: hence the accumulation of semen, and the wantonness which is felt. (n. 18.)

Even a Newchurchman may, from physical causes such as these, be burdened with an overwhelming salacity. And to such a natural disposition,--for which he cannot be blamed,--there may be added hereditary tendencies derived from salacious, and, it may be, adulterous ancestors,--for which, again, he cannot be blamed. And to all this there may be added inflaming influences, such as association with corrupt comrades in the schools and colleges of the Old Church; the unintentional hearing of lewd jests, stories and songs; not to mention the adulterous sphere which universally fills the "Christian" world. To all this a Newchurchman may be, nay, to some extent he necessarily must be subjected, without great blame attaching to him thereby.

"Faith in the saving power of the Lord" is a phrase that sounds very pious, but do we not know from the history of the Christian Church that it may be used to cover over all sorts of spiritual abominations?

Have not antinomians of all ages used the same phrase, to the destruction of all true religion? Is not "Christian Science" at this very day leading astray legions of Christians, and even many members of the New Church, in the name of "Faith in the saving power of the Lord?" But faith alone, no matter how sentimental and prayerful, never yet saved any man either from spiritual or natural ills.

Faith is mere sickly sentiment if not based on the rational understanding of spiritual truth and of natural facts. And faith in the saving power of the Lord requires first of all that we should know who and what the Lord is, and where He is actually present. Newchurchmen know that Jesus Christ is the one God and Lord, but the faith in this fact, fundamental though it be, is merely an historical faith, if it is not realized that the Lord is the Divine Truth, and that the Divine Truth, as now revealed, is the Lord in His Second Coming. "Faith in the saving power of the Lord," means therefore, to Newchurchmen, faith in the Heavenly Doctrine of the New Jerusalem, in which and as which the Lord has revealed Himself to the men of His New Church. This faith requires the acceptance of the Divine Truth revealed in the work on Conjugial Love, in toto, and it means not only the hearing but also the doing of this Word of the Lord, by each one according to the necessities of his case and according to his free and rational conscience.

CHAPTER VIII.

PURITY IN THE NEW CHURCH.

Much is said in the "Report" about "the standard of strict and perfect purity," and fornication and concubinage of every kind are characterized as a "departure from this purity." It is stated that "the Lord gives to the Church the heavenly ideal; her people must keep the ideal before them, and not excuse or justify in themselves any departure from it." And it is pointed out as "significant" that, "in the treatment of this subject in 'the Doctrine of Life for the New Jerusalem,' and in 'The True Christian Religion,' which contains 'the universal Theology of the New Church,' there is no suggestion of any departure from purity as allowable."

But why should this be considered "significant?" Is there anything remarkable in the fact that these works do not contain any suggestion that a departure from purity is allowable? If they did, they certainly would not be good or moral books, but should be rejected by all decent men. The statement in the "Report," however, quite plainly suggests that the work on Conjugial Love is different from the other works of Swedenborg in this respect; that this work does allow a departure from purity, whereas the other works do not.

This unpleasant suggestion is confirmed by various other statements to the same effect in the "Report," and it is turned into positive conviction by the statement that, "no possible departure from this purity is mentioned by Swedenborg, except where his treatment of the subject passes beyond marriage among spiritual men to marriage as it exists in the world among those in evil and natural states." In other words, the "Report" charges that Swedenborg, in the latter part of Conjugial Love, but nowhere else, does mention a departure from purity as "possible," i. e. allowable, to "those in evil and natural states," but to no others.

Apart from the folly and evident self-contradiction of this passage, (allowing those who are not pure to "depart from purity"), it betrays a colossal and most deplorable misunderstanding of the subject under consideration and of the entire tenor and purpose of the work on Conjugial Love. Is it not deplorable that ministers of the New Church should harbor for one minute the scandalous thought that this pure and holy book would suggest, connive at, or sanction any "departure from purity!" With such an idea in their minds, it is small wonder that members of the New Church have termed the book "the skeleton in the New Church closet."

The Ministers realize that it would be most wicked to suggest any departure from purity as permissible to those who are pure, but they seem to entertain with complaisance the thought that Swedenborg suggests a departure from purity to those who are "in evil and natural states."

Can they not see, then, that the latter suggestion is as wicked and cruel as the former would be? To suggest to the evil to depart from purity, means to advise them to depart from whatever remnant of purity there may be with them,--to seduce them to descend into greater impurity, and to cast themselves into deeper damnation.

