By Emanuel Swedenborg, a Swede

Revelation 21:2, 5: I, John, saw the holy city, the new Jerusalem, coming down from God out of heaven, prepared as a bride adorned for her husband. And the one sitting on the throne said, “Behold, I am making all things new”; and said to me, “Write, because these words are true and trustworthy.”

§1 / [Author’s Preface]

§§2– 8 / Roman Catholic Teachings Concerning Justification, Taken from the Council of Trent

§§9– 15 / Protestant Teachings Concerning Justification, Taken from the Formula of Concord

§16 / Sketch of the Teachings of the New Church

1. §§17– 18 / The churches that separated from Roman Catholicism during the Reformation disagree with each other on many points of theology, but there are four points on which they all agree: there is a trinity of persons in the Divine; original sin came from Adam; Christ’s merit is assigned to us; and we are justified by faith alone.

2. §§19– 20 / In fact, in regard to the four theological points just listed, Roman Catholics before the Reformation had exactly the same teachings as Protestants did after it. That is, Catholics had the same teachings regarding the trinity of persons in the Divine, the same teachings regarding original sin, the same teachings regarding the assigning of Christ’s merit, and the same teachings regarding our being justified by believing that we are assigned Christ’s merit; the only difference was that Catholics united that faith to goodwill or good works.

3. §§21– 23 / The leading reformers — Luther, Melanchthon, and Calvin — retained all the dogmas regarding the trinity of persons in the Divine, original sin, the assigning of Christ’s merit to us, and our being justified by faith, in the same past and present form they had had among Roman Catholics. The reformers separated goodwill or good works from that faith, however, and declared that our good works contribute nothing to our salvation, for the purpose of clearly differentiating themselves from Roman Catholics with regard to the essentials of the church, which are faith and goodwill.

4. §§24– 29 / The leaders of the Protestant Reformation do indeed describe good works as an appendage to faith and even an integral part of faith, but they say we are passive in the doing of them, whereas Roman Catholics say we are active in the doing of them. There is actually strong agreement between Protestants and Catholics on the subjects of faith, works, and our rewards.

5. §§30– 38 / The entire theology in the Christian world today is based on the idea that there are three gods — an idea that has arisen from the teaching that there is a trinity of persons.

6. §§39– 40 / Once we reject the idea of a trinity of persons and therefore the idea that there are three gods, and accept in its place that there is one God and that the divine trinity exists within him, we see how wrong the teachings of today’s Christian theology are.

7. §§41– 42 / After we make this change, the faith we then acknowledge and accept is a faith that is truly effective for our salvation — a faith in one God, united to good works.

8. §§43– 44 / This faith is faith in God the Savior Jesus Christ. In a simple form it is this: (1) There is one God, the divine trinity exists within him, and he is the Lord Jesus Christ. (2) Believing in him is a faith that saves. (3) We must abstain from doing things that are evil — they belong to the Devil and come from the Devil. (4) We must do things that are good — they belong to God and come from God. (5) We must do these things as if we ourselves were doing them, but we must believe that they come from the Lord working with us and through us.

9. §§45– 46 / The faith of today has removed living a religious life from the church. A religious life consists in acknowledging one God and worshiping him with a faith that is connected to goodwill.

10. §§47– 50 / The faith taught by the modern-day church is incapable of being united to acts of goodwill; it is incapable of producing any fruit in the form of good works.

11. §§51– 52 / Th e faith of the modern-day church results in worship that engages our mouths but not our lives. How acceptable the Lord finds the worship of our mouths, though, depends on how worshipful our lives are.

12. §§53– 57 / The body of teaching espoused by the modern-day church is woven together out of numerous absurdities that have to be taken on faith. Therefore its teachings become part of our memory alone. They do not become part of our higher understanding; they rest instead on supporting evidence from below the level of the intellect.

13. §§58– 59 / The tenets of the church of today are extremely difficult to learn and retain. They cannot be preached or taught without a great deal of restraint and caution to keep them from appearing in their naked state, since true reason would not recognize or accept them.

14. §§60– 63 / The teachings of faith of the modern-day church attribute to God qualities that are merely human: they say, for example, that God looked at the human race with anger; that he needed to be reconciled to us; that he was in fact reconciled through his love for his Son and through the Son’s intercession; that he needed to be appeased by seeing his Son’s wretched suffering, and this brought him back into a merciful attitude; that he assigns the Son’s justice to unjust people who beg him for it on the basis of their faith alone, and turns them from enemies into friends and from children of wrath into children of grace.

