|
|
Series:
|
101
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK multiplied
indefinitely; moreover you have yourself expressed agreement that "all that
proceeds from the Divine
In DIVINE PROVIDENCE, n. 52, we read: "But it must be known that the
Divine in itself is in the Lord, but that the Divine from itself is the Divine
of the Lord in created things". It is indeed true that created things in
themselves are not Divine; this is your argument; but the point is that the
regenerated human of man is not merely a created thing in itself; it is a
created thing into which the Lord continually inflows and in which He dwells in
His Own. For this reason the regenerated human is of the Lord alone and thus
Divine. As soon as man would ascribe the least of it to himself, he would
immediately cast himself out of Heaven. The fact that in the Word itself the
distinction is pointed out between the "Divine in itself" and the
"Divine from itself", makes it quite plain that in passages where
simply the word "Divine" is used, it ought to be discerned in which of
the two senses it must be understood. If only the actual existence of this
difference in the meaning of the term Divine is realized, there can be no doubt
about the question in which one of the two senses it is used in the statement of
the ARCANA, n. 1906, that "Remains with man are not Divine but human".
The difference of the two meanings becomes quite evident from their respective
opposites. The opposite of the primary meaning, which alone you admit, is indeed
the human; but the opposite of the derivative meaning, in which the term has
been used by us, is that which is of man's old proprium, thus disorderly and
infernal.
If you say: "It seems to me that the way you use the word Divine for
a regenerated man ... is apt to confuse your readers and make them lose sense of
the distinction between the Divine and the human", I must reply what I have
said in my previous letter, namely, that whereas the only issue is the
difference between that which is the 102 Lord's
with man and that which is of man's infernal proprium, or between that which
from the Lord with man is holy, orderly, genuine, pure, and perfect and that
which from man's proprium is infernal, disorderly, not genuine, impure, and
imperfect, it is surprising to see the reader skip to an entirely different
proposition, which is foreign to the problem, namely the difference between that
which is Uncreated, Infinite, and Divine in itself, and that which is created,
finite, and human. And I must repeat that the skipping to this other issue is
only possible because the reader is ignorant of the cognition out of the Latin
Testament that not only the Divine in itself is called Divine, but also that
which is from the Divine, by which of course I did not mean a created thing
apart from influx, but the Divine in created things (cf. D.P. 52). If it were
not that from this ignorance the reader with the term "Divine" always
connects the concept of the Uncreated and the Infinite, he could know from a
simple reading of the articles published in DE HEMELSCHE LEER that in speaking
of the understanding and reception of the Doctrine being Divine, we never have
meant to say that it is uncreated an-d infinite. And similarly it seems that you
consider it necessary to draw our
attention to the teaching that "though the reformed and vivified proprium
is from the Lord's proprium, it is still man's and he feels it as his own 103
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
cording
to reception, the statement that "the Doctrine of the Church is
Divine" loses all its meaning, if at .the same time it is held that the
reception of it is not Divine. I note, however, that while in your previous
letters you spoke of falsities adhering to the reception and understanding of
the Divine Doctrine of the Church, your last letter does not contain any such
remarks; on the contrary you yourself now bring forward confirmatory passages to
prove that very thing which is alone essential in our position, namely, that
"the new man is truly human from the Lord", that his new proprium
"is from the Lord's proprium, and that it is called angelic or
heavenly". These remarks of yours now bring us for the first time to the
real issue. The essence of the real issue can only be seen if it is seen in the
difference between "the celestial and angelic proprium which is from the
Lord and the infernal and diabolical proprium which is from one's self" (A.C.
252, the number quoted by you in this connection). There should now be
Even if, in spite of the preceding
considerations, you would still insist on using the term "Divine" only
to denote that which is uncreated and infinite as the Divine Human of the
Lord is uncreated and infinite it makes no difference with regard to what is
the real issue. Although according to my understanding it is contrary to .the
use which the Latin Word itself makes of these terms, and although it therefore
necessarily takes away from the full integrity and clearness of the argument, in
order to meet your difficulty I would suggest that in all those passages in our
articles where the term Divine is used in such a way that you object, instead of
"Divine" you simply read "of the Lord alone", or
"celestial and angelic", or "truly human", or "orderly,
genuine, perfect, pure, and holy". If
with this interchangement of terms
you can agree with our position, this is essentially all we want. With
this in mind, may I now return to those three points of my last letter, which I
consider essential for the understanding of the relation between the Third
Testament and the Doctrine of the New Church: 104
A
CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE
1. The Divine of the
Third Testament in itself alone is not sufficient to redeem and save the human
race and to build the New Church. Without that in man which is of the Lord
alone, his truly human, orderly, genuine, perfect, pure, and holy, new-born
proprium, whereby the Divine of the Third Testament is transferred from without
2.
That in man which is of the Lord alone, whereby the Divine of the Third
Testament is transferred from outside man to within man, comes into existence by
his regeneration.
3.
By regeneration a new man is conceived and born in man. By this new birth
the old man is not completely put aside at once; but nevertheless the evils and
falsities which are still present in the old man are extraneous to the new man.
The new man is altogether of the Lord alone, he is altogether truly human,
orderly, genuine, perfect
In all the places in these three
points where originally the term "Divine" occurred in application to
the man of the Church, I have now replaced it by the terms "of the Lord
alone", "holy", and so forth. It is your position as developed in
your letter to Mr. Pitcairn of April 14th, that the Doctrine of the New Church
of which you admit that it ought to be distinguished from the Latin Word
is Divine; you even say that "in a very real sense it is the Coming of the
Lord to the Church" (p. 77 of your recent pamphlet); but at the same time
you hold that the reception of it is "very imperfect" and the
understanding of it "mixed with falsities". Keeping in mind the
preceding considerations I now should like to make the following two remarks 105
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
with
regard to this position. FIRST: To anyone who is familiar with the law that all
influx is according to reception (A.C. 5118; H.H. 569. and many other places),
it must be plain that the statement "the Doctrine of the Church is
Divine" loses all its meaning if at the same time it is held that the
reception and understanding of it are mixed with evils and falsities. For there
is no sense in speaking of the Doctrine of the Church before it is received and
understood; before reception it is not the Doctrine of the Church but the Word
itself. SECONDLY: Whereas in your last letter you yourself pointed to the new,
angelic and celestial, proprium, that it is "truly human", and
"of the Lord alone with man", and whereas it seems evident that if we
are to speak of the genuine Doctrine of the Church, this is possible only if its
reception is in that new, truly human proprium, which is of the Lord alone, and
by no means if the reception is in the old infernal proprium, or even if this
latter would have the least part in the reception, does it then not follow
plainly and inevitably that if the statement "the Doctrine of the Church is
Divine" is to have any meaning, it involves that the reception and
understanding of it must be of the Lord alone with man, truly human, orderly,
genuine, pure, and holy. It cannot but be free of all imperfections in the
finite sense it must be absolutely free of all falsities. We are convinced
that it would be more in agreement with the language of the Latin Word to say
that it must be Divine; but in order to meet your difficulty we are willing to
use these other terms. May I ask you to kindly give me an answer to these two
points?
In your letter to me of May 20th you
say: "As the Doctrine of the Church proceeds from the Divine, it is Divine
in men. Growing in the Church as a plant grows from a seed, it becomes the
finite image and likeness of the Divine Doctrine which is the Lord Himself as
the Word. Thus yon say: "The Doctrine is Divine in men". How can it be
"in men" unless it has passed through reception?
You say "it grows as from a seed". How can it "grow"
and how can it be "a seed", if it is not a created thing? The infinite
and the uncreated does not grow. And yet you call it Divine. According to our
position you are perfectly right in doing so, but how can you harmonize it 106
A CORRESPONDENCE.
THE DOCTRINE with
your own position, according to which that which is from the Divine may never be
called Divine? It is true that in
a supereminent sense it may
be said that the Divine Human of the Lord Himself, when He was on earth,
"grew as from a seed". But now the Divine Human of the Lord is
infinite, and though it is true that the genuine Doctrine and the seeds of it
are from the Divine Human of the Lord, nevertheless these seeds in the Church
But from your own endeavour, as shown
in your last letter, to demonstrate that the new-born man is of the Lord alone
with man, from the Lord's own
proprium, truly human, "heavenly" that is, celestial and
angelic, and from your statement that "the human understanding of the
Divine Truth and the human reception of Divine Good, that is, the new will and
understanding so created by the Lord, is the new proprium of man, the receptacle
of the Divine, but not Divine itself", I now believe that the difference
between our positions with regard to this point is not so fundamental as it
first appeared. For the old position is that the Divine of the Latin Word
in itself is sufficient to make that Word to be the real living Word not only in
itself but also with the Church, while the new position is that also the Latin
Word is really the Word with the Church only if it is received in a new will and 107
REV. THEO. PITCAIRN TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
understanding
which is of the Lord alone, perfectly orderly, pure, and holy, in the actual
Church does never exist, but that it is always mixed with falsities; while
according to the other it is held that as far as the reception and understanding
is not free of falsities, thus not of the Lord alone, truly human, and holy, the
Latin Word with man is not the Word. From certain remarks in your previous
letters there was the appearance as if your thoughts were in the line of the old
position; but from your last letter it seems to me that we agree as to this
fundamental truth.
