1. Survey of Teachings of the New Church Meant by the New Jerusalem in the Book of Revelation

[Author’s Preface]

AFTER publishing, within the span of a few years, several larger and smaller works on the New Jerusalem (which means the new church that the Lord is going to establish), and after unveiling the Book of Revelation, I resolved to publish and bring to light the teachings of the [new] church in their fullness, and thus to present a body of teaching that was whole. But because this work was going to take several years, I developed a plan to publish an outline of it, to give people an initial, general picture of this church and its teachings. When a general overview precedes, all the details that follow, of however wide a range, stand forth in a clear light, because they each have their own place within the overall structure alongside things of the same type.

This briefing does not include detailed argumentation; it is shared as advance notice, because the points it contains will be fully demonstrated in the work itself.

First, however, I must present the teachings concerning justification as they exist today, in order to highlight the differences between the tenets of today’s church and those of the new church.

108. The first reason why Roman Catholics are better equipped than Protestants to become part of the New Jerusalem (that is, the new church) is this: The belief that we are justified by being assigned Christ’s merit, which is wrong and cannot live alongside the faith of the new church (see §§102– 104), has been wiped out among Roman Catholics, and should be completely eradicated. This belief is firmly fixed in Protestants, however, as if it were carved into their being. It is the chief teaching in their church.

The second reason is that Roman Catholics have more of an idea than Protestants that there is divine majesty in the Lord’s human manifestation. This is abundantly clear in the extremely sacred way in which Roman Catholics venerate the Host.

The third reason is that Roman Catholics see goodwill, good works, repentance, and the effort to live a new life as essential to salvation; the new church, too, considers them essential. Protestants who are committed to faith alone, though, have a very different view. They see these as playing a nonessential role or even no role at all in our faith; they see them as contributing nothing to our salvation.

These are three reasons why Roman Catholics, if they turn to God the Savior himself directly rather than indirectly and if they take both elements in the Holy Eucharist, are better equipped than Protestants to receive a living faith in place of a dead one and be led by the Lord, through the agency of his angels, to the gates of the New Jerusalem (the new church) and brought in shouting for joy.

[The Assignment of Christ’s Merit]

96. Brief Analysis

The scriptural quotation just above is what the one who sat on the throne, that is, the Lord, said to John when John saw the New Jerusalem coming down from God out of heaven. (The New Jerusalem means the new church, as the next point will demonstrate [§§99– 101].)

The reason why the falsities in the tenets of faith of the modern-day church have to be examined and rejected first before the truths in the tenets of the new church are revealed and accepted is that the two systems do not agree at any point or at any time. The tenets of the modern-day church are built on faith as their foundation, and yet no one knows whether anything essential to the church lies within that faith or not. The essential elements of the church, which are things that unite themselves to a faith in one God, are goodwill, good works, repentance, and a life in accordance with divine laws. Because these four, together with faith, affect and move both our will and our thoughts, they unite us to the Lord and the Lord to us. Since none of these essential elements plays any part in the faith espoused by the modern-day church at the moment when that faith comes into us — the moment referred to as “the act of justification” — it is completely impossible to know whether that faith is in us or not. Therefore it cannot even be known whether that faith is anything real or is just an idea. We are told that in the moment [of acquiring faith] we are like a stone or a block of wood and that when it comes to receiving faith, we are entirely unable to will, think, cooperate, or adapt or accommodate ourselves to it; see §15 c, d. None of us can even guess, then, let alone know, whether that faith exists within us or not. We do not know whether it is like a flower in a painting we own or like a flower in a field inside us. We do not know whether it is like a bird flying past us or like a bird nesting in us. We ask what signs and indications might lead us to the answers to these questions. The reply is that we may know this from the goodwill, good works, repentance, and following of the law that occur in us once we have faith. We have nevertheless also been told that there is no bond whatever between faith and these things. I leave it to the wise to investigate whether a lack of a bond can be a sign that testifies to anything! For example, our faith (we are told) is not preserved or maintained by the actions just listed; see §12 l, m.

The conclusion to be drawn is that nothing of the church has anything to do with the modern-day faith. Therefore the modern-day faith is not indeed anything; it is just a notion that there is such a thing. Given that this is the nature of that faith, it deserves to be rejected; in fact, since it contains not a single attribute of a church, it rejects itself.