15. §§64– 69 / The faith of the modern-day church has given birth to horrifying offspring in the past, and is producing more such offspring now: for example, the notion that there is instantaneous salvation as a result of the direct intervention of mercy; that there is predestination; that God cares only for our faith and pays no attention to our actions; that there is no bond that unites goodwill and faith; that as we undergo conversion we are like a log of wood; and many more teachings of the kind. Another problem has been the adoption of [false] principles of reason that are based on the teaching that we are justified by our faith alone and the teaching concerning the person of Christ, and the use of these principles to judge the uses and benefits of the sacraments (baptism and the Holy Supper). From the earliest centuries of Christianity until now, heresies have been leaping forth from a single source: the body of teaching based on the idea that there are three gods.

16. §§70– 73 / The references in Matthew 24:3 to “the close of the age” and “the Coming of the Lord” that follows it mean the final state or the end of the church of today.

17. §§74– 76 / The reference in Matthew 24:21 to “a great affliction such as has never existed since the world began and will never exist again” means an attack by falsities and the resulting end — the devastation — of all truth in the Christian denominations of today.

18. §§77– 81 / The statement in Matthew 24 “After the affliction of those days, the sun will be darkened, the moon will not give its light, the stars will fall from heaven, and the powers of the heavens will be shaken” (Matthew 24:29) means that at the last time of the Christian church, when its end is imminent, it will have no love, no faith, and no knowledge of what is good or what is true.

19. §§82– 86 / The goats mentioned in Daniel and Matthew mean people who are devoted to the modern-day view that faith is what justifies us.

20. §§87– 90 / Adamant devotees of the modern-day view that faith is what justifies us are depicted in the Book of Revelation as the dragon, its two beasts, and the locusts. This belief (when strongly held) is depicted there as the great city that is spiritually called Sodom and Egypt, where the two witnesses were killed, and as the pit of the abyss from which the locusts came forth.

21. §§91– 94 / Unless the Lord establishes a new church, no one can be saved. This is the meaning of the statement in Matthew 24:22 “Unless those days were cut short no flesh would be saved.”

22. §§95– 98 / “The one who sat on the throne said, ‘Behold, I am making all things new’; and said to me, ‘Write, because these words are true and faithful’” (Revelation 21:5). This statement in the Book of Revelation means our examining and rejecting the tenets of faith of the modern-day church and God’s revealing and our accepting the tenets of faith of the new church.

23. §§99– 101 / The New Jerusalem, which is the topic of Revelation 21 and 22, and is there called the bride and wife of the Lamb, is the new church that is going to be established by the Lord.

24. §§102– 104 / There is no way in which we can simultaneously hold the views of the new church and the views of the former church on faith; if we did hold both these views at once, they would collide and cause so much conflict that everything related to the church would be destroyed in us.

25. §§105– 108 / Roman Catholics today are not at all aware that their church once embraced concepts of the assigning of Christ’s merit to us and of our justification by faith in that. These concepts lie completely buried beneath their external rituals of worship, which are many. Therefore if Catholics give up some of their external rituals, turn directly to God the Savior Jesus Christ, and take both elements in the Holy Eucharist, they are better equipped than Protestants to become part of the New Jerusalem, that is, the Lord’s new church.

§§109– 115 / [The Assignment of Christ’s Merit]

§§116– 117 / Concluding Appendix

§§118– 120 / Three Memorable Occurrences Taken from Revelation Unveiled

75. Brief Analysis

See §73 above for the point that Matthew 24 presents the Lord’s predictions and descriptions of the successive states of decline and corruption the Christian church would go through. As this chapter in Matthew continues, there is a mention of false prophets yet to come who will bring on an abomination of desolation (Matthew 24:11, 15). That chapter speaks of “a great affliction such as has never existed since the world began until now and will never exist again” (Matthew 24:21). Clearly, then, a “great affliction,” both here and elsewhere in the Word, means an attack by falsities against truth until no genuine truth drawn from the Word, no truth that has not been falsified and completely ruined, remains.

This has happened because the churches have not acknowledged that God’s unity in trinity and trinity in unity exist in one person rather than in three persons. As a result they have based their church on a mental picture of three gods, but an oral confession of one God. By doing this they have separated themselves so far from the Lord that they have completely lost the idea of any divinity in his human manifestation (see Revelation Unveiled 294). Yet the Lord in his human manifestation is the divine truth itself and the divine light itself, as he himself teaches comprehensively in his Word. This is why there is such a great affliction today. As we will see in what follows [§§79– 81], this affliction has been caused primarily by the churches’ teachings that whether we possess faith (as the churches define it) or not is the sole thing that determines whether we are justified and assigned Christ’s merit.