However, at the same time I realize
that the real difficulties will not he removed before we have come to an
agreement with regard to the difference between the rational and the natural.. I
hope to write you on this subject within two or three days.
ERNST PFEIFFER REV.
THEO. PITCAIRN TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK Dear
Mr. Bjorok.
What you say in your last letter would
seem to exalt the innocence of ignorance or infancy of the human race
108 A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE
above
the innocence of wisdom of old age. That a celestial Church like the Most
Ancient Church will again be raised
Doctrine out of the Word with the celestial Church is spoken of in the
following numbers: A.C. 3880, 4606, 9144; A.R. 350; A.E. 119, 355. In n. 6304 of
the ARCANA it is said: "And He shall bring you back unto the land of your
fathers. This
signifies to
the state
of both Ancient
Churches".
The whole of the story of Ishmael, Isaac, and Joseph makes it clear that
the exterior and interior rational represented by these are not degrees of the
natural mind, namely that mind the opening of which makes the first Heaven; but
that the Ishmael rational makes the spiritual and the Isaac rational the
celestial, as is evident from the following 109
REV. ALBERT BJORCK TO REV. THEO. PITCAIRN
that
is represented by Ishmael, nor that represented by Isaac, nor that by Joseph. I
am very much looking forward to seeing you..
THEODORE PITCAIRN Mr.
Pitcairn.
The Church must come down in man's will and understanding on the natural
plane of the mind. The Church and the heaven formed by men's reception of the
Divine Word of the Lord's Second Coming are therefore celestial natural or
spiritual-natural, and therefore also, although below the heavens of infancy and
youth, churches and heavens in a fuller sense than the preceding ones, because
more fully the result of the cooperation of the natural mind of man with the
Lord, from a conscious effort on his own part to understand the Divine Truth and
live according to it. So doing the man of the Church returns into the former
states of youth and infancy, and can therefore progress to eternity ever nearer
the Lord in innocent dependence on Him for all things, and yet retain the
experience gained in his struggle against evil during regeneration as a man on
earth to eternity. 110
A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE
I have felt like saying this much now, as I evidently have expressed
myself poorly in my former letter, as you think what I said there would seem to
show that I exalt the innocence of ignorance of infancy above the innocence of
wisdom of old age.
I shall be very glad indeed for the opportunity to have a good talk with
you and Mr. Pfeiffer.
ALBERT BJORCK
The essential difference between the rational and the natural and that
they always are to be viewed as two distinct things, can be seen from the truth
that the rational soul is from the father, while the natural is adjoined to it
from the mother. Just as they are two things from a different origin, so they
always remain distinct, the rational being within and the natural without. This
truth is expressed for instance in the ARCANA CELESTIA, n. 3209, with the
explicit words: "The rational is in a degree above the natural".
Man's conscious life begins in the natural. The rational itself before
and during regeneration is above his conscious mind. In these preparatory states
he receives only an influx from the rational. The end in view, however, is that,
with 111
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
the
help of this influx, he should wrestle his way through the whole of the natural,
more and more interiorly, so as to come above it, and enter at last the rational
proper, in which he ought to find his conscious life, while the natural ought to
be below him as his servant. This end in view is attained when man has become
truly celestial, after having passed through all the previous degrees of
regeneration, which consist in a wrestling through the natural.
This truth may be confirmed by the teaching that "the interior
rational constitutes the degree in which the celestial Angels are, or in which
the inmost or third Heaven is" (A.C. 5145); by the teaching that "the
fathers of the Most Ancient Church, who had perception, thought out of the
interior rational" (A.C. 1914); and by the teaching in n. 6240 of the
ARCANA: "The intellectual of the internal man is called the rational, but
the intellectual of the external
In the Word this influx of the rational is simply called the rationality
of man. And it is from this fact that it is common that in the beginning one
speaks of the rational and may have an elaborate theory of the rational, without
realizing in the least that it is only the influx of the rational into the
natural in the first states of regeneration 112
A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE Only
with a celestial man they are truly rational truths. Everything which has been
brought forward against the possibility of the exposition of an internal sense
in the Latin Testament, is characterized by this mistaking of the influx of the
rational into the natural for the rational
From the reading of your letters and your pamphlet it
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
113 pamphlet,
I have already pointed this out in some detail; but in your reply you have not
entered upon my argument.
