The spiritual sense of Gen. xlix. 26, as given there, is as follows: "Joseph' is the Lord's spiritual Church, 'the crown of the head of the chosen one of his brethren' is the spiritual principle which flows into all the truths and goods of that Church; for the twelve sons or tribes of Israel,' signify all the truths and goods of the Church in one complex." Lectus (a bed), on the other hand, signifies the natural man and also doctrine; but this signification, as the reader will perceive, is not taken into account in this explanation.

As Swedenborg in A. E. 163 had recognised the true meaning of vertex lecti, on preparing his spiritual explanation of the Revelation. for the press under the title of the "Apocalypse Revealed," he as a matter of course no longer quoted this as a parallel passage in A. R. 137, although he quoted there all the other passages recorded in his "Index Biblicus."

Such seems to be the straightforward explanation of this difficulty, when all the facts belonging to this case are carefully considered and examined in their proper order. Then also, it seems to me, it is unnecessary to have recourse to any of those suggestions and explanations which the writer, naturally enough, introduced on pp. 512-515, and which induced him to make this statement: "This mistake shows that at the time he wrote that part of the A. E. . . . he was not guided infallibly to the true meaning of this one peculiar passage of Scripture."

To my mind this passage simply shows that Swedenborg in preparing for the press those writings in which the Lord effected His Second Coming, was not independent of natural means; and hence that in the selection of parallel passages from the letter of the Word he had recourse to the "Index Biblicus," which he had prepared before having fully mastered the Hebrew language, and into which consequently some imperfections of the Latin version which he used had crept. The history of this passage also shows that when he, in the light of the spiritual sense, examined Schmidtius' translation of Scripture as contained in the " Index Biblicus," he perceived the real meaning of the letter, and, contrary to what is stated by the writer in the Repository, was guided to the true spiritual meaning of "this one peculiar passage of Scripture;" since in A. E. 163 he gives the true spiritual meaning of the passage, based on the genuine literal sense, and not on the mistaken literal meaning, under which it figures in the "Adversaria" and the "Index Biblicus."

(c) Errors originating with the Critics themselves, and wrongly attributed by them to Swedenborg.

4. Of this kind is the error which the writer points out on p. 511 in these words, "In A. C. 9424 he puts a wrong construction on the literal sense of Isaiah ií. 20, 21." The Latin translation which Swedenborg gives of this verse is as follows: "In die illo projiciet homo idola argenti sui et idola auri sui, quæ fecerunt sibi ad incurvandum se talpis et vespis," of which the following is a literal translation: "In that day a man shall cast away the idols of his silver, and

the idols of his gold, which they made [each] for himself for the purpose of bowing down to the moles and the bats." Now this is a correct and literal translation of the original Hebrew text, which reads:

and to the bats to the moles to bowing down to himself they made which

לתפופרוה ולעטלפיס

It is by forcing the original construction of the Hebrew where "to moles and to bats" unquestionably belong to "bowing down," that the translation followed in the common English version is obtained, where "to moles and to bats" is construed with the verb "cast away," with which they have no natural connection whatever.

The word "vespis" in A. C. 9424 is a misprint for "vespertilionibus," which word is correctly used in A. C. 8932 and 10,582. Under this word also the passage is recorded in the "Index Biblicus" (vol. iv. p. 977).

To this class belong several errors of a similar kind which are sometimes wrongly imputed to Swedenborg, but which the writer did not care to quote. Among these is the charge that Swedenborg in A. C. 9865 did not know what the stone "topaz" in Aaron's breastplate was, and that he simply supposes that it was of a "reddish flamy" colour; while Swedenborg states there that it is not known from what WORD the Hebrew word for topaz is derived; but from the fact that the ruby in that language is derived from a word signifying redness, and the carbuncle from a word which signifies flumy, he thinks it is probable that the word for topaz is derived from a word signifying a reddish flamy colour. As Swedenborg, however, as he himself informed Count Tessin and Librarian Gjörwell, could "not tell the future," so also he could not go beyond the state of etymological science at his time.

(d) Errors that crept into Swedenborg's Writings from the fact that he was internally, and not merely externally inspired.

Here I shall first of all quote from what I said on this subject in my treatise on "Authority," etc. :—

"It is thought by some that Swedenborg's theological writings cannot be inspired, because in his manuscripts there are whole sentences and paragraphs crossed out, which is an indication that he changed his mind while in the act of writing. This objection is made by those who confound internal with external inspiration. But as soon as it is acknowledged that Swedenborg was internally inspired, that, therefore, he was inspired as to his internal thought, and that while being inspired as to his internal thought, as to his external thought he continued in the enjoyment of his freedom and rationality, this objection loses its force. It is therefore quite possible that in writing the internal sense from the Lord in the natural world, he came into the full state of inspiration only gradually, in proportion as his state of reflection became intensified, and that he crossed out what he wrote in the beginning, in order to express more clearly and precisely what he received from the Lord afterwards. On the other hand again, it is most probable that his external thought, and hence his hand, became overpowered sometimes by the flood of spiritual light streaming down int him, that the vessel therefore could not contain at once all that was

poured into it from within. On account of the peculiar nature of Swedenborg's inspiration, it was therefore quite necessary that he should prepare two copies of his works, the first being the rough draught, and the second the clean copy written out for the printer" (Authority, etc. p. 142).

For the above reasons also it is quite possible that some lapsus pennæ should have occurred in the first draught copy. These, however, Swedenborg afterwards corrected in the copy which he despatched to the printer.