Cannot the Ministers see to what monstrous absurdities they are led by characterizing pellicacy and concubinage as "a departure from purity," and how unjust they are to the Divine work on Conjugial Love? What is the teaching of the book? Does it teach that a man who is blessed with a happy marriage, may take a concubine conjointly with his wife? That would be a departure from purity. Or does it teach that an unmarried man, who is able to control his love of the sex, may enter into any kind of fornication? That would be a departure from purity. But does the book encourage anything of this kind?

No, but the Lord teaches us in this book that pellicacy and concubinage, for those who cannot otherwise preserve a desire for the purity of the conjugial life, are means of departing from IMPURITY, means of becoming purer in body or mind than they would be or could be without these means.

And He teaches, moreover, that all men, within the Church or without it, are more or less impure, insomuch that not even the angels of heaven are pure in His sight. Nay, "with men, or angels, no love can ever become pure; but as the intention of the will is what is primarily regarded by the Lord, therefore, in so far as man is in this intention and perseveres in it, so far he is initiated into purity and its holiness, and progresses successively." (C. L. 71). When, therefore, a man enters into pellicacy or concubinage with the intention of preserving the conjugial thereby, he does not "depart from purity," but, on the contrary, is "initiated into purity."

The state of impurity, from which such a man then departs, is described as "immoderate and inordinate lust which cannot be restrained by those who are salacious;" it is "the ardor of venery, which in the beginning is glowing hot, and as it were burning," but which by means of pellicacy is "allayed and mitigated; and thus the lasciviousness of salacity, which is filthy, is tempered by something which is as it were analogous to marriage." (C. L. 459.) How can a departure from such a state be described as a "departure from purity?"

To harbor such a thought is very far, indeed, from the "heavenly ideal" which the Lord has given to His Church, or from the "standard of strict and perfect purity" to which the men of the New Church should lift their eyes.

To describe the means of purification as a departure from purity, and to think of the Lord in His Second Coming as instructing men how to depart from purity, this is in the highest degree scandalous, immoral, and impure. Our brethren of the General Convention do not realize this fact, but it would be well for the New Church in their midst if they could do so. And they could do so, if they would really study the work on Conjugial Love, in its own light, and not in the light of the world.

Their ignorance or misunderstanding of the contents of this work is evident from the remarkable warning which the Ministers, in their "Report," issue against the laws of order revealed in the "Second part" of Conjugial Love:

It should be noted that the chapters on fornication and concubinage are not found in the part of the book which treats of "The Delights of Wisdom concerning Conjugial Love," but in a separate section of the book, described in its title as "Pleasures of Insanity concerning Scortatory Love." The very title warns us that in these chapters we are reading not of marriage love but of its perversions; not of heaven but of hell.

This warning is little better than puerile, for the fact is that the First part treats not only of pure conjugial love, but also of its opposites and intermediates, even as the Second part treats not only of the intermediates and the opposites, but also of conjugial love itself.

There are, for instance, in the First part, the chapters on "the Chaste and the Non-chaste," the chapter on "the Causes of Cold, Separation, and Divorce," also the chapter on "Polygamy." Would the Ministers of the Convention characterize Polygamy as one of the "Delights of Wisdom concerning Conjugial Love?" Why not, since, according to their method of reasoning, the very title of the First part should warn them that "in these chapters" they are reading of marriage love, not of its perversions; of heaven, not of hell!

Their argument is the more unfortunate, as the teaching concerning pellicacy, contained in the discredited Second part is found also in the First part, nay, in the very chapter on "the Origin of Conjugial Love." We read thus in No. 98 of this work:

That the love of the sex with man is not the origin of conjugial love, but it is its firstling, [primum]; thus it is as it were the external natural, in which the internal spiritual is implanted. . . . The reason why conjugial love commences by means of the love of the sex, is that before a consort is found, the sex in general is loved, is regarded with a loving eye, and is treated with moral courtesy. For the young man is in a state of choosing, and then, from an innate inclination toward marriage with one, which lies concealed in the inmost recesses of his mind, his external is sweetly warmed.

And because the determinations to marriage are delayed from various causes even until the middle age of young manhood, the beginning of that love in the meantime is as lust, which with some goes forth actually into the love of the sex, but still with them the bridle is relaxed no further than is conducive to health. This, however, is said of the male sex, because with it there are allurements which actually inflame; but it is not said of the female sex.