Your point which in all your thinking has been given such a predominant
position, is this, that as long as man lives in this world he is conscious only
on the natural degree of the mind. It is only after the death of the body that
he
The basis of this teaching is that there are three discrete degrees of
the human mind, the celestial, the spiritual, and the natural (D.L.W. 232); that
the natural degree viewed in itself is continuous (D.L.W. 256); and that man, as
long as he lives in the world, is in the natural degree, which is the last, and
he then thinks, wills, speaks, and acts out of that degree (D.L.W. 238); and
that the human wisdom, which is natural as long as man lives in the natural
world, can by no means be elevated into angelic wisdom, which is of the superior
degrees (D.L.W. 257 § 4).
This teaching, if kept in its proper place, is indeed very important; and
as to its meaning it is quite clear; it refers to the difference between the
celestial, the spiritual, and the natural degrees of the mind, and it contains
the outlook that the life and wisdom which awaits a regenerated man after death
is so supereminent that no man can ever conceive of its glory. If the true
meaning of what has been said in DE HEMELSCHE LEER on the difference between the
natural Doctrine, the spiritual Doctrine,
and the celestial Doctrine of the Church, has been seen, it will be
evident that it is in no way in contradiction with this teaching. For it ought
to be realized that though it is of the greatest importance that the natural and
the rational should be seen as two entirely distinct things, according to what I
have said in the first part of this letter, nevertheless, if the relation of the
three discrete degrees of altitude
celestial, spiritual, and natural is the subject under consideration,
then, of course, both the natural and the rational belong to the natural degree.
For, although the 114
A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE teaching
is that the rational proper, or the interior rational, constitutes the celestial
degree of the human mind (A.C. 5145, see also n. 1914), nevertheless the
rational is not the celestial degree in itself, but it is that inmost of the
natural degree which by regeneration, through influx from the celestial degree
and thus by correspondence with it, has become the dwelling-place in the natural
degree for the celestial degree. This is according to the teaching: "That
the natural degree of the human mind viewed in itself is continuous, but that
through correspondence with the two higher degrees, if it is elevated, it
appears as if discrete" (D.L.W. 256, chapter-heading). This is what I meant
by the "very real apparent discreteness of the natural mind" in my
letter to you of March 16th, the true purport of which, however, evidently seems
to have escaped your attention. If a man becomes spiritual, in that the
spiritual degree with him is opened (D.L.W. 252), he does indeed "not
exchange the natural degree of his mind for a spiritual degree" as you say
in your paper on The Rational, its Origin and Growth-, he remains in the natural
degree; but nevertheless there is now formed in it the appearance of a
discreteness, so much so that there is no relation between the different
apparently discrete degrees in the natural than that of correspondence. The
apparently discrete degrees of the natural which are formed through
correspondence with the superior degrees by influx are called the interior
natural, the exterior rational, and the interior rational. These degrees make
the basis of the interior degrees not only with man but also with the Angels, as
is plainly taught in n. 5145 of the ARCANA. Even the Angels must have a basis in
the natural degree; otherwise they would be infinite; and it is for this reason
that man must first be born in the natural world. For although it is true that 115
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
but
the qualification of the natural degree by influx from. and correspondence with
the superior degrees. For it is the natural degree, and not the superior
degrees, which must be regenerated. It is the exterior rational and the interior
rational which both belong to the natural degree which make the
spiritual and the celestial Heaven respectively (see A.C. 5145).
When man is regenerated in the first degree, so as to
That there are not only the three degrees of the three Heavens, but
accordingly also three degrees which make a discrete distinction between the men
of the Church, is taught in n. 4154 of the ARCANA CELESTIA: "The goods and
truths of the internal man are of threefold degrees, such as exist in the three
Heavens; and the goods and truths of the external man are also of threefold
degrees, and correspond to the internal ones. . . . These goods and truths of
threefold degrees pertain to the external man, and they correspond to so many
goods and truths of the 116
A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE internal
man. The goods and truths of all the degrees are entirely distinct from each
other, and are not in the least confused; those which are interior are component
and those which are exterior are composite". Here you have 117
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
discrete
degrees of the Doctrine of the Church, that they are "most distinct and
never are confused", and man can come into these degrees only by
regeneration. 'The truths of a higher degree remain hidden and inaccessible to a
From the preceding considerations it may be -seen that correspondences
must also be applied in the exegesis of the Third Testament. The only
application which you apparently allow as expressed on p. 68 of your pamphlet.
is that "the internal sense as it is with the angels cannot be seen by men,
but it can be seen in a corresponding form by men". This indeed is true,
but the teaching is that also the natural mind, by the opening of the superior
minds, is at last divided into three "most distinct degrees, which are by
no means to be confused" (A.C. 4154); and then also between these degrees
there is no relation except that of correspondence. That there are such genuine
correspondences not only between the natural degree in itself and the spiritual
and celestial degrees in themselves, but also, through influx and by
correspondence, in the natural degree itself, yea, even in the corporeal degree,
is plain from the correspondence
between muscles, which are composites, bundles of fibers of which they are
composed, and single fibers, within these, which are the first components. It is
the explicit teaching of the Latin Word that these are genuine discrete degrees,
between which there is no relation except that of correspondence; and yet they
are all within the corporeal plane. Another example is that of the three degrees
of the blood.
It is exactly the same with the letter of the Latin Word. Those who judge
about its internals simply from direct reading remain only in the outermost
generals. The rational there is laid down in the natural. Those who have a
genuine understanding of its natural sense are in rational-natural truths; but
only after the death of the body do they come into the light of the ultimate
Heaven itself. Those who with the orderly means have opened that letter in the
second degree are in exterior rational truths; 118 but
only after the death of the body do they come into the light of the second
Heaven itself. Those who with the orderly means have opened the letter in the
third degree
From all these considerations it may now be clear to
I also hope it has now become clear that the words in your last letter to
me: "(your position) it seems to me, implies that a regenerated man is
rationally conscious on the spiritual degree of the mind itself", are based
on the 119
REV. ERNST PFEIFFER TO REV. ALBERT BJORCK
rational
is not the spiritual itself in which the spiritual Angels are, but only the
external of it; nevertheless discretely distinct from the interior natural in
which are those of the natural Church, who believe that the letter of the Word
is the Doctrine of the Church itself. So in the ARCANA CELESTIA, n. 10584, we
read: "Those are said to see the back-parts of Jehovah and not His face,
who believe and adore the Word, but only its external which is the sense of the
letter, and do not penetrate more interiorly, as do those who have been
enlightened, and who make for themselves Doctrine out of the Word, by which they
may see its genuine
sense, thus its
interior sense". If it
is here said that those who are enlightened make for themselves Doctrine out of
the Word, what else can this mean, than that genuine
Doctrine is born in them from the Lord; genuine Doctrine certainly cannot
be born from their infernal proprium.
If you say: "I cannot see with you when you say that 'the genuine
Doctrine of the Church, being spiritual out of celestial origin, is born ... in
the living Church' ", it seems to me that you have not yet paid attention
to this teaching in the 20th and 26th chapters of Genesis, where it is plainly
given. These are not our words, but the very words of the Latin World itself.
How great your misunderstanding of our position is, appears from the following
words in your letter to me of May 1st: "Such expressions seem to embody the
idea that you not only speak from the Lord, but that it is the Lord Himself who
speaks through you. If so, then indeed your magazine would be a New Word of the
Lord, giving the internal sense of the Latin Word". The leading idea of DE
HEMELSCHE LEER is that also the Latin Word without Doctrine is as a candlestick
without light (S. S. 50-61); and that the genuine Doctrine of the Church is
spiritual out of celestial origin, but not out of rational origin; and that the
Lord is that Doctrine itself (cf. A.C. 2496, 2497, 2510, 2516, 2533, 2859; A.E.
19). If the meaning of these leading theses (see Third Fascicle, p. 2) is
understood, it will be clear that there has
I feel that I should dwell in detail on another misunderstanding, namely
that you believe that according to our 120 position
we come to the number of nine Heavens. But time forbids. I can only express the
hope that you will not base further conclusions on this belief, because I can
assure you .it is another misunderstanding. I hope to find the occasion at
another time to show you this in detail, although I believe that if the
foregoing remarks are seen in their application to the order of the Heavens, the
misunderstanding may already have been removed. July 13th 1932. Dear
Mr. Pfeiffer.
You say: "There should be no further difficulty for our mutual
understanding, if you only will admit that no evils or falsities can ever adhere
to this 'celestial and angelic proprium', which is 'truly human from the Lord'
and 'from the Lord's proprium' ".
I do admit this. The truth of it has never been questioned in my mind,
though you may have thought so from what I have said with regard to the Doctrine
of the Church, that it may include fallacies.
The difficulty for our mutual understanding remains notwithstanding this
my admission, and in spite of the fact that we do agree in many essential
points. 121
REV. ALBERT BJORCK TO REV. ERNST PFEIFFER
Before I resigned from the CONVENTION and joined the GENERAL CHURCH,
after I had come to see clearly that the Writings are the Word of the Lord, I
understood that this Word like the former revelations of Divine Truth would be
of no avail for the establishment of the Lord's New Church, unless the good and
truth from the Lord there revealed were received by men in their affections,
thoughts and lives; that they cannot be so received except in the measure that
men understand the Word; and that therefore the Doctrine of the Church is
according to its understanding of the Word; therefore that the Word is not the
Doctrine of the Church, which is to be drawn from the Word. When the
understanding in the Church of what is said in the Word is genuine, the Doctrine
of the Church is Divine, because it is the good and truth of the Lord received
by human affections and thoughts, living in them, and deciding or guiding men's
thoughts, motives and affections in their natural life.
