Imágenes de páginas



in fact, that is the very definition of evil :-"Sin (says Swedenborg) is all that which is contrary to Divine order;" and those who in the world have lived in this violation of the laws of order, or, what is the same thing, of the Divine Commandments,—till they have become confirmed in that evil state of mind, cannot, after death, change, or even wish to change, those evil inclinations ; they may wish, indeed, to rid themselves of the effects of the evil,—that is, its punishment,--but the evil itself they love and cling to; and as evil and its punishment cannot be separated, therefore they cannot but suffer. It is precisely like the case of a hardened criminal in this world, who cannot but continue to be punished, because he will not cease to do evil.

In addition to the above, our author adduces the following striking cases from experience, in confirmation of the great truth that the character or nature which man acquires in the world, continues unchangeably with him after death :

“It has been granted me (he says) to discourse with some who lived two thou. sand years ago, and whose lives are described in history, and hence made known, and they were found to be still like themselves, and altogether such as had been described, thus, the same in respect to the love which constituted their life. There were others who lived seventeen hundred years ago, and who are also known from history; others who lived four hundred years ago, others three, and 80 on, with whom it was granted to hold converse; and it was found that a similar inclination still prevailed with them, with no other difference than that the delights of their love were changed into such spiritual things as correspond. The life of the ruling love is never changed with any one, even to eternity; for every one is his own love, and therefore to change it with a spirit, would be to deprive him of his life, or to extinguish it.”*

Such are the solemn, and at the same time rational and philosophical, teachings of the New Church doctrines on the important subject under consideration. And are they not entirely in agreement with the declarations of the Scriptures—the Divine Word itself? “ Can the Ethiopian change his skin ?" says the Scripture, “or the leopard his spots ? then may ye do good, who have been accustomed to do evil;"+ showing that with those who have indulged themselves in the commission of sin till it has becomed a confirmed habit, it is at length as truly a part of their nature and mental constitution as the dark skin is a part of the Ethiopian, or as the spots are characteristic of the leopard. And with what solemn emphasis does our Lord Himself utter the declaration that “ the fire never shall be quenched :” “Their worm dieth not (He says), and the fire is not quenched." I (In the spiritual sense of Scripture, by worm is signified falsity : and by fire, evil.) The language here is

H.H. 480. + Jer. xiii. 23 Mark, ix. 44, 46, 48.



plain and unambiguous : “the fire is not quenched"—the lust of evil is not extinguished after death. “He that is unjust,” says the Scripture, “let him be unjust still; and he that is filthy, let him be filthy still."*

Here, then, is the positive declaration of Divine Truth, that the essential character of a man cannot be changed after death; and, consequently, that the evil must remain evil. But, perhaps, some reflecting and benevolent persons, while reluctantly admitting the fact, and also acknowledging the soundness of the philosophy that explains it, nevertheless may ask sadly—“Why should the mind of man have been so constituted ? How can this be reconciled with the goodness of the Creator, that He should have so constituted man as that the errors and evils of a comparatively short life, should thus determine his fate and state to eternity?” This question we shall endeavour to meet, by showing that the case which they deplore is grounded in the very necessity of things; that the good of the universe requires just such an order and constitution of man's mind, and that without it there could be no lasting happiness for man, no heaven; and consequently, that the very end of the benevolent Creator in forming the universe could not have been otherwise attained.

The argument is this. It is to be kept in mind that, as often stated by Swedenborg, the one end which the Divine Creator had in view in His creation was that there might be a heaven formed of human beings, with whom the Lord might dwell in love and joy to eternity. This is the one end: all other things are but means to this. Now heaven means a state of settled and lasting happiness, derived from the love of its inhabitants to each other, and to their good Creator. It must be a state, be it observed, in which there is no danger of falling, no danger of change—otherwise it could not be a heaven; for if there were a possibility of change, it could not be with certainty everlasting; and were there any fear of falling, that fear would poison their state of happiness, even while it did exist. In order, then, to effect this certainty of unchangeableness, man's mind was so constituted that, after a certain period of probation in the natural world, it might attain a fixed and settled character, so that when transferred into the interior and spiritual state by the process called death, it might no longer be in danger of change as it was in the lower state, but might remain unchangeably in that state of good which it had attained; in other words, that it might secure that state of fixed and settled and eternal happiness, which is called heaven. Hence we perceive the necessity of the law in man's constitution, that after a certain period of probation, after a

* Rev. xxii. 11.



certain amount of wavering and swaying backwards and forwards, it should at length become fixed and settled, beyond the possibility of change. This condition, as every one must see, was necessary, to the end that there might exist that state of settled and permanent happiness which is called heaven.

So much, then, is plain : such is the reason for the existence of that law of man's mind; we perceive that it was indispensable. But, now, the law works both ways; if the mind may become settled in good, so it may become settled in evil. If it was indispensable to the happiness of the good, and to the end of creation, that man's mind should be so constituted that, after a certain period of trial, it should at length attain a fixed character,-it follows that those who abuse. this good law, and pervert it from the purpose for which it was intended, by giving themselves up to evil instead of good, by going to the wrong instead of the right side of the stream of life—should find at length the bridge fall and cut them off from the possibility of heaven, which, in fact, was only intended to deliver the good from the possibility of hell.“ Between us and you,” says the Scripture, “there is a great gulf fixed : so that they which would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us that would come from thence."* It was necessary that the gulf should be made impassable, otherwise there would be a possibility of the good crossing to the evil, as well as of the evil going over to the good. If hell might rise, heaven might fall. Hence the absolute necessity of the law above mentioned, that after a certain period of probation, the character of the mind should become fixed unchangeably. London.