By what means do the Ministers of the General Convention strive to preserve among their people the high ideal of "purity," of which they speak with so much unction? They pass Resolutions and Reports discrediting the Second part of Conjugial Love and characterizing its teachings as suggestions to depart from purity. But how often do we find them, in the sermons appearing in the Messenger, bringing out the fundamental teaching of the First part, that conjugial love is a spiritual love, based entirely upon the internal union of husband and wife in the things that are of God, thus upon Religion?

The Doctrines of the New Church teach that

The human conjugial and religion, go hand in hand. (C. L. 80.)

Love truly conjugial viewed in itself, is a union of souls and a conjunction of minds. (C. L. 179.)

Conjugial love is according to the state of the Church, because it is according to the state of wisdom with man. (C. L. 130.)

From which it follows that

Where there is no religion, there is no conjugial love. (C. L. 239.)

And therefore we are taught that

Conjugial love cannot exist between two who are of a different religion, since the truth of the one does not agree with the good of the other, and two dissimilar and discordant principles cannot form one mind out of two. (H. H. 378)

Those who are born within the Church, and from infancy have imbibed the principles of the Church, ought not to enter into marriage with those who are outside the Church and who thus have imbibed such things as are not of the Church. The reason is because there is no conjunction between them in the spiritual world,--for every one in that world is consociated according to good and truth thence,--and since there is no conjunction in the spiritual world between such, neither ought there to be such conjunction on earth; wherefore, also, marriages on earth between those who are of a different religion are, in heaven, accounted as heinous. (A. C. 8995.)

In the General Convention these teachings are as unpopular as the intermediate laws in Conjugial Love, and therefore they are generally concealed or explained away. But what is the result? What is the state of marriage in the societies of the General Convention, as far as we may be allowed to judge of this state from well known symptoms?

Do we not hear reports from the ministers themselves that the young people more often marry out of the Church than within it? That in some societies scarcely one family can be found, where husband and wife are of the same faith? Or as stated by the Rev. James Reed, of Boston,

To what extent is the influence of the visible New Church perceptibly exerted in favor of marriage which rest on a purely spiritual and heavenly basis, as distinguished from those which have in view only supposed natural advantages? Does she lift up her voice and proclaim the truth on this subject, or is she ignominiously silent? ... Must we not confess it true that far too often among those who are ostensibly Newchurchmen, the vital principle [in marriage] is altogether lost sight of, and the question of spiritual oneness, or sympathy in those matters which are highest and holiest, receives no serious attention? It is stating the fact mildly to say that there is an alarming and growing laxity in this regard. No surer means could be found of loosening the ties which bind us to the external New Church, and doing what we can to disintegrate the Church itself. (See New Jerusalem Magazine, Dec., 1887.)

And what can be the state of conjugial love in the Church, when its fruits, the children, are lost to the Church by the thousand? when, within the last thirty years, "only twenty-five per cent. of the children baptized into New Church societies in the United States since 1870 can be accounted for?" (See New Church Messenger for July 8th, 1903.)

These statistics, it should be noted, do not involve that all of the twenty-five per cent. have remained in the Church, but simply that they "can be accounted for." In view of such overwhelming facts, one might well ask what the Ministers of the General Convention have done for the little ones whom the Lord has committed to their care, to be brought up by them for His Church? And what have they done for the growth of love truly conjugial in the Church, that marriage, the seminary of the Church as of Heaven, has proved so barren?

What has not been done is evident enough: the light of heaven has been hidden under a bushel. No instruction has been given on the most important and practical things of life, the things pertaining to marriage, its intermediates and its opposites. What has not been done is mournfully evident from marriage notices which frequently appear in the journals of the New Church, announcing the wedding of some member of the New Church with one of the Old Church, the Old Church pastor of one of the parties, officiating, assisted by the New Church pastor of the other party, or, perhaps, vice versa.

Where is the spiritual morality, the "strict and perfect purity" of a marriage in which a "believer" is "unequally yoked together with an unbeliever?" Can it be a marriage, in the New Church sense of the term? The contracting parties marry "for love," no doubt, but the question remains, what love?

Can it be love truly conjugial, when there is not a common love of the truths and goods of the New Jerusalem? If it be not conjugial love, then it must be some other love,--perhaps the love of wealth or social position, or the love of ease and comfort, or any other affection of the love of the world, the same love, in quality if not in form, as that which inspires a courtesan to sell her body to the highest bidder.