The Divine Good and Truth in the Word is the Lord Himself in His infinite
Divine Human. Divine Good and Truth revealed in the Word, that is the Lord's
Divine Human received by men, is the infinite finited in them, in their
affections, thoughts, and lives. To this finited Divine Good and Truth in men,
the Divine Human of the Lord
The Divine Truth in the Word is the seed; the proprium of man is the
soil; received there it can grow, mature and bear fruit in different measures
first the stalk, then the
The difficulty in the way for our mutual understanding arises from
different conceptions of what constitutes the human proprium; and these
different conceptions are caused, I believe, by our different views of the
natural degree of the human mind and how it functions in the states of
reformation and regeneration.
After the end of the Most Ancient Church, when men no longer had any
interior perception from the Lord of what is good, and therefore what is true,
men are born in ignorance, and all knowledge must be given them from without
to the
slowly growing natural
faculty of
122
A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE understanding.
Influx from the Lord through heaven can give them no knowledge of good and
truth. They must be instructed by means of the Word in an external form, and as
they are conscious only on the natural degree of the mind, the revelation of
good and truth is accommodated to the state of that degree.
This degree is man's proprium. In it are inherited tendencies to all
kinds of evil. In it are remains from the Most Ancient and the Ancient Churches,
or from the Lord through them. Men and animals alike are created with a natural
disposition to love others and a natural desire to know things. Men differ from
animals in this that the human natural disposition to love others can be
directed to the good of eternal life and the human desire to know can be
directed to the truths of eternal life. Good and evil alike are so created, and
with good and evil alike this natural disposition has from the Lord the faculty
of reacting to the influx from Him through the heavens, which in the beginning
came directly and immediately to their conscious life, but after the flood can
come only as they receive instruction from the Word about eternal life, given to
their natural mind.
Influx from the celestial heaven preserves during infancy this faculty of
reacting to good affections, and the angels present keep as far as possible the
tendencies to love of self away, or in a state of innocence.
When the natural memory and the embryonic understanding have by life in
the world been developed to a state that enables the infant to receive
instruction from the Word in Divine Truth, spiritual angels are present with the
child endeavoring to imbue the child with their love of truth, and by the truths
the child is instructed in to give form and quality to the disposition to love
others in the child's nature.
The knowledge and understanding of truth developed through instruction is
natural, of the same quality as the child's knowledge and understanding of
natural things, as long as it is only of the memory and thought from memory. If
during growth the remains of good in the affections have caused the child or
youth to pay particular attention to some truths, so that he thinks of them from
affection, then his understanding is taking on a spiritual quality. 123
REV. ALBERT BJORCK TO REV. ERNST PFEIFFER
and
this understanding is giving form and quality to the affections for good in the
natural disposition.
But not until the natural faculty of understanding has been developed to
a state which allows the growing youth to think of the truths in the Word he has
been instructed in from himself, can he have any real faith in these truths,
that is, a faith that is his own apart from the faith he has in the knowledge
and wisdom of his teachers. Not before that can he be said to have any
rationality that can be elevated and illumined by revealed Divine Truth, thereby
receiving an interior or spiritual quality. Then first
By thus compelling himself, affections for good that he has become
conscious of in his understanding can become of his will as a natural being, and
be kept entirely apart from the inherited tendencies to evil.
It is true that the Lord does this, because He inflows in the affections
for good in man's proprium and removes the affections for evil in the same
proprium, so giving to man's proprium a spiritual and heavenly quality, and that
man must acknowledge this and that of himself he can do nothing. But this
acknowledgement is not possible until his understanding has been instructed from
the Word that it is so, and his own reason sees it in the light from the Word,
or, as he advances in regeneration, he perceives and feels that it is so.
This understanding of truths from the Word has by instruction been given
to his natural faculty of understanding, and the will to live according to them
is given to his natural faculty of willing, that is, to the faculties he is
created with as a human being, and which all men are created with, those who
receive instruction from the Word and compel themselves to live from it, and
those who do not.
The will and the understanding constitute the natural mind of all men. In
the regenerating man they receive an interior quality from the Lord that is
truly human. This natural mind of man is after the death of the body the spirit
that lives its own life, in heaven or in hell according to its quality. The
regenerating man lives in one of the 124
A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE heavens
as an individual part of the Grand Man, performing a use and therefore in a
place as part of an organ in the Grand Man that his reception of Good and Truth
from the Lord has fitted him for.
His heavenly or truly human quality is from the Lord's good and truth
received by the remains of good in his natural disposition, that is, the
proprium he is created with which has received instruction from the Word and
thereby has been given truly human quality and form. That proprium is from the
proprium of the Lord's Divine Human because from the Word that is the Divine
Human.
You may of course, if you like, call this proprium Divine without in your
own mind confusing it with the Divine Human, the created with the uncreated, the
finite with the infinite, but when you do so you will unavoidably be
misunderstood by others who have not from the beginning been with you,
participating in the development of your thought and thereby enabled to
understand the meaning you put into it.
July 15th.
ALBERT BJORCK Dear
Mr. Pfeiffer.
I have re-read Mr. Groeneveld's address The Coming of the Lord in the
Doctrine of the Church, and also your comments on it in the Third Fascicle, p.
40.
What Mr. Groeneveld says I have always found interesting, and generally I
have felt in agreement. But I may not have got his idea quite correctly. I
notice in re-reading what you say in the Third Fascicle that I have put a
question mark after the sentences on the bottom of p. 41: "The rational or
the internal man with him, which is the Lord's, before and during regeneration
makes itself felt 125
REV. ALBERT BJORCK TO REV. ERNST PFEIFFER
only
by an unconscious influx. For that rational in itself is the
proper celestial
with man, since
the rational in itself or
the interior rational makes the
third. Heaven (cf. A.C. 5145). It is therefore clear that man, before he
has become celestial, does not live in the rational but only receives an influx
from the rational".
I have always understood the words in Swedenborg's letter to Rev. Hartley
to mean that the rational existing by means of influx from the Lord into the
celestial and spiritual heavens at the time when the Lord was born man on earth
corresponds to the rational during infancy and boyhood in a man who is being
reformed or in the first state of ~generation,, when the remains of good in his
natural mind receive influx from the Lord through the heavens. These remains are
kept alive and augmented by means of instruction in truths, and .thus the
natural mind is being reformed in preparation for regeneration. The rational
during that state cannot be said to be the child's or youth's own rational, but
is in him from others through his faith in parents and teachers and from that in
the truth of what they teach him. Not until he commences to think for himself
about and from these truths he has been instructed in, can he be said to have a
rational understanding of his own; and not until he obeys the truths because he
has faith in them from his own reason, can he be said to have a rational will of
his own; and not until then can the state of regeneration begin. This I see
implied in the statement that "the rational is predicated solely of the
celestial and spiritual natural".
In other words, as the natural understanding is instructed in Divine
Truth, and elevated and illumined by this truth can it become spiritual in
quality; and not until the natural faculty of willing obeys the truth rationally
understood can it take on a spiritual quality.
"Rationality itself is from spiritual light, and not at all
from natural light" (D.P.
167). Even those in hell see from spiritual light, but according to the
structure of their understanding.
"The faculty of receiving spiritual light is what is meant by
rationality. From this faculty man has not only the power of thinking but also
of speaking from thoughts" (D.L.W. 247). 126
In his natural understanding is inherent from creation the faculty of
receiving spiritual light, but he can receive this light from heaven or from
hell. From both and from nature influx comes to man's desire to know, but the
influx from the Lord through heaven can reach the desire for knowledge in his
natural mind only by the means of the Word in a natural or literal form, which
his natural understanding can be instructed from in the same way
"The faculty of rationality man has from creation. This faculty
consists in understanding things interiorly, and in drawing conclusions
concerning what is good and true" (D.L.W. 413).
When man is born he has no perception or knowledge of good or truth or
anything else. He has the embryo of
The rational inherited from the father is the rational of self love.
Therefore another rational must be born in man, that is, he must learn to think
from another source. There is only one source from which truly rational thoughts
can be born in man's natural understanding or
faculty of thinking, and that source is Divine Truth revealed in a 127
REV. ALBERT BJORCK TO REV. ERNST PFEIFFER
form
accommodated to that faculty in man's natural mind. Divine Truth so revealed is
the Word with men on earth.
The Divine Truths in the Word are from the Lord and are the Lord, and the
thoughts born in man's understanding from them are conceived by the Lord, our
heavenly Father; they are sons of God. But before such thoughts can be conceived
and born from the Spirit of the Lord in man's natural mind, it must be given a
quality and form that makes it willing to receive the Spirit of the Lord. That
quality and form is given to man's understanding by the Church as the mother by
means of instruction from the Word and in doctrine from the Word.
The rational thoughts born from the Word in man's natural faculty of
thinking are of a nature discretely distinct from all thoughts born to the
rational from the human father, but the faculty of understanding which is
instructed from the Word, and in which these thoughts are born and grow, is the
faculty of the mind that all men have from creation.
The affections for good, born in man's natural faculty of loving, when
man shuns what instruction from the Word has shown his understanding is evil,
are of a nature discretely distinct from the affections his inheritance from
human parents inclines him to harbor. They are as distinct as heaven is distinct
from hell, but they are affections born in the natural will's faculty of loving
that all men are created with.
They are born from the Lord, first in man's intellectual part as
understanding of what is evil by instruction from the Word, and as man obeys the
affection for good in the understanding, the affections pertaining to love of
self are one by one crowded to one side and affections for good and truth are
made room for in man's natural will.
This, as I understand it, is the plain general teaching of the Final
Testament, and all particulars in the teaching of man's regeneration seem to me
in perfect harmony with this general, and aid us to see it more clearly.
When writing this I have had in mind particularly DIVINE LOVE AND WISDOM,
n. 394432, and ARCANA CELESTIA, n. 27152718, 10028, 10057.
In CONJUGIAL LOVE, n. 495, it says: "A man is reformed by his
understanding, which is done through the knowledge
128 A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE of
good and truth, and a rational intuition thereby. If a
To me all this teaching conveys the idea that in the natural mind man is
created, with there are certain faculties which
can respond
to the
mediate and immediate influx
of life
from the Lord
through the Word and through heaven; and that these faculties in the
natural degree are the beginnings of the spiritual and celestial degrees of the
human mind. When they respond to the teaching of the Word and to the influx
through heaven, they become the internal degrees of the natural, and as the
external of the natural is ruled by this internal and brought into
correspondence with it, man becomes spiritual natural or celestial-natural, of
whom alone true rationality from the Divine Rational of the Lord's Divine Human
The understanding of truth leads in the first state; the will to do
according to the truths in the understanding leads in the second state; and as
progress is made love for the truth of the Lord comes down in man's will and
gives perception that what the Word teaches is really true and good.
This perception is also in the elevated and illumined natural mind, for
such as the quality of man's will and understanding is when he is living in the
natural world, such is his spirit when it leaves the body. Man's will and
understanding constitute his mind, and his mind is his spirit. It is the natural
mind which in regeneration becomes spiritual or celestial as to quality.
The perception a celestial-natural man has is joined to his understanding
of the Word; he sees there continually truths that he had not seen before, but
he never perceives truths that his understanding of the letter of the Word does
not give him to perceive.
As the understanding is a faculty of the natural mind, 129
REV. ALBERT BJORCK TO REV. ERNST PFEIFFER it
is contingent not only on the progress in regeneration but also on hereditary
and acquired character. The knowledge of correspondences gives great aid for the
understanding of the Word and a rational comprehension of its teaching, because
it is the science of sciences, and the greater the knowledge of all science the
mind has, the clearer and more rational should its ability to think be.
But the Lord in His Second Coming has given us a Word which in its very
letter reveals Divine Truths in such a way that man's understanding can see
them, be elevated and illumined by them, and so see more, and this to eternity.
I may misunderstand your position. Very likely I do, as your position in
the light of some of the things you say in your last letter does not appear to
differ very much from that I have tried to put forward in the above. Other
things said, however, give me the impression that you postulate a celestial and
a spiritual degree of the human mind from conception which are in perfect
correspondence with the celestial and spiritual heavens, and that, as man's
natural degree is becoming regenerated so that he loves the truths of the
literal sense and the good they teach, his spiritual degree opens, and he from
that degree sees spiritual truths hidden in the letter, and similarly with the
celestial degree.
This letter will no doubt disappoint you, because I have not taken up the
different points in your letter one by one in order. But to do that would have
taken me much longer time than I at present have at my disposal. I have
therefore chosen to try to express my position in such a way that you from that
will understand the reasons why I cannot agree with you, when you call the human
reception and understanding of the good and truth from the Lord, Divine. Also
why I cannot agree with your thought of the application of correspondences in
unfolding the spiritual sense of the Latin Word.
Finally I will say that when I in a letter to you said: "Such
expressions seem to embody the idea that you not only speak from the Lord but
that it is the Lord Himself who speaks through you. If so, then indeed your
magazine would be a New Word of the Lord, giving the internal sense of the Latin
Word", I did not mean to say that I thought this was your position, but
that men reading what
130 A CORRESPONDENCE ON THE DOCTRINE |
