Henry James The Church of Christ not an ecclesiasticism London and New York 1861

8/3/2019 Henry James The Church of Christ not an ecclesiasticism London and New York 1861

1/98

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST NOT ANECCLESIASTICISM.


2/98


3/98


4/98

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST NOT ANECCLESIASTICISM.

A LETTER OF REMONSTRANCE .

SIR,You and I are equally persuaded, doubtless,

that a new church, which according to the tenor ofancient promise, is destined to be the crown andconsummation of all past churches, is now formingin the earth; and if we have equally reflected uponthe characteristic scope and genius of this church,as depictedin the almost transparent language ofprophecy, we must be equally convinced that it isfull both of sympathy towards every existing formof use or goodness; and of mercy, gentleness, pa-tience, towards every form of ignorance and un-conscious error.

For, what is meant by a church, to which thevoice of inspiration does not hesitate to apply them y ~ t i c name of New Jerusalem 1 What is meant

[ I I I ]


5/98

THE CHURCH OF CHRIST

by a church which may truly be styled the crownand consummation of all past churches; or whatis the same thing, which shall express God's fullpleasure in humanity 1 Clearly it is not meant tobe a mere rival or competitor to any other church.Clearly it is not meant to be a better church of thesame kind as already exists. Churches of theexisting sort have only dwindled ever since thestately days of Moses and Aaron. Starting fromthat gorgeous prime, they have descended throughthe diminished pomp of the Romish ritual, andthe Anglican attenuation of that, until the acmeof desquamation seems at length attained in thepinched and wintry ceremonial of our own Con-gregationalism. And even if this sort of churchshould be revived, and redintegrated in its fullMosaic splendor, would it be a work worthy of God1Will the divine name be written as legibly underthese skies on stone and mortar, on 'ephod andbreastplate, as on the fleshly tablets of the busyhuman heart 1 I think not. I think indeed thata church which by dint of holding its breath, orarresting the transit of the divine influx, shouldswell itself to more than Papal or even Mosaicresonance, would only swell itself away from thewhole divine meaning it ever contained For .thetrue meaning of every visible divine institution has

[ 112 ]


6/98

NOT AN ECCLESIASTICISM.

been, to serve as a witness merely to the invisibleDivine, whom the heaven of heavens canoot con-tain, much less therefore any house or polity ofman's invention. Consequently any visible church,technically either "old" or "new," which shouldprofess to constitute God's true abode on earth,would only repeat the Jewish mistake, and incurthe like public contempt.

Besides, when we talk of the crown and consum-mation of a thing, we do not mean any rival orhostile thing on the same plane with itself; wemean some discretely higher thing, say its facultyof use or action. Thus when we talk of the crownand consummation of a plant, we mean its floweror fruit, assuredly not some other and hostile plant.In like manner the crown and consummation ofan animal body is its will or faculty of voluntarymotion, not some new and rival form of animation.And the crown and consummation of the humanorganization is not any new and superior organiza-tion which is to supersede the old, but its facultyof virtuous activity, or the fruit of a holy life. Infact, the crown and consummation of any naturalthing, is always the use it effects, is always thesuperb fruit it bears. Thus the crown and con-lmmmation of the mineral kingdom is not somenew and precious form of mineral existence, but

[ 113 ] Q


7/98

THE CHURCH OF ClIRIST

the vegetable form to whose development all itsuses al'e tributary. And so in like manner thecrown and consummation of the vegetable kingdomis not some rare and splendid form of vegetation.but on the contrary the animal form, to the devf'-lopment of which the vegetable kingdom is whollysubservient. And so again the crown and consum-mation of the animal kingdom is not some newand glorious form of animality, but the humanform, to which all the realm of animal existence istributary or subordinate. In all these cases we seeprogressive development to be the intention andmethod of nature. We never see her returningupon herself, or stopping short in her career toamend the work she has made, and bring out asecond edition of the same performance. We seeher going straight onward from the foundation ofher edifice, through all its successive grades orstories to its roof and skylight, and stopping onl)'when the faultless house stands before you radiantin beauty, and inexpugnable in strength.

Analogically therefore, when we look for a newchurch in the earth which is to be the crown andconsummation of all past churches, we are not wlook for a mere second edition of the existing ecclf'-siasticiRm: we are not to look for a new and rivalecclesiastical organization to that of the old church:

[ 114 ]


8/98


we are not to look for a new and competitive priest-hood, nor for a new and competitive baptism, norfor a new and competitive eucharist. This sort ofnewness the church experiences usque ad nauseamevery few yeal'8, upon the occasion of the outbirthof every new sect. No, in looking f9r that newchurch which is to be the crown and c o n s u m m a t i ~ nof all past churches, we are to look for the incor-ruptible spirit of which these past churches havebeen only the preparatory and perishable letter, forthe ripe and perfect fruit of which they have beenthe temporary and unconscious husks. In shortwe are to look for a spiritual church, which beingidentical with the broadest charity in the life ofman, must alwaYl:! refuse to become identified withparticular persons, particular places, or particularrituals of worship.

Such of necessity is the character of the churchof Ohrist. It is a spiritual economy, and is there-fore identical with all that is humble and tenderand easy to be entreated in the soul of man.Heaven is not more distant from earth, than issectarianism, or the desire to separate oneself fromothers, distant from the mind of the true church-man. Instead of saying to Oalvinist or Oatholic,to Methodist or Episcopalian, "Stand aside, wepossess a holier priesthood than you, and put forth

[ 115 ]


9/98


a more acceptable baptism and eucharist than you,"the true churchman taking counsel of the divinelove in his heart, says, "Draw near, my brother,and let us worship together. There is but onepriesthood known on high, the priesthood of good-ness, and one baptism and communion, that which~ t e s instead of dividing the household of faith.The two outward ordinances which we have receivedfrom the Lord's hand are uniting, not dividingordinances j they are 80 divinely large IlB to accom-modate all heavenly truth, and hence to unite intheir equal embrace every true worshipper of God,in every clime, and of every name under heaven.He consequently who claims that they are adaptedto symbolize only the truth he professes, or thatthey lend themselves more willingly to his worshipthan to that of other and less instructed men, vir-tually claims to possess all truth, and in so doingproves that he is himself an alien from the entirespirit of truth. No, my friend, let us worship to-gether, calling upon one and the same blessed Lorda.nd Redeemer. You possibly do not know manyof the spiritual things c o n t a i n ~ d within the ob.scurity of the literal scriptures j but all savingk'lWWledge is amply contained in the letter ofsacred scripture, and is to be drawn exclUBivelyfrMn it,. and you doubtless are IlB sincerely zealous

[ 116 ]


10/98


of the honor of the letter as I can claim to be.But even if it were otherwise, even if the commondoctrine of the church were not deducible fromthe letter of scripture, but only from its spiritualcontents, I yet know so little of those contentscompared with what is to be known, that the dif-ference between my knowledge and your ignorancein this respect sinks into absolute nought. Andyet on the other hand I know so well the mag-nanimous and divine spirit of all that truth, thuscontained invisibly to natural sight within theliteral page,-I know so well the boundless loveand charity with which it is all aglow, that I couldnever think of making any amount of superiorinformation I possessed, a ground of glorying overothers, or a warrant for expecting a greater com-placency on God's part to my worship than yours.On the contrary, the spirit of all truth is goodness,the substance of all faith is charity, and hence themore I feel the spirit of truth, the less I value allmerely external and intellectual differences amongmen, and the more I value all cordial and vitalagreement.". Now no one can doubt that this is the attitudeof the true churchman. Every one in whom thechurch truly exists is a regenerate man, is a formof charity, and nothing can be more intolerable to

[ 117 ]


11/98


such a man, than the attempt to separate himfrom others, or give him an ecclesiastical elevationabove others. He cannot be persuaded by anyamount of sophistry, or any force of clerical domi-nation, long to falsify his fundamental instincts inthis particular. He will go on to suffocate andsuffer, until at length he throws off the incumbentmass of ecclesiastical pride and dotage, and emergesfor ever into the lustrous air and warm sunshine ofGod's boundless love. The true Christian allowsothers to separate from him as much as they please,as much as their unfortunate narrowness makes itinevitable to them; but he feels it nece88arJ toseparate himself from no one. His mission is oneof love, and therefore of fusion and unity, insteadof separation or disunity. Hence although heclaims the right to worship on Sundays withwhomsoever he pleases, and to employ for thatpurpose any improved form of worship, he yettakes care to deny all ecclesiastical separation onthat account from those around him, professing hissteadfast allegiance to the same Lord whom theyequally profess to obey. He does not attempt toconstrue his arrangements for an improved socialworship, into a fact of public significance, nor doeshe claim for what is purely conventional and tran-sitory that public importance which is due only to