Or, on the part of the young man, it may be the love of beauty, and, on the part of the young woman, the love of manly strength, intellectual brightness, external uprightness, or some other natural duality. This is the "love" we most often read of in novels, a love which, however romantic, is nothing but the natural love of the sex, a love that passes away if it has no spiritual internal. Or perhaps the young man is acting on the "sublime" advice of Paul, that "it is better to marry than to burn;" that it is better for him to pour out upon a virgin bride the filthy fury of his pent-up lust, than to temper his fire with one who is neither a virgin nor a wife.

A marriage that is entered upon merely from any of the affections described above, is naught but one of those "illegitimate conjunctions" of which we read:

An illegitimate conjunction is one which takes place, not from conjugial affection, but from any other affection whatsoever, as from the love of beauty, from the love of wealth, from the love of the dignity of the person, and also from the love of what is lascivious. These conjunctions are illegitimate in principle, because it is the external that conjoins and not internal things at the same time. (A. C. 9182.)

Marriages such as these are taking place all the time, in the New Church, alas, as well as in the Old, but we do not hear of any Council of Ministers passing Resolutions and Reports condemning these sexual impurities, which, differing from pellicacy and concubinage, invade and destroy the conjugial itself. Which is purer in the sight of God, concubinage, or a marriage which is entered into merely from external reasons, a marriage which is of the flesh alone? The Doctrine answers.

Marriages between those who are of different religion are unlawful, (illicita), because there is not a conjunction of similar good and truth in the interiors. (H. H. 378, ref.)

But,

Concubinage, separate from the wife, when from legitimate, just, and truly serious causes, is not unlawful, (non sit illicitus). C. L. 467

Thus the Doctrine of the New Jerusalem. But the Church, as represented by the Old Church or by the General Convention or the General Conference of the New Church. reserves its condemnations for that which is "not unlawful," and its blessings for that which is "unlawful."

The ministers of the General Convention know as well as we do, that it is the absence of the spiritual element in marriage, that lies at the root of all the unhappy marriages and of all the sexual evils and impurities which are the curse of the whole Christian world, and which are by no means unknown even in the nominal New Church. They must know it, for the Doctrine teaches that

The first of the internal causes of cold [in marriage] is the rejection of religion by both of the married partners. (C. L. 230.)

The second of the internal causes of cold is, that one of the married partners has religion, and the other has not. (C. L. 241.)

The third of the internal causes of cold is, that one of the married partners has a different religion from the other. (C. L. 242.)

From these causes, then, springs the "coldness" in marriage, which, again, is the mother of all domestic infelicities and tragedies, and all sexual evils and impurities in the world and in the Church.

But the Ministers of the Convention, straining at gnats and swallowing camels, close their eyes to the root of all these evils, while condemning as sinful and adulterous "the washed linen" of concubinage.

It is vain to hope for genuine purity in the New Church before its members learn to discriminate between natural marriage and spiritual marriage between conjugial love, its opposites, and its intermediates, for the Heavenly Doctrine teaches that such discriminations "may be seen by those who look upon things minutely and distinctly but not by those whose view of things is confused and indistinct. Yea, it may be seen by those who are in conjugial love, but not by those who are in the love of adultery. The latter are in night concerning all the derivations of the love of the sex, whereas the former are in daylight respecting them." (C. L. 463.

Natural purity in the Church depends upon spiritual purity, and this again depends in the first instance upon the fidelity of the Church to Him who is her Divine Bridegroom. To the New Church the Lord has revealed Himself in the Heavenly Doctrine of the New Jerusalem; faith in the Lord means faith in this Doctrine, and love of the Lord means love of this Doctrine. When the Doctrine is despised, or falsified, or denied in faith or in practice by members or bodies of the Church, then spiritual adultery is committed.

Forsaking the Truth which should be her one Lord and Master, the Church becomes a harlot, conjoining herself with the gods of the nations, the false standards of thought and conduct which are worshipped by an hypocritical and adulterous world.

It is only by unswerving loyalty to the Heavenly Doctrine that the Church can become and remain the Bride, the Lamb's Wife. The test of loyalty comes when the Doctrine offends the natural man, the "world" within us. The world considers this Doctrine "a man gluttonous and a winebibber, a friend of publicans and sinners." The natural man is offended at the Doctrine concerning fornication and concubinage. But will the Church follow her Lord whithersoever He goeth? He will not lead us astray. He will not depart from purity. Wherever He goes before us in His Heavenly Doctrine, there we shall find Heaven, there love truly conjugial will blossom as the rose, pure within and without. The Doctrine alone can make the Church pure within. "Cleanse ye, therefore, first the inside of the cup and the platter, that the outside of them may be clean also."