So we read in A. E. 1146 :

"By ivory is understood rational truth, because by the camel is signified the natural in general; hence by ivory, which is from its tooth, and whence is its power, and also because it is white and resisting, there is signified rational truth, which is the most excellent truth of the natural man.

In A. R. 774 Swedenborg corrects this lapsus pennæ, by saying that "ivory signifies natural truth, because it is white and can be polished, and because it protrudes out of the mouth of the elephant, and also constitutes its power."

We see, therefore, that one of the advantages which internal inspiration has over merely external inspiration is this, that it enables the writer to correct any lapsus pennæ which may have crept in during the act of writing; while those who are merely externally inspired cannot distinguish the wrong from the right word.

5. To this class belongs also the wrong quotation of Luke i. 80, referred to by the writer on p. 511, which Swedenborg in A. C. 1457 attributed to the child Jesus, while in A. C. 2708, and ever afterwards in A. E. 183 and 730, he attributed it rightly to John.

The error in the present case, as in several others which we have discussed above, was due to Swedenborg's "Biblical Concordance," where he did not properly distinguish the passages referring to John from those referring to Jesus. He became aware, however, of the error, and corrected it in later parts of his writings; but did not become aware of it in time to correct also the earlier passage or passages. In my next, which will contain the conclusion of my article, I shall consider the alleged contradictions in Swedenborg's writings. R. L. TAFEL.

Review.

"UNCROWNED QUEENS." By MRS. ROE. Simpkin & Marshall. MRS. ROE has added another to her historical sketches by the publication of this charming little volume. Its pages are occupied with brief, but interesting and instructive, biographies of some of the most estimable women of English history. Of these one, Florence Nightingale, is still living; the others are gathered to the roll of those "who are worthy," and who abide for ever in the kingdom of their Heavenly Father. The book is written in a pleasing and attractive manner, and throws light on the social customs and political usages of many periods of English history. It is well adapted to interest young persons, and to lure them to the study of their own country, and is not more valuable for its historical teaching than for the high moral tone which pervades its pages. It is published in a neat style, and has already passed into a second edition. It is not, we hope, the last of these "Historical Vignettes" we are to receive from the pen of the gifted authoress.

281

Miscellaneous.

66

as to a supreme authority, we might accept it as a metaphysical theology, but unless it entered our conscience and possessed our religious convictions, it could not possibly excite our religious feeling, or rule our religious conduct."

FUTURE PUNISHMENT.-The sermons repeats from a former publication the on this subject, preached by Canon following words: To a man's moral Farrar in Westminster Abbey, have consciousness all teaching of religion been published under the title of must appeal. I do not hesitate to say Eternal Hope." Their publication that no word of God in the Bible, no has been rendered necessary by the ex- element of the religious system of tensive, and often imperfect, reports Jesus Christ, can achieve any pracwhich have appeared in the public tical religious hold upon us, unless it prints. In their printed form they have carries the assent of our own moral also attracted considerable attention, conscience. We might submit to it and already passed through several editions. The question has evidently taken a firm hold of the minds of thinking persons, and both the clergy and the laity are seriously exercised by the efforts to solve this mystery of the future life. The present state of the question is discussed in the April and May numbers of the Contemporary Review in a series of papers by some of the most eminent 66 representative men " of the day. Amid considerable diversity of opinion there are some points on which all are agreed. There is perfect unanimity in the opinion that the popular doctrine of hell-that "when we think of the future of the human race, we must conceive of a vast and burning prison in which the lost souls of millions and millions writhe and shriek for ever, tormented in a flame that never will be quenched "is gone for ever. Its last echoes may linger upon the ear for a time from the voices of some modern dealers in theological "old clothes;" but no public teacher, who hopes to gain the ear of thoughtful and cultured minds, will repeat, as his own conviction, the startling and horrible statements respecting the fate of the lost indulged in by the medieval and Calvinistic preachers. There is also a tolerably, if not entirely, unanimous opinion that Christian doctrine cannot be accepted apart from moral teaching. Any doctrine which is repugnant to the moral sense, is on that account regarded with suspicion. The great truth that religion is "spiritual morality," that apart from benevolence, it has no real existence, has fully dawned on the minds of the most trusted Christian teachers. On this subject Dr. Allon, who writes in support of the finality of the awards and conditions of the life after death,

as

But while agreeing in these general statements, there is considerable diversity of thought and great lack of definite knowledge respecting the condition of the lost in the future life. Canon Farrar appears in some passages of his eloquent discourses to favour universal restitution; in others, he carefully guards himself against the teaching of this doctrine. The ut-most that is affirmed by the several writers in the Contemporary is but conjecture, derived quite as largely from what is styled "natural religion from the teaching of the Word of God. It is abundantly evident, as stated by Swedenborg, that if the Lord had not more fully revealed the future life, by the actual intromission of a chosen messenger into the inner world, the Church must have remained in ignorance of its true nature, and of the laws by which it is governed. The literal interpretation of the Word has confessedly led to error and darkness, and the Church is not yet possessed of "a more excellent way" of scriptural interpretation. Without, therefore, the knowledge supplied by the writings of the New Church, her teachers "stumble at noonday as in the night." Our space forbids an extended notice of this discussion. The following extract from Principal Tulloch is suggestive, and we give it at length:

"The clear hold of this law of moral sequence as embedded in life and building up this structure every day in ourselves or in others, must prevent all