294. To this I will append the following narrative account:

In the natural world people possess two levels of speech, because they possess two levels of thought, one inward and one outward. For a person can speak from his inner thought and at the same time then from his outer one, or he can speak from his outer thought and not from his inner one, and even contrary to his inner one. This is what makes possible pretenses, flatteries, and hypocrisies.

In the spiritual world, however, people do not possess two levels of speech, but a single one. A person there speaks as he thinks. Otherwise his voice becomes grating and hurts the ears. Still, he can remain silent and so not divulge the thoughts of his mind. Consequently, when a hypocrite comes into the company of people who are wise, either he goes away, or he hurries to a corner of the room and makes himself inconspicuous, and sits silent.

[2] Many spirits once gathered in the world of spirits and discussed this circumstance with each other, saying that being unable to speak as one thinks in the company of good spirits was a hardship for those who had not thought correctly about God and the Lord.

At the center of the gathering were the Protestant Reformed, and many of their clergy, and next to them Roman Catholics with some monks. Both groups said at first that it was not a hardship. What need is there to speak otherwise than as one thinks? And if perchance one does not think correctly, can he not purse his lips and remain silent?

Moreover, one of the clergy said, "Who does not think correctly about God and the Lord?"

But some of the gathering said, "Still, let's put it to the test."

And regarding God, there were some who had confirmed themselves in a trinity of persons — particularly because of the statement in the Athanasian doctrine,

The person of the Father is one person, that of the Son another, and that of the Holy Spirit still another.

And,

As the Father is God, so is the Son God, and the Holy Spirit God.

These were told to say "one God." But they could not. They contorted their lips and twisted them into many convolutions, but they could not articulate the sound into any other words than those in keeping with the ideas of their thought, which were ideas of three persons and so of three Gods.

[3] Moreover, those who had affirmed a faith divorced from charity were told to say the name Jesus. But they could not, even though they could all say Christ, and also God the Father. They were surprised at this, and inquiring into the reason, they found that they prayed to God the Father for the sake of the Son, and did not pray to the Savior Himself. For Jesus means Savior.

[4] They were further told to speak from their thought about the Lord's humanity and say, "Divine humanity." But none of the clergy present there could do so, though some of the laity could, and therefore the subject was presented for a serious ventilation.

So then, 1. They had read to them these statements in the Gospels:

The Father... has given all things into (the Son's) hand. (John 3:35)

(The Father has) given (the Son) authority over all flesh... (John 17:2)

All things have been delivered to Me by My Father. (Matthew 11:27)

All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. (Matthew 28:18)

They were then told to retain in thought therefore the idea that Christ is God of heaven and earth, both in respect to His Divinity and in respect to His humanity, and so to utter the term, "Divine humanity." But still they could not. And they said that they even retained from the quotations some thought of the idea from an understanding of it, but nevertheless without any acknowledgment of it, and that for that reason they could not.

[5] 2. After that they had read to them statements from Luke 1:32, 34-35, ¹ saying that the Lord in respect to His humanity was the Son of Jehovah God, and statements showing that in respect to His humanity He is everywhere in the Word called the Son of God, and also the only-begotten. ² And the examiners asked them to retain this idea in their thought, along with the idea that the only begotten Son of God born into the world could not but be God, as the Father is God, and to utter the term, "Divine humanity."

But they said, "We cannot, because our spiritual thought, which is the inner one, does not allow into the thought nearest our speech any other than like ideas."

They said, too, that they perceived from this that it is now not possible to keep separate their levels of thought as in the natural world.

[6] 3. Next they had read to them the Lord's words to Philip:

Philip said to Him, "Lord, show us the Father...." (And the Lord) said to him, ."..He who sees Me has seen the Father... Do you not believe that I am in the Father, and the Father in Me?" (John 14:8-11)

And moreover other passages, saying that the Father and He are one (John 10:30, and elsewhere). And they were told to retain this idea in thought and then say "Divine humanity." But because their thought was not rooted in an acknowledgment that the Lord was God even in respect to His humanity, therefore they could not. They contorted their lips into convolutions to the point of becoming irate, and they tried to force their mouths into uttering it and to spit it out. But without success. The reason was that mental ideas flowing from an acknowledgment unite with spoken words in people who live in the spiritual world; and when those ideas do not exist, words are lacking, for ideas become words when uttered in speech.