[ ll8 ]


12/98

NOT AN ECCLESIAS'l'ICISM.

what is spiritual and eternal. Hence he remamsin ecclesiastical unity with the people around him,being content to enjoy unimpaired his spiritualfreedom, and the freedom of external worship withwhomsoever and wheresoever he pleases.The only legitimate newness of the Christian

church consists in a newness of spirit among itsmembers, not a newness of letter. The letter ofthe church consists unalterably in its two ordi-nances of baptism and the Lord's supper. A newliteral church therefore must disown these ordi-nances, must exhibit new ordinances, instinct withnew meaning. Clearly Swedenborg never contem-plated such a church. Never once in the wholecourse of his writings, has he criticized the admini-stration of the Christian ordinances, or declared itdefective, save in respect to the withholding thecup from the laity in the Roman church. Hewaged no war whatever with the church as anecclesiasticism, though I doubt not he had his justProtestant predilections, but only as a corruptspiritual economy. He complained of it only inthat respect wherein the Lord complains of it,namely, as being destitute of the life of charity,and being therefore to all heavenly intents andpurposes dead or inactive. Accordingly you nevPf.find him proposing so cheap and superficial a

[ 119 ]


13/98


a remedy for so grave a disease, as the creation ofa new ecclesiastical organization. How should anew ecclesiastical hierarchy mend matters 1 Thecomplaint was not against a particular set of per-sons, as contrasted with another set. The Glomplaintwas not that certain persons called God's churchwere worse men spiritually than certain other per-Rons; which other persons must therefore be formedinto a new ecclesiastical body, and made to super-sede the old one. By no means. The complaintwas that the entire mind of man, as ecclesiasticallyexhibited, was in spiritual ignorance or darkness,and hence the remedy befitting this condition couldnot be a change in the personal administration ofthe church, or a change in the persons composingit, but an entire renewal of its spirit. What thechurch wanted was not a new body, or a new literalconstitution, but exclusively a new spirit, the spiritof unfeigned love.

Hence you never find Swedenborg discussingany questions of ecclesiastical polity, or urging anymeasures of ecclesiastical reform, except that ofthe administration of the eucharist in the Romanchurch. He thought, indeed, that from the cir-cumstance of that church exalting a life of charityin its doctrines more than the reformed churchesdo, it would more easily receive the new truths

[ 120 ]


14/98


than any other church, provided it would rectifyits administmtion of the eucharist, and dismiss theworship of saints. But all this of course was matterof private opinion. You always find him treating.all questions of ritual or e x t e ~ a l difference betweenchurches as of no spiritual significance, save ascontributing indeed to the greater unity of thechurch, when charity was its spiritual bond. Heinvariably represents the true Christian, or theman in whom charity dwells, as gratefully andreverently observing the institutions of public wor-ship established in his nation, and on no occasionwhatever does he represent him as finding theseinstitutions inadequate to his need So also when-ever he talks of the external of the church, he doesnot represent it as consisting in a Sunday ritual,or a correct liturgical form, but exclusively ingoodness of life. " The church of the Lord," says hein 403 of .A.rcana Explained, "is both internaland external: the internal of the'church consists ofcharity and faith thence derived, but the externalof the church IS THE GOOD OF LIFE, or the WORKSof charity and faith j" that is, all those thingswhich charity and faith opemte in our social re-lation!. Consistently with this definition, you findhim throughout his writings making no ecclesiasti-cal complaint of the church, but only a spiritual

[ 121 ]


15/98


complaint, as to its destitution of charity. Thushe says the existing array of divided churches, asCatholic and Protestant, and the various subdivi-sions of t h e ~ again, would be perfectly conformableto the divine mind, were they only animated bymutual love or charity. "THE THINGS OF DOC-TRINE," he says in his Oelestial .A.rcana, 1790,"DO NOT DISTINGUISH CHURCHES BEFORE THELORD,"- tha t is to say, the Lord knows no differ-ence between a church professing true doctrineand one professing false-" but this distinction iseffected BY A LIFE ACCORDING TO THE THINGS OFDOCTRINE, all of which, i f they are true, regardcharity as their fundamental, for what is the endand design of doctrine but to teach how man shouldlive? The several churches in the Christian worldare doctrinally distinguished into Roman Catholics,Lutherans, and Calvinists. This diversity of namearises solely from the things of doctrine, and wouldnever have had place i f the members of the churchhad made love to the Lord, and charity towardstheir neighbor, the principal point of faith. Thingsof doctrine would then be only varieties of opinionconcerning the mysteries of faith, which THEY WHOARE TRUE CHRISTIANS would leave to every one tobelieve according to his conscience, whilst it wouldbe the language of their hearts THAT HE IS A TRUE

[ 122 ]


16/98


CHRISTIAN WHO LIVES AS A CHRISTIAN, that is, asthe Lord teaches. Thus one church would bef01"YMd out of all these diverse ones, and all dis-agreements arising from mere forms of doctrinewould vanish ; yea, all the animosities of one againstanother would be dissipated, and THE KINGDOM OFTHE LORD WOULD BE ESTABLISHED ON THE EARTH."Think of that, my sectarian friend. These oldChristian sects whom you propose to supersede,Catholic, Calvinist, and Lutheran, with all theirsubdivisions, were they only enlivened by charityor mutual love, would present no ecclesiastical obstacle to the divine truth, but would really consti-tute the Lord's kingdom on earth, would constitutethe true and spiritual church which is identicalwith that kingdom. How much wider the sym-pathies of this great man were, than they arerepresented to have been by those who make useof his name to originate a new ecclesiasticism !Let us sing a few more brief hymns to the sameblessed tune, from the same general repository. "Allthe members of the primitive Christian church,"he says, A. a. 1834, -


17/98


themselves, whence arose schisms and heresies.These would never have existed, i f charity hadcontinued to live and rule : JOT in BUch ca8e theywould not have called 8chism by the name of8chism, nOT heresy by the name oj heresy, butthey would have called them doctrines a.greeableto each person's particular opinion, or wa.y of think-ing, which they would have left to every one'sconscience, not judging or condemning any fortheir opinions, provided they did not deny funda-mental principles, that is, the Lord, eternal life,and the Word, and maintained nothing contraryto divine order, that is, to the commandments ofthe decalogue." "The false principle within thechurch," he says, A. O. 2351, "which favors evilsof life, is that goodneBB or charity doth not con-stitute a man of the church, but that churchmembership is effected by truth or faith." '''.ABman becomes internal and instructed in internalthings, externals are as nothing to him, for hethen knows what is sacred, namely, charity, andfaith grounded therein." Again he says in A. O.3122, "The regenerate man makes no account ofthe things of faith or truth;" that is, of course,holds them to be wholly subordinate to a life ofcharity. " Faith, in the Word, means nothing butlove and charity: hence doctrines and tenets of

[ 124 ]


18/98


faith are not faith but only appurtenances of it.-A . 0.2116." Love to the Lord cannot possibly be separated

frmn love to the neighbor, for the Lord's love istowards the whole human race, which he desiresto save eternally, and to adjoin entirely to himself,so as for none of them to perish: wherefore WHO-SOEVER HAS LOVE TO THE LORD, HAS THE LORD'SLOVE, and cannot h.elp loving his neighbor."A. a. 2023.

"When it is said there is no salvation in anyname but that of the Lord, it means that there issalvation in no other doctrine; that is, IN NOOTHER THING THAN MUTUAL LOVE, which is thetme doctrine of faith."-A. a. 2009.

" The essential of worship is hearty adoration ofthe Lord, which does not exist save in so far as theheart be principled in charity or neighborly love..All true worship is adoration of the Lord, for theLord is never present in external worship unleBBinternal worship be contained in i t . " - A . a. 1150.

"Many say ' t hat there is. no internal worship'without external, when yet the truth of the case is,that there is no external without internal.' ' 'A. a. 1175.

" The new church is to be established only amongthose who are in a life of good."-A. a. 3898.

[ 125 ]


19/98


"The church is one, notwithstanding its diversi-ties of doctrine, when all acknowledge charity asthe eB8ential of the church, or, what is the samething, when they have respect to life as the end ofdoctrine, that is, when they inquire HOW A MAN OFTHE CHURCH LIVES, and not 80 much what arehis 8entiment8."-.A. O. 3341.

., The church must needs vary as to doctrine,one society or one man profe!lSing one opinion, andanother, another. But as long as each liveB i11charity, HE IS IN THE CHURCH AS TO LIFE, whethe1'he be as to doctrine or not, and consequently, theLord's church or kingdom is in him." - .A. O. 3451.

