an idolater; and that he had not yet, whilst in the land of Canaan, rejected from his mind Shaddai, by whom is signified, in the literal sense, the name of the God of Abram; and that by this name the Lord was first represented before the patriarchs, Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, appears from the passage just cited. The reason that the

Lord was pleased first to be represented before them by the name of Shaddai, is because the Lord is never willing to destroy suddenly, much less instantaneously, the worship inseminated in any one from infaney; for this would be to pluck up the root, and thus to destroy the holy principle of adoration and worship deeply implanted, which the Lord never breaks, but bends. The holy principle of worship, rooted in early life, is of such a nature, that it cannot endure violence, but must be bent with moderation and gentleness. Such is the case in regard to the gentiles, who, during their life in the body, had worshiped idols, and yet had lived in mutual charity. The holy principle of their worship is not in the other life removed instantaneously, but gradually; for those who have lived in mutual charity are in a state capable of having the goods and truths of faith easily implanted in them, which afterwards they receive with joy; for charity is the very ground of reception" (A. C. 1992).

The fact is, idolatries are of two kinds, internal and external; "and the internal are what bring a man under condemnation, but the external not so much so. Internal idolaters do not acknowledge a God, but adore themselves and the world, and make idols of all their lusts; whereas external idolaters may acknowledge a God, although they do not know who is the God of the universe. Internal idolaters are known by the life which they have acquired to themselves; and their idolatry is of a more interior kind, in proportion as the life so acquired departs from the life of charity: whereas external idolaters are known only by their worship; and notwithstanding their being idolaters, they may still possess the life of charity" (A. C. 1363).

Thus we see that a man may be an idolater in externals, without losing that by which he may become conjoined with angels, the life of charity; and, on the contrary, a man may be a Christian in name only, and an idolater in heart; and to this effect the Apostle Paul testifies to the Colossian converts (iii. 5), where he warns them against "covetousness;" which he expressly calls "idolatry."

Doubtless a great deal of the horror of idolatry, which to a certain extent is so justly felt by all Christians, has arisen from not making the distinction, drawn above by Swedenborg, between internal and external idolatry; and its propriety to its fullest extent has been

confirmed by the very strong expressions with which the Bible abounds in reference to this crime, on the part both of Jews and Christians. For instance, in regard to the former, we read in Leviticus (xxvi. 1, 27, 28, 29, 30, &c.), "Ye shall make no idols nor graven images, neither rear you up a standing image; neither shall ye set up any image of stone in your land, to bow down unto it; for I am Jehovah your God. And if ye will not hearken unto me, but walk contrary unto me, then I will walk contrary unto you also in my fury; and I, even I, will chastise you seven times for your sins. And ye shall eat the flesh of your sons; and the flesh of your daughters shall ye eat. And I will destroy your high places, and cut down your images, and cast your carcasses upon the carcasses of your idols; and my soul shall abhor you," &c. And of the latter it is stated in Rev. xxi. 8, "Idolaters shall have their part in the lake which burneth with fire and brimstone." And Paul writes to the Corinthians (I. vi. 9) that "idolaters shall not inherit the kingdom of God."

Strictly speaking, no idolater can enter into heaven; but most assuredly many of those who have been idolaters will do so upon being instructed after death that our blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is the only God of heaven and earth. The same remark is applicable also to those who, knowing no better, believe our Lord to be only one of three divine persons, instead of being, as He truly is, the only personal God. Such a faith is, correctly speaking, an idolatrous faith; and, not being the faith of heaven, no one can enter into heaven who entertains it; since none but a true faith can possibly exist there. Yet those who have believed in this tripersonal scheme, and yet have lived according to the precepts of charity from spiritual motives, so as to become principled in the life of charity, would easily give up after death their belief in any Deity separate from the person of Jesus Christ, and thus "cast away their idols," the imaginary persons they had idolatrously worshiped, "to the moles and the bats” (Isaiah ii. 20), and become prepared to receive a faith in accordance with the life they had previously acquired, of whilst in the world.

Divine mercy,

That idolatry should be so dreadful a crime in the members of the Lord's church as to exclude them from all participation in the delightful contemplation and perception that "God is love," and that fury is not in him," we can easily perceive to be true. For such a state unquestionably resembles that of a subject rebelling against the authority of his sovereign, and joining himself to his enemies; or

66

that of a soldier refusing obedience to his lawful commander, and deserting his post to associate himself with an opposing army.

Hence the necessity of the awful warnings against idolatry, both in the first Christian and in the Israelitish churches; and the more especially in the latter, as they were so prone to fall into it, and indeed could scarcely be witheld from it even by the dread of immediate punishment; and if they had fallen into it universally, so that all knowledge of the true God had been lost, or, in the words of holy Scripture, if the Lord had not reserved unto himself at least " a very small remnant," all mankind must have perished.

Nor are the citizens of the New Jerusalem less free from the evil consequences of idolatry than the members of preceding churches. To us, indeed, external idolatry can scarcely occur. If, however, there be any who, having received the primary article of our churches, afterwards fall into the tripersonal creed, such persons we must regard as idolaters; as much so indeed as those who, after admitting the truths promulgated by the apostles, "eat of things offered to idols."

There is, however, a species of idolatry to which all men are prone; idolatry of the worst kind, because it is internal, and therefore liable to escape the observation of all who do not carefully and frequently look into themselves, and scan with rigid eye their motives and thoughts; we mean the idolatry of the heart. And Swedenborg testifies (A. C. 4825) that all "who are principled in self-love and the love of the world, are in internal idolatry; for they worship themselves and they worship the world, and perform holy duties for the sake of self-adoration and of self-gain; that is, with a view to self as an end, not with a view to the Lord's church and kingdom as an end; thus, not with a view to the Lord."

At some future period, if the Lord will, we purpose entering into a consideration of the primitive sacrifices, and of their nature amongst different ancient nations; and we cannot better conclude this paper than in the words of "the disciple whom Jesus loved," "Little children, keep yourselves from idols" (1 John v. 21).

Διάκονος.

A CURE FOR DISSENSIONS AMONG CHRISTIANS.

To the Editors of the Intellectual Repository, &c. GENTLEMEN,

"IT must needs be that offences will come ;" for such is the low condition of human nature, that they cannot be avoided; and it must needs

be also, that sorrow will be the bitter fruit of such offences, while it is written, "Wo unto that man by whom the offence cometh." "Whence come wars and fightings among you," demands an apostle, "Come they not hence,-even of your lusts?" No one, then, can reasonably doubt, that since offences must come, it is the duty and interest of every Christian to ascertain to a certainty, how he ought to conduct himself whensoever they arise.

66

It has been shrewdly remarked, that "if one will not quarrel, two cannot ;" and this saying is worthy of all acceptation. If when the violent or disordered natural affections of one person threaten the commencement of strife, all the others who are present were to restrain their selfish passions from yielding to the excitement, there would be no war;" contention would begin and end in the same moment! Christians are not without abundant cautionary precepts how to conduct themselves when suffering under provocation, such as, "The servant of the Lord must not strive :" worketh not the righteousness of God" is confusion and every evil work; but the wisdom that is from above, is peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy, and without partiality."

"The wrath of men

"Where strife is, there

What! it may be asked, by those who have never considered these admonitory truths, Are we to give way to every ill-advised suggestion? Are we to pass by every rude speech, or ungenerous insinuation, or be silent under open accusation, however unjust? To these questions, it is replied, Certainly not. But there are two ways of meeting error, accusation, and rudeness; the one is such as becomes a Christian, because it springs from Christian feelings and principles, and the other is such only as becomes a man who is not a Christian, because-no matter whether the views advocated are abstractedly right or wrong,-the manner of maintaining them originates with the self-hood, and breathes a spirit of personal hostility and retaliation, which can only spring from beneath.

How then should a Christian carry on a discussion of disputed points? It is answered, By applying himself EXCLUSIVELY to the matter at issue, and passing by, as no concern of his, all that is offensive in the language or manner of the opposing party; and by replying with equal courtesy, whether he has been courteously treated, or the contrary.

Disputants would do well to remember, that in order to the full elucidation of a matter, both parties must keep to the point. There is already, owing to the infirmity which besets the judgement of most

N. S. NO. I.-VOL. I.

C

men, sufficient to lead the attention away from the question, without suffering the intrusive admixture of resentful feelings and personal considerations. When these are admitted,—and they can only be admitted by consent of BOTH parties, and owing to the assailed party acting upon the abrogated principle of "an eye for an eye, and a tooth for a tooth,”—then the discussion can no longer be uscfully carried on. Truth cannot compromise her dignity, by consenting to be present at contentions between selfhood and selfhood, although carried on under the pretence of seeking her favor. It cannot be doubted, that the truth of a matter, and a just judgement thereon, are much more likely to be realized, while extraneous matters are excluded from mixing with the discussion; and what so extraneous as personal feelings, and the personal contentions they originate? If TRUTH could be personally present, she would command the opposing parties not to presume to mingle their petty personalities, whether offensive or defensive, with her exalted interests; for no two things can be more incompatible with each other.

66

Is it objected, Am I then to refrain from chastising my assailant for his improper conduct or demeanor ? Am I not justified in holding up to ridicule or contempt the man who presumes to offer a ridiculous argument? To these objections it is answered, Certainly you are not entitled to return evil for evil; nor to hold up the feeble to contempt,—if Christianity is to determine your line of conduct. Undoubtedly, you are to stand up for the truth, but you are to speak the truth in love." Even the wiser portion of the worldlyminded would applaud your equanimity, and also your magnanimity, if, in spite of all provocation to turn the question into a personal one, you were calmly and rigidly to adhere to the point at issue, and to the matter which fairly relates to the real question under consideration. But if you are disposed to plead further, that the provocation may be so great as to exceed all endurance; why then, the greater would be the merit of your not being carried away by it!

It is then quite certain, that the intrusion into public discussions of personal feelings and contentions, is equally obnoxious to natural reason, and the principles of the gospel.

Is it further objected, "you demand an impossibility;" to this it is replied, "with men, indeed, it is impossible; but with God, all things are possible;" to which I add, that the Lord has given us an injunction, the observance of which would infallibly prevent discussion from degenerating into discreditable personal contention, and it is con