0. P. H. (To be continued.)


NICENE PERIOD. Justin having earned, by his life and death, the titles of philosopher and martyr, his mantle (as a Christian philosopher) descended on Titus Flavius Clemens, better known as Clement of Alexandria, from his long residence in that city and connection with the church there. Of his life we know but little. His early years were devoted to the acquisition of that deep, varied, and curious learning so conspicuous in his writings. First the scholar, and then the successor of the learned Pantæpus (whom he terms “the Sicilian bee”) in the celebrated school of divinity at Alexandria, his teaching rendered that great Christian University (as

* Luke, xvi. 26.



it may be styled) superior to the Pagan school of that illustrious city, which, from the days of the first Ptolemy, had been famous for her schools of science, literature, and philosophy. The Christian school is said to have existed there since the time of St. Mark the Evangelist. Clement also held the office of Presbyter in the Alexandrian church; and his life continued for some years to flow on in the pleasant though arduous discharge of his multifarious duties, until a season of persecution obliged him to take refuge in Jerusalem with his former pupil Alexander, the first Gentile bishop of that city, the first twelve bishops of Jerusalem having been Hebrews. We next find him visiting the church at Antioch, and then back again at Alexandria, once more pursuing “the even tenor of his way." After that he vanishes completely from the scene, and afterwards only appears in his writings. He flourished in the early part of the third century.

Clement was deeply read in all the lore of his day, both ancient and modern ; and in his writings are preserved many invaluable fragments both of Greek and Oriental literature, especially as regards the ancient mysteries; indeed, according to the opinion of some, his three great works are arranged according to the Mystic degrees, his object in his earliest work, the Protrepticon, being the purification of the reader's mind from Gentile error and evil practice; next, in his Pædagogus, he initiates him in the great truths of Christianity; while in his Magnum Opus the Stromata, he endeavours to lead the mind to the contemplation of higher and more interior ideas contained within the external truths of the Gospel, whose tendency is to elevate and perfect the soul, thereby affording an intuition of universal truth. That such was Clement's intention is the only conclusion to which an attentive perusal of bis writings must lead. His views of the Logos are identical with those of Justin, but worked out more in detail. Like the great philosophers of his day and city, he is essentially an Eclectic. He collects all that is valuable in Heathen literature, mythology, and philosophy; and endeavours to raise it, as it were, to a higher power in the light of Christian truth; and though in this neither he nor Justin are always happy or judicious in their efforts, yet we cannot fail to recognise therein the carrying out of a great principle.

Clement, with the Platonists, places happiness in the contemplation of “ideas,” but with Philo (see No. II.) he regards the Logos, the Divine Reason or Wisdom, as the seat or region of ideas; and farther, he, with John, identifies the Logos with the Messiah, the Incarnate Word, who delivered humanity from the power of those evil demons that would otherwise have obstructed all heavenly communication therewith,



and the medium of the inflowing (influx) of Divine Love into all, “whereby," as he expresses it, “the whole universe is become an ocean of good.” He, as an evident corollary from this, constantly asserts the immanence of the Logos in all men, in opposition to the philosophers of his day, who admitted, indeed, the immanence of the Logos or Divine Reason in men, but confined it to a portion—an elect or elite of humanity. Clement, on the other hand, viewing the subject from the heights of redemptive love, affirms all mankind—without exception or distinction to be partakers of the Logos. This he considered the essential Gospel which he could preach to every human creature—which in a certain sense rendered every human creature on a level with the sage and the saint; for however foolish and fallen, had he not in him, though unknown to himself, the germ of all wisdom and sanctity, nay, of heaven itself? This was, in truth, “glad tidings" to every human creature; the recognition of so great a treasure in “ the last recesses of his mind,” must give him “good hope through grace;" while the conviction that it—though in—is not of himself in any way, but totally independent of him, must fill him with humility. And, in fine, he is stimulated to avoid every evil of thought or life that would tend to retard the development of the Logos in his life, by fear, on the one hand, lest his mind should be darkened, and closed to the perception of it; and on the other hand, by the prospect of enjoying all the blessedness enveloped therein, as the tree with all its branches, foliage, and flowers in the seed. *

Having in these observations, as we believe, faithfully given the substance and spirit of Clement's teaching, we proceed to notice the other great representative of the “ Theory of the Logos” in the Ante-Nicene church. This was Hippolytus, bishop of Portus, near Rome, the recent discovery and identification of whose magnum opus is now pretty generally known. His views on the Logos are identical with those of Clement. After representing God as having none coëval with Him, “no infinite chaos, no measureless water or solid earth, no thick air or hot fire or spirit, nor the blue form of the great heaven,” he proceeds to say that “this sole one and universal God first by cognition begat the Word, not the Word in the sense of speech, but as the indwelling Reason of the Universe."

The generation of the Logos is here evidently the same as the proceeding of Divine Truth from Divine Good, in order to be the life and

* Clement, as a necessary consequence of this doctrine, advocates the freedom of man both morally and intellectually. He maintains, with Philo, an allegorical sense in the Scripture, and interprets several portions of the Word according to this method.

« AnteriorContinuar »