"Doctrinals are not designed to direct thethoughts so much as the life, for what is theirend but that a man may become what they teachhim to be 1"-...1.. O. 2982.Again, in his latest work, entitled "The-.rrue

Christian Religion," 784, when expressly describingthe formation of the church, he says, "that thiscannot be effected in a moment, but in proportionas the false8 of the fornwr church are removed;and this must first take place among the clergy,and by their means among the laity."

Now, surely, this whole strain of observation isinconsistent with the notion of any just stigmaattaching to the Christian church, considered as

[ 126 ]


20/98


an ecclesiastical constitution, and utterly forbidsthe conception of the new church, therefore, as anew and militant ecclesiastical polity. Noone,indeed, can read Swedenborg at all intelligently,without being convinced that the Christian ordi-nances of Baptism and the Holy Supper werenever given by the Lord for the purpose of sym-bolizing a particular creed, or celebrating a certaindoctrinal consensus on the part of his professedfollowers. They were given to be a sign or memo-rial of the universal spirit which, under all varietiesof doctrinal and ritual observance, reigns amonghis followers, namely, a regenerative spirit, a spiritwhich proceeds upon the putting away the evils ofthe natural heart as sins against God, typified bybaptism, and tlie consequent reception of goodsand truths from the Lord, typified by the eucharist.These ordinances have thus a most universal scope,being addressed solely to the foreshadowing of thegreat facts of life in which all God's children are

, one, and not in the slightest degree to the fore-shadowing of those minor facts of doctrine, as towhich all God's children, simply because they arehis children, must eternally differ. It is thisuniversality of scope in the Christian ordinanceliiwhich fits them to symbolize the new or spiritualand universal Christian church; because what this

[ 127 ]


21/98

THE CHURCH OF CHlUS'l'

church primarily regards is the life of charity, or aspiritual new birth in man, and the ordinances ofbaptism and the supper are the express imagesand types, are the divinely appointed signs :andseals of this regenerate life. No matter how mucha man may misconceive the literal text of scripture,no matter how full of absurd traditions or super-stitions his ecclesiastical memory may be, so longas he professes to believe in the Lord, and avoidsevils as sins, he is a perfectly proper recipient ofthe Christian ordinances, let them be administeredwhere or by whom they may; as proper a recipient,let me add, and one as precious in the Lord's sight,as if, instead of his own native ignorance on thesesubjects, he possessed the angel Gabriel's plenaryillumination. We may well f e e ~ therefore, howmerited a scorn shall one day betide any commu-nion which excludes such a man from it in theLord's name. We may well feel what scorn shallespecially betide any corporation, which, assumingthe sacred name of New Jerusalem, yet seeks todivert these divinely appointed vessels of the Lord'shouse aside from their benign and universal uses,to the service of its own ecclesiastical pomp andvanity.

Now, my friend, i f the spirit of the new economybe as I have' described it, i f charity be the all of

[ 128 ]


22/98


the true Christian church, the all of its life and theall of its doctrine-and I defy anyone rationallyto gainsay this-then it is highly incumbent onthose who profess to be devoted to the interestsof true Christianity, to inquire what hinders thespread of it among men. Let us proceed brieflyto do this.Now, mark! the inquiry we propose to make isnot as to the obstacles which defeat the spread oftrue religion in the world generally. Undoubtedlythe main obstacle to the spread of true religion inthe world, is a very prevalent indifference to theconcerns of man's spiritual history and destiny,growing out of the unsanctified lusts of self-loveand the love of the world. This obstacle you andI, in common with all the rest of the world, experience to the life of true religion in our souls. Truereligion is of so heavenly a genius, its temper is sohumane, so instinct with the vital breath of charity,that it necessarily encounters the stupid antagonismof the natural heart in all of us, and is alwaysobliged to conquer, therefore, wherever it takespossession. But this is not the point we are nowto consider. It is a most interesting point, doubtless; but we have one still more interesting beforeus, which is this: what obstacles exist in the mindsof religious people-people who are sincerely

[ 129 ) 10


23/98

THE CHURCH OF ~ L q T

anxious to know and do the will of God-tothe reception of new-church light, as that lightstands diiiclosed in the remarkable writings ofSwedenborg 1 This is our question. We findmultitudes of tender, generous, and profoundlyreligious minds in all the divided Christian sect.B,who are consciously starving and perishing uponthe slender fare which is hebdomadally served outto them; and we ask what is it which hindersthese persons immediately receiving the stupendous consolations of the new and spiritual church 1

Now, my friend, permit me to say that I thinkthere can be but one answer to this enquiry, andit is, that these personl' are continually taught tolook upon the new church, not as a spiritual andtherefore universal church, but simply as a newChristian sect, and upon the writings of Swedenborg, consequently, as tbe ravings of a fanatical ordisordered brain. I say, these persons are taughtto take this view of the new church pretensions.And i f you ask me how they are thus taught, Ianswer, by the purely ecclesiastical aspect which isgiven to the new church idea, by so many sincerebut inconsiderate admirers of Swedenborg. Thetechnical or self-styled new church assumes beforethe world simply the attitude of a new ecclesiastical organization, or a new organization for external

[ 130 ]


24/98

NOT AN ECCLESIASTICISM:.

worship, claiming a new clerical order, and a morevirtuous or valid administration of the Christianordinances than pertains to any other sect. Thusthe world is led to consider the new church, not asa new and regenerate life of man, not as a life ofspiritual conformity to the divine will, to be exem-plified only in the broadest charity, or in everyform of domestic, social, civil and religious use, butonly as a new visible sect, having a local habitationand a name, and capable, therefore, of being geo-metrically dened and demonstrated. And, accord-ingly, when you go to a person whose thoughts areexercised about innite truth and goodness, or whoBuffers in soul from the violence which is done tothese interests by the spirit of sect-when you goto such a person and set before him the claims ofthe new church to his regard, be replies at once," Do you mean by the new church the sect thatworships in such or such a place, and seeks toprocure itself a name by outwardly separatingitself from all other worship 1 Because if youmean that, 1 really do not see that you promiseme any improvement. The persO,llS who composemy present ecclesiastical connection are very goodpersons generally, very good neighbors, very goodcitizens; and besides all that are too niodest toclaim before the world any peculiar ecclesiastical

[ 131 1


25/98


nearness to God, as the sect in question does. Ihave no fault to find with my ecclesiastical connection, consequently, at least, no such fault aspromises to be remedied by a mere change ofconnection. In short, my troubles are not at allecclesiastical, but spiritual. One ecclesiasticism isquite as good as another to me, were the vital spiritof it only divine. What I lack in them all is thatclose internal fusion or sympathy of the members,which could not fail to be felt in them all if charitywere their life and not an unchastised ambition formutual preeminence. How should I be helped,then, by going among the people in question 1Do they not pretend to offer God a more acceptable worship than the Presbyterians or Catholicsor Episco.palians? Do they not claim a newministry? Do they accept Presbyterian or Methodist baptism? Will they allow Bishop Wainwrightor Dr. Dewey to administer the Lord's supper tothem? I f all these things are so, will you tell mewherein this self-styled new church differs in spiritfrom all the older sects, unless, perhaps, in beingrather more sectarian? And if it do not differ inspirit from the older sects, why then, of course itis nothing new under the sun, but something onthe contrary-very stale, flat, and unprofitable. Anew church must prove itself such by 'ne1cmesS of

[ 132 ]


26/98


8pirit, by a spirit of universal charity-a charitywhich shall loathe to be preeminent even overPagam and Turks, let alone its fellow-Ohristiana.Any spirit short of this, any spirit which virtuallysays to sincere Christian worshippers of whatevername,- ' Stand aside! we claim to offer a moreacceptable worship than you!' is an extremelyancient spirit, is as ancient at least as that unhappyPharisee we read of in holy writ, who approachedthe temple of divine worship, saying, 'Father, ITHA.NK THEE that I am not as other men,' &c.,and who therefore went down to his house considerably disadvantaged from other men."

I say therefore, because i f a man so mistakes thedivine character as to suppose Him a respecter ofpersons, and to give Him thanks accordingly forprivate or personal favors, it is manifest that theman's worship is animated by self-love, and thedivine name consequently grossly profaned. Ofcourse it is the dictate of true religion to refer allgood. to the Lord, and all evil to the devil: buttrue religion dictates no comparisons or contrastsbetween ourselves and others, nor indeed does shetolerate any such comparisons, declaring them, onthe contrary, utterly incompatible with her heavenlytemper. When. I feel disposed to thank God forgreater ecclesiastical privileges than my neighbors,

[ 133 ]


27/98


or what is the same thing, a nearer access to Himthan my neighbours enjoy; whenever, lookingupon Dr. Potts or Dr. Hawks, I felicitate myselfupon the knowledge of a rival priesthood superiorto theirs;. or whenever, looking upon the ordi-nances of the universal church as administered bytheir hands, I congratulate myself that they aremore efficaciously administered elsewhere-it is nolonger religion which animates me-i t is no longerthe blessed spirit of charity, but the accursed spiritof sect, or a temper of genuine self-love, which, i fleft unchecked, must issue in confirmed diabolism.Do not misunderstand me. It is very far frommy intention, because it is very far from my desire,to cast disparagement upon any institutions ofsocial worship. It seems to me entirely properand inevitable that those who sympathize witheach other's views of Christian doctrine, shouldcome together at suitable times and places forsocial worship. Nothing could be more delightfulthan an assembly of this sort, when animated solelyby a spirit of charity towards all other assemblies,and having nothing to gain by disparaging themin public estimation. An assembly like this, unitedin cordial adoration of the Divine Love, and intentonly on celebrating His ineffable perfection, wouldIlf,and in an attitude of the tenderest sympathy

[ 134 ]


28/98


towards all other assemblies. Jt would neverdream of impugning the truth of their worshipby publishing itself as the only true church of Godin New York; but it would strive on the contraryto shew them the riches of spiritual consolationwhich are embodied in the Christian ordinanceswherever administered, and prove how every par-ticular of their own worship is fragrant with theinward acknowledgment of divine mercy and peace.No, let us worship together in this spirit to ourhearts' content, and under whatever orderly routinebefits our taste. Let us have architecture, let ushave music, let us have singing, let us have preach-ing, and the concerted voice of prayer; let us have,in short, whatever graceful and glowing forms maybe deemed suitable to express a worship so cordialand therefore so cheerful,' so rational and thereforeso profoundly reverential, as that which is inspiredby the new truths must necessarily be. All thisis right and sweet and beautiful; and I can'timagine anyone but a sour and surly sectarianobjecting to it. No one, indeed, can object to it,unless he be disposed to deny freedom of worshipaltogether. Every one, on the contrary, must seethat it is a suitable and decorous thing for personswhose intellects are forming upon the same generalclass of truths, to seek each other's sympathy in

[ 135 ]


29/98


public or social worship. But what every one hasa right to complain of as an unsuitable and inde-corous thing, is for this company thus comingtogether for worship to arrogate to themselves thename and authority of the Lord, in any such senseas prejudices the equal right of any other worship-ping assembly to do the same thing. I believevery truly in the interior truths of the Scriptureas they .are unfolded by Swedenborg, and I instructmy family in the knowledge of those t r u t h ~ so faras their tender understandings are capable of re-ceiving them. Have I thereupon the right to saythat my family worship is one whit truer or moreacceptable in a heavenward way than that of mynext door neighbor, who never heard of any inte-rior sense in the Scripture, or i f he h deemsit a very great snare and delusion, and steadilyworships, notwithstanding, according to the plenaryPresbyterian platform 1 Assuredly not. Shall thetruth of any man's reverence and worship of thegreat Beingwho creates and redeems and preserveshim, hinge upon his possessing adequate conceptionsof the divine p e r f e c t i o n ~ and offering a homagetherefore which shall be worthy of those perfections1God help the best of us in that case! say I. Forthis is to place worship in a new ground entirely-no longer in a sense of the profound wants of the

[ 136 ]


30/98


heart-no longer in the deep and cordial andoverwhelming sense of our own deficiencies, of ourown relative nothingness and vanity, and of God'sboundless sufficiency-but rather in one's intellectual acquisitions, in the sentiment of possessing asuperior illumination to other people.

But i f I have no right to defame my neighbor'sfamily worship on the ground of its utter unconsciousness of the new truths, i f I have no right tosuppose that the Lord views my family worshipwith more complacency than he does that of myPresbyterian neighbor; what right have I andthose who socially worship with me, to supposethat He views our social worship with any morecomplacency than He does that of the Baptists,Catholics, Unitarians, Presbyterians, or Mahomedans 1 What right have we to claim in our socialcapacity, a comparative nearness t.o God over othersocieties, which we have no right to claim in ourfamily capacities! I f I myself, with all my heartydelight in the new truths,. do not contribute anyelement to my family worship which makes itcapable of disparaging my neighbor's family wor-ship before God, do pray tell me how any fifty orfive hundred of us assembling for social worship,shall contribute any element to that worship whichshall have the effect to disparage any other sincere

[ 137 ]


31/98


worship before God 1 I f I have no right in myprivate devotions to stigmatize my neighbor's devotions as old and worthless and dead, what righthave I to do so in my public worship 1 Whatright have I to advertise my public devotions asnew and living and valid, and his by implication,as old, spiritless, and unprofitable?Of course it is perfectly proper for people whosympathize in any particular views of divine truth,and who desire to express that sympathy in formsof social worship, to advertise their place ofmeeting,for the benefit of all persons interested. Or i f wewish to assail the popular doctrines by means oflectures, sermons, and so forth, let us clearly advertise our intention. But let us not put forthimmodest hand-bills, informing the world that herethe true church is to be found, and inferentiallytherefore not anywhere else in the city, underpenalty of affronting the most intimate spirit ofthat church.

You may very properly say to the world, i f youplease, that you are about establishing, or havealready established, external Christian worship insuch a place on an improved basis, or with a spiritmodified by new church light. Bnt to say thatany amount of such worship gives you the slightestclaim to the world's recognition as the" new Jeru-

[ 138 I


32/98


salem," as the grand end and achievement of alldivine promise and prophecy, gives you the slightestright to arrogate to yourselves one particle of theconsideration which belongs to that divine and im-maculate economy, is to say what only a completeignorance of the spirit of that economy prompts.The new church in man, is a regenerate life, a lifeof brotherly love or charity, a life which is no moreconsistent with the claim of superior ecclesiasticalmerit before God, than it is with that of superiormoral or physical merit. I am ashamed to gobefore God saying that I am a better man morallythan John Smith, and that I should like thereforea superior celestial position to his. Why am Ithus ashamed 1 Because the plea insultingly im-plies that God is a respecter of persons, thus, thatone of His creatures is less dependent upon Himthan another. By what infatuation is it, then,that one is not ashamed to do ecclesiastically, thatwhich he is thus ashamed to do personally 1 Oneis not ashamed every Sunday to claim before theworld, and challenge the world's recognition of thefact, that he is ecclesiastically much nearer to Godthan the Catholic bishop Hughes, the Presbyterianbishop Phillips, or the Unitarian bishop Bellows.What, I ask, is the explanation of this scandalousincongruity 1

[ 139 ]


33/98


The explanation is to be sought in the prevalenceof totally erroneous or sectarian views of the church.The sectarian idea of the church is, that it is pri-marily a visible corporation, hierarchically consti-tuted, whose life lies in Sunday worship, and whoseproper activity consists accordingly in promotingall the resources and interests of that worship.According to this conception of the church, a manis what he is, chiefly by virtue of his connnectionwith that visible body; that visible body standsbetween him and God, and is the medium of thedivine blessing to him, so that he may be calledupon to honor it as his spiritual mother, with pre-cisely the same propriety that he may be calledupon to honor God as his spiritual Father. Wefind the conception everywhere diffused, and hearit expounded and enforced from all sorts of pulpits ;but the only consistent and worthy representativeof it is the Roman Catholic church. No personwho holds this theory of the church, who holds theecclesiastical conception of it, and maintains it ea;0JI'IJimw, has any logical right to disclaim the pater-nal authority of bishop Hughes, and must eitherin this world or the next filially submit himself toit. He may call himself a Protestant against thechurch of Rome, and may protest till he is blackIn the face; but when he at last finds that the

[ 140 ]


34/98


church of Rome is the only logical exponent of hisidea of the church,-when he finds that all logicand all experience and all testimony go to substantiate her sole claim to the name of church in thisview,-when, in short, it comes to the choice ofthe church of Rome or no church at all of thatsame general type or pattern; he will infalliblyswallow the nauseous medicine, I haven't a doubt.I cannot, indeed, understand how anyone who

holds to the ecclesiastical conception of the church,can for an instant deny the paramount claims ofthe Romish hierarchy upon his allegiance. I f thechurch of Christ possesses of necessity an ecclesiastical constitution, or, what is the same thing, aninseparable external organization, based upon thedistinction of clergy and laity, then the Romanchurch is the only true church, because it alonepermanently secures such an organization. Hadthe Protestant been as stoutly pushed a tergo asthe Catholic has been pushed by him, and as hehimself bids fair to be pushed in the future, hemust long ere this have acknowledged that theonly consistent ecclesiasticism is that of Rome.The Roman Catholic makes the church to consistwholly in the pope and his inferior clergy, just asthe old theories of the State left out the people, oras the little boys when they form amateur military

[ 141 ]


35/98


companies, make them to consist wholly of captains,lieutenants, and corporals. We may smile at thisinfantine simplicity on the part of the church, orweep over its boundless spiritual arrogance, as weplease, but it affords nevertheless the only i'alliblerecipe for the church's perpetuity, considered as anecclesiastical institution. I f we want convictionon this point, we have only to refer to the utterdisorganization which the hierarchical idea, or thechurch considered as having an inseparable ecclesi-astical organization, encounters at Protestant hands.The Protestant democratizes the idea of the church,making it to consist not of one power alone, not ofthe clergy simply, but of the clergy and peoplejointly. But this theory by commixing the twoorders, and leaving their respective parts whollyundefined, like a military company whose officersand privates should possess a joint authority, isdestructive of all discipline, and has actually endedin the complete disorganization of the church, asan ecclesiasticism. What is your own ecclesiasticalpretension in fact but a proof of this 1 Your ownsect is a striking fruit and exemplification of thepurely disorganizing tendencies of Protestantism.In the first place, a handful of laymen reared inthe bosom of Protestantism, and united in nothingbut a profession of faith in the remarkable writings

[ 142 ]


36/98


37/98


limited movement exhibits no spiritual advanceupon the older Protestant sects, but only a highlyrational and comfortable modification of their ritualobservances. Thus you have no right to gloryover the Protestant sects, through which yourown ecclesiastical validity is derived; just as theyhave no right to glory over the Catholic church,seeing that whatsoever hierarchical virtue theypossess, is but a puny rill of that once affluent butnow moss-grown and dishonored fountain. Neitherof you has the slightest reason for boasting overthe other, save on the ground of a spiritual superiority, or a more eminent life of charity; andeminence in that life is scarcely consistent withecclesiastical or any other sort of boasting, beingidentical in fact with the greatest personal humility.Do I- complain of these unhandsome quarrels,

however 1 Do I regret the grand original fact ofProtestantism 1 Do I regret the great subsequentfacts which have marked her history, and developedher true or characteristic tendencies 1 God forbid !I look upon them all as facts full of blessed significance for the true church of God, for the true lifeof God in the soul of man. Had we not hadCatholicism in the first place, or an ecclesiasticaleconomy paramount to the civil and politicalregime, the human mind must have lacked the

[ 144 ]


38/98

NOT AN ECCLESlASTICISM.

necessary germ or egg of the true idea of the church.We could never have conceived in that case of thedivine life in man, as destined eventually to controland sanctify his civil and natural life. Had wenot haQ Protestantism again, we should have hadno disorganization of this primary and beneficentgenu, nor consequently any development of themiraculous spirit which infonus it. I have indeedno doubt that the Providence which governs humanaffairs is altogether divine, for I see throughout allhistory the unswerving march of a great spiritualend or purpose, which is so high above man'sthought as to find its stepping-stones alternatelyin his wisdom and his folly, and so high above hisbest affections, as to make his very vices contributean equal furtherance with his virtues, to itB finale v o l u t i o n . . f

I need not say to you that I look upon this endor purpose of the Divine Providence, as identicalwith that new church of which the world has solong and so reverently read in ancient prophecy,and of whose advent the roseate dawn is at lengthflushing the entire mental horizon of humanity;that new and everlasting church, the crown andconsummation of all past churches, which is c o n s t i ~tuted solely by a regenerate life in all her members,or a heart full of love to God and love to man.

[ 145 ] 11


39/98


I t is identical with what the mystical scriptures callthe New Jerusalem, meaning by that carnal symbolnothing indeed appreciable to the carnal eye, "norat all germane to the carnal heart, but a trulydivine life in the soul of man. "I t is also called anew church, both because it is the crown and ful-filment of all past churches, and because a churchin the spiritual idea invariably signiiies a regeneratelife in man, or the life of charity. This church isnot aristocratically constituted like the RomishChurch, nor yet democratically like the Protestantchurches. It is not made up of clergy alone, norof clellq' and people jointly; but simply of goodnessand truth in the soul of every individual member.It is not made a church by any amount or anyexactitude of ritual worship, any more than I ammade a'ather by the number of kisses I give mychildren. No man can say of it 10 here! or 10there! any more than he can limit the path ofthe lightning which now shin:es in one part of theheavens and now in the opposite. For as all her "members are born of God, they can only be spi-ritually discerned, and hence the new church mustpeI'listently disclaim all identification with parti-cular persons, particular times, or particular places.

Unlike the typical "churches, this perfect churchfinds its t.mest abode and expression in the indi-

[ 146 ]


40/98

NOT AN ~ I A S T I C I S l L

vidual soul. The existing ecclesiaBtical politiell,both Catholic and P r o t e s t a . n ~ stand between Godand the individual man, claiming to be the mediumto him of the divine blessing. The true church,on the contrary, derives its most general or aBBO-ciated form from the individual life of which it iscomposed, only from the purer individual fibres ofwhich it is the gross aggregation. It consequentlyconfesses a total inability to confer life, or do any-thing else but receive it. There is no stone so dead,no dolt so absolute, in respect to whom this newchurch claims or is conscious of one jot of supe-riority. Because her first, second, and third estate,or her beginning, middle, and end, are unmixeltdependence, and beget nothing accordingly batunmixed humility. She is only what her individus:lmembers make her; and as they are all regeneratemen, or men inwhom charity rules, and self-seekU::gis dead, so she of course can only be a stupendousform of charity, whose life lies not in receiving,but only in communicating.

No baptisms and no sacraments give admissionto this church, but only those things which allbaptisms and sacraments do but typify, namely,charity and a faith which itself is charity. All thebaptisms and sacraments that ever were adminis-tered, and all the priesthoods ever consecrated, veil

[ 147 ]


41/98


their servile heads before the true divine presencein the soul of the humblest of men, confessing theirutter impotence to approxima.te their subject: tothat suprema bliss. Nay, more j were the Lordhimself once again in finite form upon the earth,and the actual administrator of the Christian ordi-nances, they would still remain utterly inoperativeto give the slightest. approximation to his spiritualpresence. For all true approximation in thatdirection is spiritual, depending 'upon the existenceof neighborly love in our hea.rt:.'l, and a new andtrue church t h e r e f o ~ e will place her distinctivemarks, not in the possession of any baptisms orsacraments or other ca.rnal observances of any BOrt,but only in the sincere and saintly life of hervotaries. I t is totally impossible, if she be a truechurch, if she be anything else than a spuriouschurch, or a mere representative economy, that shecan have any manifestation apart from the manifes-tations of charity in the daily life of her members.I f charity teaches her subject to blow trumpetsbefore him in the public streets, proclaiming thathe is a regenerate man j if it teach him to invitepublic attention by printed handbills, whenever heseeks to celebrate the Divine Perfection by praiseand prayer j if it teach him to advertise himself asGod's true child, in contradistinction to others who

[ 148 ]


42/98


only falsely profess to be so; i f it teach him toacknowledge the divine life only in those whoentertain the same theological opinions 88 himself,or read the same theological books: why then, ofcourse, the greater church will do the same things,that is to say, will soon render the name of "newchurch" the synonyme of whatsoever is sectarianin temper, or vulgar and disreputable in manners.But i f charity prescribe no such behavior to hervotaries; i f the truly regenerate man, or the manin whom charity rules, be, from the very nature ofthe case, the least conscious of the difference be-tween himself and other men, and the least disposedto magnify such difference; i f he be disposed tohide the shortcomings of his brother, and discoveronly the things that make for peace and universalunity; i f he perceive in the law of God a heightand depth, a length and breadth of spiritual perfec-tion, which laughs to scorn the bare thought of meritin God's sight, and makes our truest wealth to lie inthe unaffected consciousness of our utter want: whythen,ofcourse,the new church will everywhere inten-sify these individual characteristics until she utterlysink from all identification with persons or placesor rituals, and stamp herself 88 one only with what-soever is pure and unsullied in human inspiration,and manly, just, and generous in human conduct.

[ 149 ]


43/98


In short, the true or final church is not in theleast degree an ecclesiasticism, is not in any out-ward sense a hierarchical institution. Were it so,it would have existed from the beginning of theworld, for theworld h8.8 never been without authen..tic hierarchies, or true ecclesiastical institutioIl&I do not see what rea.sonable fault is to be foundwith either the Jewish worship, or with that of theCh.zmian church, i f they are to be replaced onlyby other external worship. The Jewish priestsreflected, no doubt, the prevalent arrogance andselfishness of the national hope, but, I presume,were otherwise a superior class of men. And theChristian priesthood, although the temptations in-cident to their conventional elevation have servedto d e v e l ~ p e among them many of the subtler formsof evil latent in the undisciplined human heart,have yet, on the whole, been lustrous with manyvirtues. You will occasionally find one amongthem with a conscience like the hide of a rhino-ceros, and a lust of dominion able to surmount thetallest star, and annex it to the bishopric of hisconceit. And, what is remarkable, the smaller thesect, the plentier you find this sort of men, 8.8 i fthe divine Providence purposely limited a stomachso gigantic.to the meagerest possible pasture. But,on the whole, what sweetness h8.8 baptized the

[ lliO I


44/98

NOT AN ECCLESIASTICISlL

clerical function in the past! What fortitude, whatself-denial, what patience, what labor in seasonand out of season, have been the heritage of thegreat ma.es of these men! What stores of learningthey have accumulated; what splendid additionsthey have made to the best literature of every land;how they have enriched the sciences by their ob-servation and studious enquiries; how they havekept the flame of patriotism aglow; how they haveencouraged the generous ambition of youth, anddirected it to worthy and useful ends; how theyhave dignified the family altar, and cherished thepurity of woman, and diffused through society thecharm of honest and gentle manners: all thesethings must be cordially acknowledged by everyone competent to speak on the question. Wherewould be the sense of ousting such a body of men,native, as it were, and to the manor born, inheriting a grace and dignity from their time-honoredplaces, embalmed in the kindly reverence andgood-will of the community, only for the purposeof introducing a new and undisciplined body, honestand well-intentioned, no doubt, and in many re-spects intellectually well qualified; but aggreBBiveby the very nece88ity of their birth, contemptuousand insulting by the inseparable theory of theiroffice 1

[ lIH ]


45/98

THE CHURCH OF CHRlST

All the world' will bid God-speed to the new3.'lpirantB, provided they will honestly and modestlyapply such teaching-faculty 88 they posseBB to thedissemination of original truths on the s u ~ j e c t ofman's relations to God and his fellow-man. Butif they are not content with this-if they immodestly claim to be a newer and more authenticpriesthood as well; if, instead of simply sheddingnew and grateful light on previously insolubleproblems, they 8eek a private end also, which isthe exaltation of their oumorder in public regard,and to this end represent baptism and the Lord'88upper to P088es8 a different virtue, a divinerunction, under their administration than underthat of the existing priesthood: then the insultedcommon sense of the public will conclude thattruth informed and urged by such a temper canhardly be worth a reasonable man's attention; andthat i f we can never attain t a newne88 of 8p'ih-itin religious matteI"B without necessitating a >corres-ponding newne88 of letter also, the sooner we abandon all hope of spiritual progreBB the better, and BOget well rid for ever of the interminable quarreland fatigue.

But let us go a little deeper int the problem.Let us inquire the meaning of t h great phenomenon which we call THE CHURCH; let us inquire in

[ 162 ]


46/98


what sentiment of the human soul it takes its rise,and to what rational issues it inevitably points. I fwe thoroughly master these inquiries, we shall haveno remaining doubt as to the genius of the truechurch of God in heaven and on earth.

The vis formativa in the church, the foundationstone of all religion, is a certain sentiment in thebreast of man of disproportion or disunion betweenhim and God, between him and the Infinite. Thissentiment underlies every church in history, under-lies the entire religious life of the world. It hasgiven shape to all man's distinctive hope, to all hisaspiration, to all his best activity. He has the ideaor inward sense of infinitude, of perfection, of a lifewhich is not derived from without, and which isconsequently above all vicissitude or perturbation,and he feels in all his bones that this is not thelife which nature gives him. Hence a conflictbetween him and nature, between the ideal withinhim, and the actual without him. For man alwaysfeels himself bound to realize his ideas. To makethe ideal actual, to bring forth the dim and nebu-lous radiance of the soul into clear bodily shapeand act, is the very distinction of human life. Thebrute obeys only the life of the senses. Man, whenhe is truly man, when he is emancipated from thepurely animal life to which his inherited tendencies

.[ 153 ]


47/98


condemn him, obeys his ideas, acts from within,from the impulse of taste, from the inspimtion ofGoodness. His life lies in clothing the outer worldwith the glory which he brings from the inner, orin making his ideal actual. Hence, when hecherishes the idea of So life higher than he yet ex-periences, he inevitably aspires, aims, and hopes tomake it actual. Did he not 80 aim, aspire, andhope, he would perish. For the idea is there tobe realized. I t is not there merely to mock himwith its stem impo88ibilities; it is not there simplyto taunt him with his hopele88 infirmities; but, onthe contrary, to educate his. nascent and UDBU8-pected powers, to stimulate his hopes, and leavehim no rest until he has amply actualized it.

Man, then, has the idea of infinitude, of perfeo-tion, of a life infinitely superior to that whichnature gives him. And hence, the beginnings ofthe church in him, the beginnings of his religiouslife, or of his attempts to conciliate the Infinite,involve a. conflict between him and nature. Naturegives him So life underived from within, derivedfrom past ancestry,-a life depending on a. myriadexternal things, and hence subject to a myriadpains, disquiets, and disappointments. His soulwhispers to him of a. h i ~ h e r life than this, the lifeof God, a life which flows wholly from within the

[ 154 ]


48/98


subject, depending upon no outward circumstanceswhatever, controlling a.ll outward circumstances infac1; and subject therefore to no pain, no disquiet,and 00 meanness for ever. By all the attraction ofthe latter life over the former, he aspires to placateit, to draw it nearer to him, to win its blessedness.And he knows no way so direct, so full of influencetowards this end, as the denial of the natural life,or the persistent mortification of its desires, ambi-tions, and splendors. This life, he says practically,which I derive from nature, shall not be my life.I hate it, I abhor it, I banish it. I know of aserener, of a freer, of a higher life than this, andall my instincts bid me crave it. Hence I will killthis mortal natural life within me. I t ma.y forlong years yet invest my body, but my soul shallhave no participation with it. My soul 8hall mournin itsjoys and rejoice in its sorrows, if so be thatI may thus get deliverance from it.

Hence it is that you see the church throughouthistory disclaiming any natural basis, built uponthe practical denial of nature. Hence it is thatyou see the religious life, under whatever skies itmay flower, involve more or less of asceticism.This makes the unity of all churches, Pagan andChristian, Jew and Gentile, that they all declareman to be separated from God by nature, and not

[ 155 ]

"


49/98

,THE CHURCH OF CHRIST

connected with Him. They ~ affirm the necessityof regeneration. They all say, of course not in thesame, but equivalent terms, Ye must be bom againbefore ye shall see the kingdom of God. Accord-ingly, in the earlier and ruder stages of humanhistory, you find the eminent parts of divine wor-ship to consist in sacrifices and offerings, the sacri-fice or offering up t


50/98


You have heard, no doubt, of the famous ring ofPolycrates, king of Samos, which being thrown byhim into the sea with a view to propitiate thedivine friendship, came back to him in the bellyof a fish. The letter of his friend Amasis, king ofEgypt, which had induced him to sacrifice the ring,is worth quoting. "Amasis says thus to Polycrates :I t is pleasant to hear that one's friend prospers,yet your exceeding good fortune pleases me not,knowing as I do that the Deity is a jealous being;and I could wish that both myself and those I loveshould be fortunate in some of their doings, and inothers miscarry, and so pass their lives in changesof fortune, rather thap be always fortunate; for Ine'ver yet heard talk of anyone who with goodfortune in everything, did not come to his endmiserably with an utter downfall. . Do you there-fore follow my advice, and in respect of your happychances do as I tell you. Look out well for themost precious thing you have, and that which youwould most take to heart the loss of; and thenaway with it in such sort that it shall never morecome before the eyes of men. And if after this,your success should not take turns, and go evenlywith your mishaps, still remedy the matter in theway here proposed." Herodotu8, iii. 40. H e r ~upon Polycrates threw his ring which he valued

[ 167 ]


51/98


very highly into the sea, and when Amasis learnedthat it had been restored to him by I t fish, he atonce renounced the friendship of a man so clearlymarked out for misfortune.

In reading this touching letter of Amasis, kingof Egypt, one fancies that he is listening to a stmmof modem piety, so exactly akin is the true reli-gious instinct in all time and all space. It wasnever better illustrated than in t h i ~ document oflong mummied royalty. Its starting point or in-spiration is the conviction of God's dissatisfactionwith the merely natural life, and' its method ofconciliation is as Amasis describes it, assiduously" to seek out the most precious thing one has, thepossession dearest to one's heart, and then awaywith it in such sort that it shall never come beforethe eyes of men." Thus the Roman Catholicascetic under the fervent inspiration of this temperbetakes himself to convents and nunneries, andunder its ordinary exhibitions to fasting and penance. And the Protestant ascetic under the sameinfluence devotes himself to the ministry or themissionary enterprise, and persistently denies him-.self the delights of music and the dance. Theopera is a snare to him, and the theatre little shortof certain destruction. Ritually of COUI"l!le or intheir ecclesiastic practice, both the Catholic and

[ 158 ]


52/98


Protestant Mcetic differ very widely from the Paganworshipper. But they are all very closely allied inspirit, since they all alike aim to please God by anincessant depletion of the flesh, or an incessantmortification of natural desire.

Such then is the universal attitude of the churchof God throughout the past, an attitude of aversiontowards the joys of the merely natural life. Suchis the invariable aspect of the religious sentiment,ere it has degenerated M among us into sentimentality and cant, an aspect of patient and profoundself-sacrifice as to all the things men naturallycovet. Churches may exhibit inter 8e the greatestpoBBible ritual and political diversity, but none 'ofthem has any claim to be considered a churchunleBB it be baptized with this spirit. This is thereason, independently of its denial of the Lord'sdivinity, why the Unitarian church gets so littleuncultivated recognition, and impresses so slightlythe popular imagination. Its theory of Christianitysoftens the depravity of human n a t u r e ~ which de-pravity to the popular mind is the neceBBary antithesis of the divine magnanimity, and .the verynucleus therefore of gospel consolation. HenceUnitarianism never gets beyond the respectableclasses. Even where it conquers the bedroom andparlor floors, it leaves the attics and kitchen all the

[ 169 ]


53/98


more obstinate Baptifilt and Methodist. I t is a.good profeBSion for those in whom culture andprosperous circumstances have somewhat overlaidthe natural discrepancy between flesh and spirit,or self-love and brotherly love, so enforcing a milderand more decorous doctrine upon that subject.But evidently the chief historic praise of Unitarianism is negative, consisting in its destructive criticism of some Calvinistic errors, and in its stillfarther toning-dmvn the prevalent ecclesiasticalidea of the church, and so preparing the way forthe recognition of the Lord's spiritual advent.

From this survey, then, it is evident that theconstituent principle of the church is the convictionof the inadequacy of the merely natural life of manto attract the divine complacency. The obvioussentiment which underlies all man's religious life,is that of a total disproportion between God andhimselfconsidered as the subject of nature. Humannature universally confesses a conscience of sin, andhence regeneration becomes the prime necessityand aspiration of the religious profeBBion. Thesetwo words, a conscience of sin, and an ardent desirefor a new b i r t h - B u ~ up the entire ecclesiasticaldevelopment of the race. The church has begottenand maintained only these connected convictions,and consequently when you ask it for any distillctive

[ 160 1


54/98

NOT AN ECCLlIASTICISM:.

life, for any life which shall confess the operationof its own peculiar spirit, it consistently refers youon the one hand to the tears of humble penitence,and on the other to the anticipations of cheerfulfaith. It disclaims' all present vital satisfactions.I t is content to transact a ritual or forensic approxi-mation to God through the periodical ministrationsof its clergy, and patiently postpones the directrealization of its faith and hope to a post-1n


55/98


indeed, a much more substantial or real existencethan the body, because its substance is the DivineLove which alone is creative. The Divine Love isnot the attribute or quality of a material subject.God is not a finite, physical subject, of whom weproperly say, as we say of ourselves, that He feelsan emotion of love. He IS Love. His existenceis not first given, and then His character or per-sonality. He is not first a passive existence, aswe are, and only afterwards and upon occasion acharacteristic and active subject of that existence.He has no nature apart from His personality, asyou and I have. His personality absorbs his nature.He is personality itself, thus e s s e n ~ i a l l y active, oractive in Be, instead of obeying an outward motive.In short, the Divine Love is not emotional, butcreative, and hence His operation, or going forth,is not arbitrary, wilful, irrational, but on the con-trary strictly rational and formative, proceedingfrom ends by means to effects. It is exerted onlyin creating subjects or forms receptive of itself, andhence its procession is invariably from within towithout, and not the contrary: it is not like thepower of a carpenter or sculptor modifying pre-existing materials, and proceeding therefore fromthe circumference to the centre of his work: it re-sembles rather the phenomenon of natural growth,

[ 162 ]


56/98


which proceeds upon the liberation under suitableconditions of an invisible spiritual germ, and itssubsequent orderly expansion into root and stem,branch and leaf, flower and fruit. In short, thedivine power is the power primarily of an inwardand spiritual life, and only in strict subordination to this the power of an outward and naturalone.

God is a spirit, and his creation therefore mustbe primarily spiritual. He is essential Love andWisdom, and His creatures therefore must be as totheir essence, derivative forms of love and wisdom.But one cannot be born spiritual: he can onlybooO'me so. I am not made loving and wise byvirtue of my natural generation, but by virtue ofculture, or the patient subjection of my outwardlife to the inspirations of interior goodness andtruth. Hence time and space become necessaryelements of the creature's self-consciousness. Hisspiritual evolution exacts external or inferiorfield of existence, by means of which this culture~ self-discipline may take place; and Nature, orthe world of time and space, is the fruit of thisexaction. Accordingly while the mind is underthe dominion of Nature, and supposes the laws oftime and space to be absolute, man is in a stateof spiritual infancy, incapable of forming a single

[ 163 ]


57/98


right conception on the subject of the Divineexistence and character. This is not the place totrace the historic steps by which the mind of man,through the g r a d ~ l preponderance of self-loveover charity, lapses under this dominion of nature.Weare here only concerned with the fact of thelapse, in order to show how neceBBarily all thesubsequent judgments of the mind, in regard toGod and Ris relations to us, become colored by it.I flimply take the fact of such lapse, then, as indubitable by every one who has duly estimated thesubject, and I say that so long as it remains fullypronounced, that is, 80 long as the mind looks uponthe laws of physical existence, or the laws of timeand space, -as absolute, it neceBBarily regards themas essential to all existence, and consequently tothe Divine. Conceiving of himself as a purelyphysical existence, and at the same time perceivinga life or being superior to, and creative of, himself,man instinctively i n v e ~ , > this superior being withall excess of physical attributes, by intensifying inits favor the only elements of existence known tohimself under the names of time and space. Manhimself occupies seventy years more or less of time,and six feet more or less of space; his Creator,therefore, being so superior, must occupy a greatdeal more of both: yea, being perfect, He must

[ 164 ]


58/98

NOT AN ECCLESIASTICISM:.

,occupy all time and all space, and so be avouchedeternal and infinite.Of c o ~ e , then, in the soul's infancy, the Divine

Perfection is exclusively material, being identicalwith the utmost possible amount of time and space.And equally, of course, therefore, in this state ofthings, when spiritual love and light in the soulare so completely overlaid by natural love and light,the more devout one is, or the more he acknowledgesthe Divine, the greater must be his conviction ofthe disproportion between God and himself. Man'saffections and intelligence are completely dominated by the things of space and time, turning himin fact into a mere form of self-love; but as, in thisstate of ignorance, he necessarily attributes to Godan infinitely greater subjectiqn to the same laws,so consequently God becomes to the carnal imagination a huge overshadowing form of self-seeking,intent upon His creatures' incessant diminution.Hence, I repeat, the profounder one's conviction ofthe Divine existence is at this period, and the pmfounder his conviction of his own dependence, thedeeper will be his sense of their irreconcilableantagonism, and the more he will strive to hidethe implacable enmity of his heart under the profferof a servile and interested devotion.

Such being the attitude of a purely natural mind[ 165 ]


59/98


towards God, it is very easy to see how the peculiarecclesiastical development of humanity comes about.Man looks upon God only as a larger self, or as agreat corporeal existence, full of superfluous andebullient self-love, and capable, therefore, of verymischievous determinations towards His insignificant creatures. I t necessarily follows from thisthat every true revelation of God to the naturalmind, every revelation of Himself at all adapted topopular credence, must consult these carnal conceptions, and wear an extremely accommodated aspect.The final elevation of the mind out of nature depends upon this merciful descent and accommodation of Divine Truth to carnal conditions. Henceyou find God's name or glory in the earlier stagesof history associated with some exclusiv'e people,,and His worship made purely sensuous, or at best,merely representative of spiritual things. This.people may be a capital type or figure of the trueor spiritual people; but if they pretend to be anything more, i f they pretend to fulfil the spirit aswell as the letter of the Divine promise, they be-come an insufferable stench in the nostrilB, compared with which Gentiledom were sweet andvernal. A spiritual tie with minds so carnal mustof course be preposterous, and hence the Deity isalways revealed as in eminent spiritual hostility,

[ 166 ]


60/98


as in the 'lnost pointed private antagonism andquarrel, with the very people upon whom Hisname is publicly written. God is exclusivelyspiritual, being essential Love and Wisdom, andtherefore He incessantly repugns physical attributes, seeking to elevate His creature to morespiritual conceptions. But this can be done onlyin the most gradual manner, only in so far as thecreature himself, by virtue of the discipline to whichhe s u b j e ~ t s the principle of self-love in his bosom,regains his primal status, or becomes spiritua.llypronounced by becoming a form of brotherly love,or charity, and thus learns to conceive of God nolonger as a huge physical and passive existence,but as the sum of spiritual and active perfection,as the perfection of character or personality, inshort, as perfect Man. Meanwhile, therefore, Godcan consent to place His name upon any specialpeople only with a view to the utter abasement ofits pride or carnal righteousness, only with a viewto demonstrate, by the contrast of its proper vileness,the character of the true and spiritual worship Hecraves. Hence, I repeat that you will always findGod revealed as in intimate spiritual hostility toevery church or people with whom his name isoutwardly identified. The total pith and authenticity of every divine institution upon earth, stands

[ 167 ]


61/98


in its purely insubstantial or promissory character,--stands in it'3 being a figure or emblem of divinerthings to come. For abundant illustration on thispoint read the history of God's" chosen people"in the Old Testament, and observe how, whenJesus came offering a full and direct revelation ofthe Divine Spirit, he provoked the measurelessscorn of that deluded and self-righteous people.In fact, as we very well know, he was obliged tohide the pure spirituality of his mission even fromhis own kindly but unintelligent followers, wasobliged to wrap it up in apologue and parableand mystic action, and finally bequeath it to theworld's memory in the disguise of two ceremonialrites, baptism and the eucharist, under penalty ofhaving it utterly obliterated and forgotten.

Had it not been accordingly for these two carna.lordinances, snatched by the Lord's hand from thewreck of the Jewish worship, and modified intosymbols or memorials of His own blessed spirit,the church of Christ, that great multitude in earthand heaven ransomed from sin and death by his'majestic suffering, could have had no embodimentin nature, no material basis of existence, and hencecould never have come to spiritual consciousness.For as nature is the seminary of the spiritualworld; as no conscious spiritual existence takes

[ 168 ]


62/98


place without a previous natural germination; so,consequently, had it not been fDr this provisionaland symbolical embodiment of the church affordedby the two rites in question, it must have utterlylacked all natural body or germ, must have re-mained for ever unincarnate, for the simple reasonthat the spirit of Christ was so infinitely above thatof his followers, that its only true incarnation inthe fruits of a regenerate life, or the works ofcharity, was absolutely impossible. Such is theentire philosophy of religion considered as a CUltU8,and not as a life; such the sole justification of thechurch regarded as an ecclesiasticism, and not as aliving society or fellowship.

Swedenborg's whole labour, accordingly, is vir-tually given to the extrication of the Divine spirit,which is latent in these carnal ordinances of theChristian church. He shews that they are utterlyworthless save for their spiritual contents, andvindicates their existence and use only on theground of this mystic significance. The spirit ofChrist was Divine and Infinite Love. Now thisspirit becQmes possible to finite man only throughthe h u ~ i l i a t i o n of his natural lusts, only in so faras he puts away evils of life from a sentiment ofreverence towards God or Infinite Goodness. Hemay put away these evils apparently, that is, in

[ 169 ]


63/98


obedience to merely prudential motives, motives ofoutward profit and 10l'lll, but all this does not invitethe Divine Spirit. To put away one's evils truly,one must put them away from an interior motive,or a sentiment of their contrariety to Supreme andInfinite Goodness; and just in proportion as onedoes this, the Divine spirit, the spirit of InfiniteLove, flows into him interiorly, and builds him upinto a living and miraculous tabernacle; immortallyadequate and pliant to the Divine inhabitation.

But who was there at Christ's day to comprehendor receive these truths 1 How totally averse 'werethey to the entire strain of the Jewish mind! Andhow little prepared the Gentile mind also was fortheir entertainment, may be augured from the factthat Christ's professed followers had scarcely gotstanding-room in Gentile tolerance, before theybegan to give his mission a palpably secular determination, and merged the glimmer of spiritualpromise it exerted in the lust of a mere earthlydominion. Indeed, for that matter, we may say,how few minds are even now prepared to receivethese high spiritual verities! You will doubtlessfind numbers of very amiable people professing tobe "converted," and able, moreover, to put theirfingers on the time and place of its transaction;but how rarely do we find our men of intellect

[ 170 ]


64/98


living in the habitual acknowledgment of the Divine _name, or putting away their native evils from anyother than worldly ends! The pride of intellectsays, "Be ye yourselves as gods, determining goodand evil;" and in missing humility consequentlywe miss all true exaltation. The house that towershighest towards the skies must first go down thedeepest in the earth; and the life that lays thesurest hold on heaven, is that which has the mosthonestly subjugated hell.

If, therefore, the mind of man be still so carnaland stupid, how was it possible for the Lord tohave communicated the grand mystery of the spiri-tual birth, at that early day, in any other than afigurative or symbolic manner 1 Clearly the thingwas impossible, without fatally disgusting even themost adhesive of his few and perplexed disciples.Either the great arcanum must have remainedwholly untaught, the very effort being abandoned;or else it must be taught in accommodation to themental stature of the race, that is, carnally orfiguratively. Accordingly, Christ instituted the tworites of baptism and the supper, one symbolizingthe negative or initiatory side of the regenerativeprocess, the other the positive and consummateside of it. Baptism was designed as a sign ormemorial of the elimination or putting away of

[ 171 ]


65/98

THE CHunCH OF CHRIST

natura.l evils requiElite in spiritual regeneration;and the eucharist, or the mystical feeding on thebody and blood of the Lord, as a sign or memorialof the influx of Divine goodness and truth conS&-quent upon such elimination. They were bothalike mere signs of this regenerative process, merememorials of it, destined to survive until hi1!mystical second coming; that is, until he shouldcome in the power of his Spirit, to claim the spiritual allegiance of his worshipper, or, what is thesame thing, take possession of his heart and understanding.Now, what must we say of a self-styled newchurch which, in face of all these palpable facts,and while avowedly acknowledging the spiritualadvent of the Christ, does not hesit2l.te to graspthese literal symbols or memorials of his truth,and convert them into its inseparable and eternalsubstance 1 Why, we can only say with the Apostle,"that he is not a Jew who is so outwardly, andthat circumcision is truly nQt of the letter, but ofthe spirit." The sole glory of the Christian sacraments lies not in themselves, but in their spiritualsignificance. When, therefore, that thing whichthese sacraments signify is, by your own avowal,come, why seek to re-enact the accomplished sym-bol1 Especially, why should you claim a more

[ 172 ]


66/98


authentic hold upon the symbol, than they whodeny the Lord's second or spiritual advent, andwho, therefore, very pertinently cherish his appointed memorials 1 I f your hold upon these ordin a n ~ s be really more authentic than that of theEpiscopalian and Baptist, it can only be becauseyour relation to Christ is more carnal and sensuousthan theirs. These ordinances were intended onlyfor the carnal mind, or those who had no spiritualapprehension of the Divine Truth; and if, therefore,your administration of them exhibit any specialfitness, it must lie wholly in your spiritual inferiority to the older sects.

But the whole pretension is unfounded. A memorial is of value only during the absence of thememorialist. When he returns to us, and exhibitsevery day and hour the love of his llllveiled heart,the memorial grows instantly wan and faded, andfalls of necessity into disuse. How sinister a com-pliment should we seem to pay to his friendship,if we persisted in cherishing a gift after the giverhad made himself wholly ours! He would say," Clearly, the gift has been prized not for my sakepurely, but for some private en,d; otherwise itsvalue would cease by my re-appearance." It wasso with the Christian ordinances. Their worth wasinestimable during the long spiritual night which

[ 173 ]


67/98


invested the church from the time of the apostlesto the splendid Pentecost of the last century; forthey served, as Swedenborg says, to secure anorderl

Date post:	06-Apr-2018
Category:	Documents
Upload:	francis-batt
View:	215 times
Download:	0 times

Henry James The Church of Christ not an ecclesiasticism London and New York 1861

Documents