[7] 4. Then they had read to them statement from the church's doctrine accepted throughout the world, saying that the Divine and human in the Lord are not two but one, indeed one person, united altogether like soul and body — statements from the Athanasian Creed. And they were told, "You may take from this an idea in keeping with your acknowledgment, that the Lord's humanity is Divine, because His soul is Divine, for it comes from your church's doctrine which you acknowledged in the world. Moreover the soul is the underlying essence and the body the form, and the essence and form are united, like being and expression, or like the efficient cause of an effect and the effect itself."

The spirits retained this idea and tried in accord with it to utter the term, "Divine humanity." But they could not, for their inner idea of the Lord's humanity dismissed and expunged this novel new idea, as they called it.

[8] 5. Again they had read to them the following from John:

...the Word was with God, and the Word was God... And the Word became flesh... (John 1:1, 14)

And the following from Paul:

...in (Christ Jesus) dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily. (Colossians 2:9)

And they were told to think hard that God, who was the Word, became flesh, and that all the Divine dwells in Him bodily. "Perhaps," they were told, "you can then utter the term, 'Divine humanity.'"

But they could not, saying openly that they could not entertain the idea of a Divine humanity, as God is God and man is man, and God is a spirit, "and we can think of a spirit only as being like a puff of wind or bit of ether."

[9] 6. Finally they were told, "You know that the Lord said, "Abide in Me, and I in you... He who abides in Me, and I in him, bears much fruit; for without Me you can do nothing. (John 15:4-5)" And because some of the English clergy were present, they had read to them also something from one of their prayers before Holy Communion:

For, when we spiritually eat the flesh of Christ, and drink the blood, then we dwell in Christ, and Christ in us.

"If you now think that this would not be possible unless the Lord's humanity is Divine, utter then the term, "Divine humanity," from an acknowledgment in the thought."

But still they could not. For they had the idea so deeply impressed on them that the Lord's Divinity was one thing and His humanity another, so that His Divinity was like the Divinity of the Father, and His humanity like the humanity of any other man.

The examiners said to them, however, "How can you think so? Is it possible for a rational mind ever to think that God is three and the Lord two?"

[10] 7. After that the examiners turned to the Lutherans, saying that the Augsburg Confession and Luther taught that the Son of God and the Son of Man in Christ are one person, that He is also in respect to His human nature the true, almighty and eternal God, and that being in respect to that nature at the right hand of almighty God, He governs everything in heaven and on earth, fills everything, is present with us, and dwells and acts in us. Moreover, there is no difference in any worship of them, since through the nature that is seen, the Divinity that is not seen is worshiped. Thus in Christ, God is man, and man is God.

Hearing this, the Lutherans replied, "Is that right?" And having looked around, they presently said, "We have not known this before. Consequently we cannot."

But one or two of them said, "We have read this and written it, yet when we have thought about it to ourselves on our own, the words were still only words, of which we could not form an interior idea."

[11] 8. Finally, turning to the Roman Catholics, the examiners said, "Perhaps you can pronounce the term 'Divine humanity,' because you believe that Christ is wholly present in the bread and wine of your Eucharist and in every particle of it, and you also worship Him as God when you present the host and distribute it, and you call Mary the mother of God. Consequently you acknowledge that she gave birth to God, which is to say, to His Divine humanity."

They then tried to utter the term in accord with those mental ideas they had of the Lord. But they could not, because of the physical idea they had of His body and blood, and because of their assertion that it was human power and not Divine power that He conferred on the Pope.

A monk then rose and said that he could think of the term "Divine humanity" as applying to the Virgin Mary, mother of God, and also to the patron saint of his monastery.

And another monk came forward saying, "I can, in accord with my mental idea of it, say 'Divine humanity' as a term applying to our most holy Pope rather than to the Christ."

But at that other monks pulled him back and said, "Shame on you."

[12] After that I saw heaven opened, and I saw little flame-like tongues descending and flowing into some of those present, and they then began to celebrate the Lord's Divine humanity, saying, "Put aside the idea of three Gods and believe that in the Lord dwells all the fullness of the Godhead bodily, that the Father and He are one as a soul and body are one, and that God is not a puff of wind or bit of ether, but human, and you will then be conjoined with heaven, and the Lord will enable you thereby to say the name Jesus and utter the term, "Divine humanity."

Footnotes: