CHAP. IV.

WE now come to a most interesting part of our history,- the period when it was thought high time for the professors of the new doctrines to assume a more public character, than that which had hitherto marked their progress. The Society had not as yet separated themselves, as a religious body, from the other professors of Christianity, usually designated by the name of the Old Church, in contradistinction from that of the New Church; neither had they, as yet, made any efforts to establish public worship in agreement with their own adopted sentiments, and the great truths of revelation. Their labours were confined to the translation and publication of the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg; to weekly and other meetings for conversation, and to epistolary correspondence with those societies, both at home and abroad, which had already been formed, and with such individuals in all parts of the world, as were then known to have embraced the doctrines of the New Church. Great as were the benefits resulting from these measures, by extending the knowledge of the truth through the Press, and building up each other in the practical part of the purest religion that ever blessed the Christian world, there was still no public ensign lifted up among the nations, Isa. v. 26; the outcasts of Israel were not yet assembled, nor the dispersed of Judah gathered from the four corners of the earth, Isa. xi. 12; neither was the flock of the Lord’s people, like the precious stones of a crown, lifted up as an ensign upon his land, Zech. ix. 16; though their enemies roared in the midst of their congregations; and set up their ensigns for signs, casting fire into the sanctuary, defiling the dwelling-place of the Lord’s most holy Name, and burning up all the synagogues of God in the land, Ps. lxxiv. 4, 7, 8. {51}
It became, therefore, a subject of deep concern, with those who considered the state and quality of the public worship generally practised in the Christian world, to witness, in the various Churches of the land, the awful defection of charity and faith, the entire perversion of the genuine sense of the Holy Word, and the destruction of all true knowledge of the One proper Object of worship, – the Lord God and Saviour Jesus Christ. It was clearly perceived, that the idea of a Trinity of Gods had pervaded the whole Church, and subverted it from its very foundation; that the Divine Being, who is Essentially and Personally One, was divided into Three distinct Persons, each of whom “singly and by himself,” that is to say, separately from the others, is declared to be God and Lord, which is as plain and palpable an acknowledgment of Three Gods and Three Lords, as if it were expressly said, “THERE ARE THREE GODS AND THREE LORDS!” It was further considered, that these Three Divine Persons, particularly the two first of them, are described sometimes of one mind and disposition, and at other times as of contrary dispositions; the First Divine Person, or Father, being naturally vindictive, yet after much difficulty, suffering himself to be appeased by the sight of blood drawn from an innocent Victim; the Second Person, or Son, being in his own nature merciful, and therefore offering himself as that innocent Victim, in the room of wicked and ungrateful criminals, who are thus screened from the Divine vengeance due to their sins, if they will but believe in such a scheme being adopted for their salvation; and the Third Person, or Holy Ghost, being in the above respects altogether neutral, yet ready on all occasions to execute the designs and purposes of the other two, as soon as ever they are agreed upon. It is also the prevailing custom among the professors of Christianity, not only to divide their God into Three distinct Intelligences, but in their acts of public and private worship, to address one of them only, that is, the First in order of nomination, for the sake of the Second, or in consideration of the sufferings, death, and merits of the latter: and rarely, if ever, do they implore the forgiveness of sins, or what is the same thing, the removal of evils, purely for the sake of mercy, or by virtue of that infinite goodness and loving kindness, which constitutes the very nature of the Divine Being. {52}
Strange and unreasonable as these notions may appear to a sober and reflecting mind, free from the prejudices of education, or of a party spirit, they are yet, alas! too generally entertained, both by Churchmen and Dissenters. Where, for an example, could be found, at the time alluded to, a single Church, or a single congregation in any one of the places of public worship throughout the Christian world, that professedly worshiped the Lord JESUS CHRIST, as the Supreme and Only God of heaven and earth? addressing all their prayers, praises, and thanksgivings, to Him, and Him Alone, as including in his own Divine Person all that is meant in the Scriptures by the terms, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit? and not marring, distorting, and confounding the worship by some ambidextrous slip or error of judgment, thought, or speech? Nay, where could be found a single individual – out of the Societies of the New Church, or uninstructed by the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg – who had attained to this great truth, and could rationally and intelligibly explain the real nature of the Divine Trinity in Unity of Person as well as Essence? at the same time drawing all his proofs from the Holy Volume of Inspiration, which, though it lay open to the inspection of every man’s natural eye and understanding, was still to all intents and purposes a Sealed Book, which neither the learned nor the unlearned could read and expound? Isa. xxix. 11, 12. It does not appear, from any testimony hitherto brought forward either in public or in private, that any one such individual was to be found throughout the whole of the Christian world. What then was to be done in a case so truly alarming and deplorable? Were we to continue inert, like sluggards, with “lamps burning in a secret place, or under a bushel?” Luke xi. 33. The Lord says in the Gospel, “A city that is set on a hill, cannot be hid,” Matt. v. 14.
Now the New Jerusalem is such a city; a city of truth, which cannot – must not remain concealed from the eyes of mankind. The prophet, also, contemplating in distant prospect, the arrival of this happy day, exclaims, – “For Zion’s sake will I not hold my peace, and for Jerusalem’s sake I will not rest, until the righteousness thereof go forth as brightness, and the salvation thereof as a lamp that burneth,” Isa. lxii. 1; and again, “Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father who is in heaven,” ver. 16. The fact is, that the state of the professing or nominal Church was such, that it became necessary to raise a new standard, to which the people might flock; and that standard could be no other than “a Rod out of the Stem of Jesse, yea, the Root of Jesse itself,” Isa. xi. 1, 10; “the Man, whose name is the Branch;” Zech. vi. 12; “the Righteous Branch,” Jer. xxiii. 5;
“Jehovah our Righteousness,” ver. 6; “the Word of God,” Rev. xix. 13; “King of Kings, and Lord of Lords,” ver. 16; “the Alpha and the Omega, the Beginning and the End, the First and the Last, who Is, and who Was, and who is to Come – the Almighty,” Rev. xxii. 13; chap. i. 8; and, to take the sum of all prophecy and all revelation, the Lord and Saviour JESUS CHRIST in his Divine Humanity, to whom all power is given in heaven and on earth,” Matt. xxviii. 18. {53} This standard was erected in the city of London, and the public worship of the One True God was announced, as soon as a suitable place for the purpose could be procured. In the meantime the following steps were taken by those, who were convinced in their hearts, that “the time to favour Zion, yea, the set time, was come,” Ps. cii. 13.
The Society having now continued its meetings in the Temple, from 1783 to 1787, during which time the doctrines of the New Church were very extensively made known in the kingdom, and in other parts of the world by printing, publishing, and circulating the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg; and various other Societies having been formed in different places for reading and conversation, but hitherto without the hope or expectation of seeing public worship established among them, in agreement with those doctrines; several of the London members of the Church came to the resolution of bringing forward in the Society a distinct proposition for taking and opening a place of worship. For it had been found, after a trial of several years, that the progress of the Church, in procuring actual recipients of the doctrines, by merely publishing the works, and by holding meetings for reading and conversation, was comparatively very partial and limited in its extent. And it was thought, that the promise and hope of increase to the Church attached more to the hearing of the Word preached, than to the reading of comments upon it, or to any private explanations that may be given of it, however edifying they may be to those who have already embraced the new doctrines. This was gathered from the following passages, which contain the injunctions of the Lord, both to his ministers and to his people; and it was afterwards confirmed by the success, which attended obedience to those injunctions.
First. To his ministers: “Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature,” Mark xvi. 15. “Arise, go unto Nineveh, that great city, and preach unto it the preaching that I bid thee,” Jonah iii. 2. “Jesus commanded his twelve apostles, saying, Go to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. And as ye go, preach, saying, The kingdom of heaven is at hand,” Matt. x. 5 to 7. “What I tell you in darkness, that speak ye in light: and what ye hear in the ear, that preach ye upon the house-tops,” ver. 27. “Jesus said to the man, who was desirous of burying his father, Let the dead bury their dead: but go thou, and preach the kingdom of God,” Luke ix. 60.
Secondly. To his people: “Hear the Word of the Lord, O ye women, and let your ears receive the word of his mouth,” Jer, ix. 20. “Incline your ear, and come unto me: hear, and your soul shall live,” Isa. iv. 3. {54} “Come and hear, all ye that fear God, and I will declare what he hath done for my soul,” Ps. lxvi. 16. “Give ear, O my people, to my law: incline your ears to the words of my mouth,” Ps. lxxviii. 1. “He that hath ears to hear, let him hear,” Matt. xi. 15. “And when he had called all the people unto him, he said unto them, Hearken unto me, every one of you, and understand,” Mark vii. 14. “Jesus said unto all of his disciples, Let these things sink deep into your ears,” Luke ix. 44. “If they hear not Moses and the prophets neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead,” Luke xvi. 31. “Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life. Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour is coming, and now is, when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God; and they that hear shall live,” John v. 24, 25.
When the proposition for opening a place of worship was regularly submitted to the Society, which was at a meeting held in New Court, Middle Temple, on Thursday the 19th of April, 1787, it was negatived by a small majority, on the ground that the proper time for separating from the Old Establishments was not yet arrived. A few individuals of the Society, however, thought otherwise; conceiving, that whenever the human mind is in a fit and prepared state for the full reception of unadulterated goodness and truth, and free from the shackles of a blind faith, imposed upon it by “the precepts of men,” rather than by the Word of God, then is the proper time for withdrawing from a fallen Church, and for adopting a worship more consistent with the principles of genuine Christianity, than that either of the Established Church or of ]Dissenters. Finding that the Society, as then constituted, was not disposed for any change, those of the members, who were desirous of having a new order of worship, united themselves expressly for that purpose, yet without discontinuing the usual meetings with the rest of their brethren in the Temple. For though in the article of separate worship they could not all see alike, they were still united in affection and friendship; having one great object in view, in common with each other, namely, to spread the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem as extensively as their means would permit, by printing and publishing. While, therefore, a part of the general body resolved themselves into a new Society for promoting the establishment of an External Church, in agreement with the truths of the Internal Church, which, it was humbly presumed, had already begun to be formed in the hearts and lives of many, all were actuated by the same zeal, as before, in favour of the common cause.
It was about this time that the Rev. J. Clowes, M.A., Rector of St. John’s, Manchester, hearing of our design to form a separate community for the establishment of public worship on the principles of the New Jerusalem alone, without any mixture with those of the old establishments, came to London for the express purpose of dissuading us from the proposed measure. {55} With the purest intentions in the world, and doubtless actuated with the most sincere desire of promoting the interests of the New Church, according to the best of his judgment, he earnestly intreated us to remain in our former religious connections, and not to think of deserting the authorized worship of the country. He thought it probable, that sooner or later the bishops and other dignitaries of the Church of England would be disposed to revise their Liturgy, and make it conformable to the truths of the new dispensation*; and he considered, that no others had any right whatever to interfere in the matter. A separation, he thought, might at some future period be found necessary, if no such reform, as that which he contemplated, should be likely to take place. In the mean time he recommended us to wait with patience until the doctrines of the New Church shall have gained a more extensive reception in the hearts of the people; to cultivate the principle of charity** towards others, rather than aim at the introduction of new forms and creeds; and leave to those, who had the proper authority, to make alterations in the articles of faith, and in the ceremonies of public worship.
* After a period of about seventy years, a revision of the Church of England Liturgy is beginning to be talked of, not because “the Bishops and other dignitaries” have been “disposed” to do it, but because the intelligence of the laity, and the general advance of the human mind, have rendered it necessary. Any doctrinal alteration is not, however, contemplated- ED.
** At one of the meetings held in the Temple, during the time that we were favoured with the company of Mr. Clowes, the Rev. Dr. Twycross, a clergyman of the Church of England was introduced by me as a visitor; and he, observing the great stress which Mr. Clowes deservedly laid upon charity, in preference to all those perceptions of truth which come under the general denomination of faith, remarked to me afterwards, that it appeared to him as if Mr. Clowes had only “one string to his fiddle,” and that he could sound no other note than “the cuckoo note, charity, charity.” This being related to the Society at their next meeting, it was pertinently remarked by one of our members, Mr. George Keen, in reply, That if the sound of the cuckoo were indeed heard in our land, it was certainly a sign of spring!
We heard these observations and recommendations with the greatest deference and respect to the character of Mr. Clowes, whose services in the Church, together with his pious and amiable conduct in life, had gained the esteem and affection of all who knew him. But in a cause of so much importance, as that of the promulgation of the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem, in a way too which appeared to have the sanction of the Divine Word, as well as of the writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, we did not think ourselves justifiable in deviating from our avowed purpose, but were determined, through divine assistance, to proceed in the course, which our own consciences dictated as the wisest, the best, and the most expedient, that could be adopted at the time. {56} And it is highly satisfactory to reflect, after many years’ experience of the good effects produced by the efforts of a few individuals, associated to give publicity to the new doctrines by preaching them in an open and unreserved manner, that many thousands have been brought to the knowledge of the truth, who otherwise might still have remained in the darkness of error, and the mazes of superstition.
The first regular meeting of our new Society, as a separate body from the Old Church, was held on the 7th of May, 1787; when, after mature deliberation, it was unanimously Resolved that, on the first opportunity that might offer, a suitable chapel’ situate in some convenient part of the town, should be engaged for the use of the Society.* Places of worship, however, being generally occupied in the metropolis, it was sometime before one could be procured. In the mean time our little Society, thus newly formed, held their weekly meeting, at each other’s houses particularly at Mr. Thomas Willdon’s, in Tooley Street, Southwark, at the foot of London Bridge; also at the house of Mr. Thomas Wright, Watchmaker to the King, No. 6 Poultry; and afterwards at the house of Mr. John Willdon, No. 8, Snow Hill. A Select Meeting was likewise formed, consisting of those persons most anxious to bring forward the New Church in its ultimate and external form, and who could conveniently attend its primitive institution. {57} A Preparatory Meeting was appointed to be held by these, on the Sunday preceding the day which was fixed upon for the formal and solemn commencement of the New Church in its external form; and an entry was made in the society’s Book, recording the transactions of that day, of which the following is a COPY:

“A Select Meeting of the Members of the New Church-Sunday, July 29th, 1787, at Mr. Wright’s No. 6, Poultry.
“At a Meeting held this day by appointment, present as follows:

Mr. JAMES GLEN,
Mr. ROBERT BRANT,
Mr. GEORGE; ROBINSON,
Mr. JOHN AUGUSTUS,
Mr. JOHN WILLDON,
Mr. SAMUEL BEMBRIDGE,
Mr. THOMAS WRIGHT,
Mr. THOMAS WILLDON,
Mr. ROBERT HINDMARSH,
Mrs. MARGARET PARKER,
Mr. ISAAC BRAND,
Miss JANE, GRANT,
Mr. JAMES RAYNER,

“After being assembled, the Lord’s Prayer was read, and No. 625 of the Universal Theology, being the Glorification of the New Heavens for the Lord’s Second Advent.
“A Paper drawn up by Mr. Glen, containing general principles of the New Church, was also read, and with some alterations and additions unanimously approved of. It is as follows:

“FOUR PRINCIPLES OF THE DOCTRINE OF INFLUX.

“1. There are two distinct Worlds, the Spiritual and the Natural.
“2. The Spiritual World produces the Natural World by Influx.
“3. In consequence Of this Influx, every Object in Nature corresponds with its Spiritual cause.
“4. This Correspondence, by means of Influx, is essential to the Existence of both Worlds.

“FOUR THEOLOGICAL PARALLELS.

“1. God Omnipotent in his Divine Humanity, in the year 1757, began and accomplished a Last Judgment in the Spiritual World, and thereby formed New Heavens.
“2. From these New Heavens a New Church will descend, must descend, on this earth, according to the eternal and immutable Laws of Influx.
“3. This New Church will be an exact Corresponding Representation of the New Heavens.
“4. This Correspondence, by Influx, between the New Heavens and the New Church, is essential to the Existence of both.

“OBSERVATIONS ADDED.

“1. The Truths of the New Church are alone contained in the Word, and the Theological Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg.
“2. The Doctrine of Correspondence, being the Knowledge of the Order of Influx, as proceeding from the Divine Humanity, is essential to the Understanding of the Word.
“3. The earnest and hearty Rejection of the Doctrines and Forms of the Old Church, must precede the full Reception of the Influx of Wisdom and Love from the Divine Humanity, through the New Heavens, into the New Church.
“4. The full Reception of the glorious Truths of the New Church, as revealed by Swedenborg, is essential to constitute a Member of the New Church on earth, and thereby to admit him into an immediate Conjunction with the Lord, and Consociation with the Angels of the New Heavens.
“5. Introduction into the New Church is solely through the Spiritual Correspondent, Baptism, performed in that Church.
“6. Conjunction with the Lord, and Consociation with the Angels of the New Heavens, are effected by the Holy Supper taken in the New Church, according to its Heavenly and Divine Correspondences.

“This Society admits the propriety of Baptising into the New Church, and also of Receiving the Holy Supper.
“The Form of Baptism to be by reading the Faith of the New Heaven and New Church in its Universal and Particular Form, from the Universal Theology, No. 2, &c. {58} And the Person to be Baptised must declare his Belief therein. Then to Baptise him in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
“The Form of the Holy Supper to be thus:- All to sit at the Table. Read the last part of No. 703, Universal Theology, concerning the Lord’s Doctrine.- One person (chosen by Lot) to break the Bread, and bless it by repeating the Lord’s Prayer, and reading the first part of the Institution respecting the Bread. (Universal Theology, No. 703.) – Then every one to take the Bread, and eat.- Again, the chosen person to take the Wine in a Cup, and give Thanks by again repeating the Lord’s Prayer, and concluding the Institution.- Then every one to drink thereof.”
* A Committee was also appointed to frame rules and regulations for the government of the Society; and at a meeting held 2nd July, 1787, they were presented and adopted. As these were the first rules and regulations ever framed for the use of a Society of this New Jerusalem Church, it may be well to preserve them. They were as follows:

“1. The design of this Society is, to the utmost of their power, by the Divine Mercy of the Lord, to promote the knowledge and practice of the Doctrines contained in the Theological Writings of the Honourable Emanuel Swedenborg, by meeting together as often as convenient to read and converse on the said Writings, in order thereby to become more and more acquainted with the spiritual sense of the Holy Word.
“2. That the Society shall consist of a President, Treasurer, and Secretary, and an unlimited number of male and female readers of the said Writings, and believers in the Doctrines therein contained, and who will declare themselves to be such on their admission.
“3. That the Officers of this Society, viz., the President, Treasurer, and Secretary shall be annually elected in the first month of every New Year by ballot, and the choice determined by a majority of votes.
“4. The business of the President is to preserve good order, and freedom of conversation in the Society.
“5. The Treasurer is to keep an account of all monies received and paid by him on the Society’s account, and at the end of every year, or oftener, if required, to produce the same, and pay the balance, if any, into the hands of the Treasurer elect.
“6. The business of the Secretary is to make minutes of all the transactions of the Society, and of all monies paid into the Treasurer’s hands, as a check upon his accounts, in a book to be provided for the purpose.
“7. That every person desirous of becoming a Member of this Society, shall first be proposed by a Member, and duly seconded, at a Monthly Meeting for business, and elected unanimously by ballot, at a subsequent meeting.
“8. The expenses attending the Meetings of the Society to be defrayed by voluntary subscriptions.
“9. That all business relating to the temporal concerns of the Society, shall be transacted at a Monthly Meeting to be held for that purpose on the first Monday in every month.
“10. That all resolutions which shall be carried by a majority of votes, except for the admission of Members, which must be unanimous, shall be equally binding with these laws while they remain unrescinded.”- ED.

The Society, having thus made solemn preparation for what they conceived to be an event of great importance and interest to all who should thereafter be admitted as actual and visible members of the Lord’s New Church on earth, proceeded to appoint a day for carrying their intentions into effect; and at the particular request of Mr. James Glen, who was much respected by all the members of the Society, Tuesday, the 31st of July, was fixed upon for that purpose. The proceedings of that day, as entered in the Society’s Book, are thus recorded:

“Tuesday Evening, Six o’clock, July 31, 1787. No. 6, in the Poultry, at Mr. Wright’s.

“A meeting of the following persons was this day held, for the purpose of forming, by the Divine Mercy of the Lord, the New Church upon earth, signified in the Revelation by the New Jerusalem descending from [God out of] heaven.

Mr. JAMES GLEN,
Mr. GEORGE ROBINSON,
Mr. ROBERT HINDMARSH,
Mr. JOHN AUGUSTUS TULK,
Mr. THOMAS WILLDON,
Mr. JAMES RAYNER,
Mr. THOMAS WRIGHT,
Mr. JOHN WILLDON,
Mr. ISAAC BRAND,
Mr. JAMES HINDMARSH,
Mr. SAMUEL BEMBRIDGE,
Mr. SAMUEL HANDS,
Mrs. MARGARET PARKER,
Mr. ROBERT BRANT.
Mr. GEORGE WRIGHT.
Miss JANE GRANT,
———

“The meeting was begun with the Lord’s Prayer.- It was determined by Lot, that Mr. JAMES HINDMARSH should officiate in the room of a Priest, in blessing the Bread and Wine for the Holy Supper, according to the Form prescribed at the last meeting; which Sacrament was to be considered as the Sign and Seal of the Formation of the New Church. The Holy Supper was received by the Eleven first persons in the preceding List, all sitting round the Table. Behind them stood the five last, who were desirous of being Baptised into the Faith of the New Church. After the former had taken the Holy Supper, ROBERT HINDMARSH was called; and the Faith of the New Heaven and New Church, from Emanuel Swedenborg’s Universal Theology, being read to him, he was questioned whether he firmly believed the same, and was desirous of being Baptised into that Faith. On his answering in the affirmative, he was marked with the sign of the Cross on his Forehead and Breast, and Baptised in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
“GEORGE WRIGHT, ISAAC BRAND, SAMUEL HANDS, and JAMES RAYNER, being then called together, the Faith of the New Heaven and New Church was again read to them; and upon each declaring his belief therein, and desire of being Baptised, they were each likewise Baptised in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.
“After this the Glorification for the Lord’s Second Advent was read from the Universal Theology, n. 625; and the ceremony concluded with the Lord’s Prayer, and a Prayer for the King and Royal Family, &c., with the Benediction at the end of the Revelation, ‘The Grace of our Lord Jesus Christ be with you all. Amen.'”

Such was the commencement of the New Church in its External and Visible Form, in the city of London; which latter place, in one point of view, that is, in a good sense, in reference to the best of the Protestants, may be considered as the Meditullium or centre of all the Reformed Churches; and in another point of view, that is, in an opposite sense, in reference to their denial of the two essentials of the New Church, may be considered as “the great city, which spiritually is called Sodom and Egypt, where also our Lord was crucified,” Rev. xi. 8; and from the hostility to be expected from many of the English Church, may be further considered as the very place alluded to in the Revelation, chap. xvi. 16, and called in the Hebrew tongue Armageddon. {59}
Great care was taken, that all the proceedings of the Society should be conducted in the most orderly manner. Due regard was paid to the solemnity of the occasion, and to the high character given in the book of Revelation to the New Jerusalem dispensation. For we had confidence in the divine promises, and firmly believed, that the Church, now begun in much weakness and imperfection, is yet destined to become, in the Lord’s appointed time, the Crown and Glory of all the Churches that have heretofore existed on this earthly globe. We therefore did what we conceived to be a duty imposed upon us, as the first Society in the known world, that was disposed to bring into ultimate effect the true worship of the Lord, which, beginning in the internal affections and perceptions of the mind, descends into the externals of the body, where it is, like the Word itself, in its fulness, in its sanctity, and in its power.

The Society still continued its weekly meetings in the Middle Temple, and at one of the friend’s houses on Sunday and other evenings*, until a place of worship offered in Great East Cheap, (the same that was formerly lectured in by the celebrated Dr. Gill,) which was immediately hired at the rent of L30 per annum. We had now to look out for a minister, capable of teaching the new doctrines, and of defending them, in a public manner, from the Pulpit; and all eyes were directed to one of the Society, who had for many years been in the habit of preaching among the people called Methodists, with great reputation to himself, and benefit to the congregations which he addressed. This was no other than my own father, Mr. JAMES HINDMARSH, formerly Writing Master at the Methodist Seminary, called Kingswood School, near Bristol; and afterwards an Itinerant Preacher in Mr. Wesley’s Connexion.
* The Society left their rooms on the 5th November, 1787.-ED.
His reception of the doctrines of the New Church had been attended with great difficulty at first, arising, no doubt, from a conscientious belief, entertained for many years of his life, that the principles of Methodism were those of the true Christian religion, from which he was determined never to swerve, except on the fullest conviction that they were not founded on the truth. Although he often conversed with me, his son, on the extraordinary character of the Writings of Swedenborg, which he knew I had embraced with my whole heart and understanding, yet for several years he rather opposed than favoured them, fearing they might in the end prove no better than the dreams of imagination, and consequently detrimental to my spiritual state. {60} He approved, indeed, of the doctrine of the Divine Trinity in the Person of the Lord, as taught by Swedenborg, and some of the other essential truths of the New Church, which had respect to purity and integrity of life: but he still clung to the doctrine of the Atonement, even as it is vulgarly understood. He did not perceive, that such an idea as that of One Divine Being requiring satisfaction, and atonement for sin, of another Divine Being, like to himself in respect to his Divine nature, but totally unlike him in respect to the feelings of vindictive justice, was in itself a direct breach of the Divine Unity, which admits of no contradictory feelings, passions, or attributes of any description. Thus, like many others, who partially embrace the truth, he for a time maintained two opposing propositions the one of which naturally tended to destroy the effect of the other.
At length, after visiting our Society meetings in the Temple with which he appeared to be highly delighted, and again reading and digesting the writings of Swedenborg, particularly the work entitled, True Christian Religion, containing the Universal Theology of the New Church, he became, about the year 1785, a complete convert to the doctrines; his former doubts were entirely removed; and the path was opened to his view, that led at once into the New Jerusalem.
The Society, having known Mr. James Hindmarsh for a considerable time, and being well satisfied with his character and abilities, now requested, that he would become their Minister, and officiate in that capacity, as soon as their place of worship should have undergone the necessary repairs, and be ready for opening. To this request he assented, assuring them that it was his desire to promote the heavenly doctrines according to the utmost of his ability, without the hope or expectation of any other reward, than that of seeing the actual establishment of the Church, and rejoicing with them in its prosperity and happiness.
It now became necessary to prepare a Form of Worship for the use of the New Church, in the new place, which the Society was about to occupy. This was immediately done, and printed under the title of The Order of Worship for the New Church, signified by the New Jerusalem in the Revelation, &c. This little Manual of devotion was instrumental in drawing the attention of the public to the new doctrines, which were embodied in it; and had the good effect of giving, in a very small compass, satisfactory information concerning the religious principles of the members of the New Jerusalem Church.
The day of opening the chapel was fixed for Sunday, the 27th of January, 1788; and accordingly on that day Divine Service was performed therein, and a Sermon preached by Mr. JAMES HINDMARSH, to a very crowded audience, in defence and recommendation of the new doctrines. {61} His text was “Praise ye the Lord,” Ps. cl. 6. Mr. ISAAC HAWKINS read the Prayers for that day; and Mr. ROBERT BRANT preached in the afternoon. In the evening a reading-meeting was held by the Society. Thus it appears, that Mr. JAMES HINDMARSH was the first appointed Minister of the New Church in England, and probably in the world, being called to that office by the first Society that associated together for the avowed purpose of instituting public worship therein, and proclaiming to the world, by discourses from the pulpit, the glorious truths of the New Jerusalem.* This office he continued to hold for several years; obtaining no other reward for his labours, than the respect and thanks of his congregation, and the high satisfaction of seeing, that the great cause in which he had embarked was a growing cause, not likely to be eventually frustrated, however it may for a time be impeded by the oppositions of ignorance and superstition, but giving promise of the most complete success in the future progress of its career. He was occasionally assisted by various other Ministers, whom the wants of the Church had called to the exercise of public speaking.
* At the end of the passage in the Street, that led to the place of worship, was placed a painted board, on which was inscribed “The New Jerusalem Church;” and over the entrance of the Chapel was the inscription, “Now it is allowable,” in conformity to the Memorable relation, in the True Christian Religion, n. 508.- ED.
As the law then stood, a stamp duty was payable to Government on the registry of burials, marriages, births, and christenings, among Dissenters, as well as in the Established Church; and as it was the intention of the Society to keep a regular entry of all our Baptisms from the commencement of the Church in July, 1787, it was found necessary to procure a Licence for that purpose from His Majesty’s Commissioners for managing the Stamp Duties. Being Secretary of the Society, and personally responsible for the rent of the chapel while it continued in our possession, I made application at the Stamp Office, in Somerset House, for the requisite Licence, and obtained the same in due form, of which the following is a copy:

“We, His Majesty’s Commissioners appointed to manage the Duties charged on stamped vellum, parchment, and paper, do, in pursuance of the power vested in us, hereby give and signify unto ROBERT HINDMARSH, of Clerkenwell, Printer, in the county of Middlesex, our Licence and Authority to enter and write, or cause to be entered and written, in the Register Book or Books of the New Jerusalem Church, in Great East Cheap, in the City of London, all Entries of any Burial, Marriage, Birth, or Christening, without any Stamps or Marks affixed thereto, or thereupon subject nevertheless to the payment of the Duty imposed thereon, by an Act entitled, ‘An Act for granting to His Majesty a stamp Duty on the Registry of Burials, Marriages, Births, and Christenings;’ {62} and also, ‘An Act to extend the Provisions of an Act made in the Twenty-third Year of His present Majesty’s Reign, for granting to His Majesty a Stamp ‘Duty on the Registry of Burials, Marriages, Births, and Christenings, to the Registry of ‘Burials, Births, and Christenings of Protestant Dissenters from the Church of England;’ and for the payment of which sufficient Security hath been given by Bond to His Majesty: And we do grant this our Licence, under this particular condition, that the said ROBERT HINDMARSH shall, whensoever thereunto required, from time to time, produce and shew the said Register to us, or to any Officer or Agent duly authorized by us, or the major part of us, for the purpose of inspecting or viewing such Registers, and the Entries made therein: Provided always, that this our Licence shall continue in force, until we, or the Commissioners for the time being, appointed to put the several Stamp Laws in execution, shall revoke the same, and give notice thereof in writing, and no longer. Given under our Hands and Seals the Thirty-first Day of July, One thousand seven hundred and eighty-seven.

{“J. BYNG,
(Signed) {T. BINDLEY.
{W. BAILLIE.”

From the preceding document it appears, that the New Church, in common with other Protestant Dissenters, was authorized by the Government to keep a register of burials, births, and christenings, on paying a stamp duty, for each. The charge on christenings or baptisms, which were the only entries at that time made or contemplated by the Society, was three-pence each; for the regular payment of which a bond was given by me, as required by the Act of Parliament. This Stamp Duty continued in force for a few years only, when, from its unproductiveness, or some other cause, the Act was repealed, and the Duty thereupon ceased. The number of baptisms that took place in the Society, while it occupied the Chapel in Great East Cheap, and for which a stamp duty was paid to Government, including those of adults, as well as of infants, was two hundred and fifty-one.
Soon after the opening of the chapel, Mr. SAMUEL SMITH, an Itinerant Preacher among the Methodists, joined the Society, and gave proof of his ability to serve the cause by his valuable assistance in the work of the Ministry. This gentleman related to the Society an anecdote respecting Swedenborg and the Rev. John Wesley, which he assured us from his own knowledge, was true. As I did not at the time minute down the particulars, I shall here transcribe what a worthy member of the Society, then also present, viz., Mr. John Isaac Hawkins, has stated on the subject, in a letter to the Rev. Samuel Noble, which the latter gentleman has inserted in his Appeal in Behalf of the Doctrines of the New Church, 3rd edit., p. 245.

Mr. HAWKINS’S LETTER to the Rev. Mr. NOBLE.

“Dear Sir,
“In answer to your inquiries, I am able to state, that I have a clear recollection of having repeatedly heard the Rev. Samuel Smith say, about the year 1787 or 1788, That in the latter end of February, 1772, he, with some other preachers, was in attendance upon the Rev. John Wesley, taking instructions and assisting him in the preparations for his great Circuit, which Mr. Wesley was about to commence: That while thus in attendance, a letter came to Mr. Wesley, which he perused with evident astonishment: that after a pause he read the letter to the company; and that it was couched in nearly the following words: [The letter was most probably in Latin; but Mr. Wesley, no doubt, would read it in English.] {63}

“Sir Great Bath Street, Cold Bath Fields, Feb. – 1772.

“I have been informed in the world of spirits, that you have a strong desire to converse with me: I shall be happy to see you, if you will favour me with a visit.
“I am, Sir, your humble Servant,
“EMAN. SWEDENBORG.”

“Mr. Wesley frankly acknowledged to the company, that he had been very strongly impressed with a desire to see and converse with Swedenborg, and that he had never mentioned that desire to any one.
“Mr. Wesley wrote for answer, that he was then closely occupied in preparing for a six months’ journey, but would do himself the pleasure of waiting upon Mr. Swedenborg soon after his return to London.
“Mr. Smith farther informed me, that he afterwards learned from very good authority, that Swedenborg wrote in reply that the visit proposed by Mr. Wesley would be too late, as he, Swedenborg, should go into the world of spirits on the 29th day of the next month, never more to return.
“Mr. Wesley went the Circuit, and on his return to London, was informed of the fact, that Swedenborg had departed this life on the 29th of March preceding.
“This extraordinary correspondence induced Mr. Smith to examine the writings of Swedenborg; and the result was, a firm conviction of the rationality and truth of the heavenly doctrines promulgated in those invaluable writings, which doctrines he zealously laboured to disseminate during the remainder of his natural life.
“That Mr. Smith was a man of undoubted veracity, can be testified by several persons now living, besides myself. The fact, therefore, that such a correspondence did take place between the Honourable Emanuel Swedenborg and the Rev. John Wesley is established upon the best authority.
“On referring to Mr. Wesley’s printed Journal, it may be seen, that he left London on the 1st of March, in the year 1772, reached Bristol on the 3rd, Worcester on the 14th, and Chester on the 29th, which was the day of Swedenborg’s final departure from this world. Mr. Wesley, in continuing his Circuit, visited Liverpool, and various towns in the north of England, and in Scotland, returning through Northumberland and Durham to Yorkshire, and thence through Derbyshire, Staffordshire, and Shropshire, to Wales; thence to Bristol, Salisbury, Winchester, and Portsmouth, to London, where he arrived on the 10th of October in the same year, having been absent rather more than six months.
“I feel it my duty to accede to your request, and allow my name to appear as your immediate voucher.
“I remain, dear Sir, your’s very sincerely
“JOHN ISAAC HAWKINS.”

Such were the circumstances related by Mr. Smith, according to the best of Mr. Hawkins’s recollection. Another gentleman, Mr. Benedict Harford, now of Liverpool, who was also present when Mr. Smith stated the above particulars to the Society, gives a similar account from his recollection, which was minuted down by him in writing, and delivered to me, on the 5th of August, 1822. It is as follows:

“An anecdote of the late Rev. John Wesley and the late Hon. Emanuel Swedenborg, as related by Mr. Samuel Smith, a Methodist Preacher, who had it from Mr. Wesley’s own mouth.-Swedenborg, a little previously to his decease, sent a Note to Mr. Wesley, to the following effect: ‘I perceive in the spiritual
world, that you have a desire to see me. If you would see me, you must call before such a-day; for after that I must go to the angels, with whom I have been associated these twenty-seven years.’ – ‘It is certain,’ said Mr. Wesley, ‘that I had a strong desire to see the Baron; but how he came to know it, I have not an idea, as I never told any creature, that I had such a desire.’ (Signed) “BENEDICT HARFORD.”

I was myself also present, with several others now living, but not mentioned, when Mr. Smith related these particulars; and though I do not charge my memory with the exact words of Mr. Smith, yet I well remember, that the account given above is substantially correct, having frequently heard him repeat it. {64}

The Society now increased considerably in number, and the doctrines began to be much more generally known, both in town and country, than they had been before the commencement of public worship. The opinion entertained at first by some readers, that the doctrines of the New Church could not easily be preached, was found to be far from correct. For, as General Rainsford, who succeeded General Elliot, as Governor of Gibraltar, justly observed to me, after he had heard my father preach, “The doctrines of the New Jerusalem ought to be those of the Established Church;” and he was in great hopes, he further added, that they would one day become so generally approved of in this country, that “no rational man would be desirous of hearing any other.” Yet, notwithstanding this declaration of the General, who was a man eminently qualified to judge of these things, we still had reason to expect opposition from the bigotted of all denominations. And truly we were not deceived: for while many rejoiced to find, that the standard of truth was erected in our land, and that the Divine Word was preached in all its purity, we are compelled to state, that an opposition was raised against the new doctrines, which nothing but the protecting hand of the Divine Providence could effectually withstand. But with such divine succour, no weapon formed against us could prosper. Truth was found to be omnipotent; and many, who came for no other purpose than to gratify a vain curiosity, or to make a jest of what they did not before understand, were powerfully arrested in their course, and in the end constrained to acknowledge, that no other religion than that of the New Church, no other views of the gospel than those which the new dispensation offered, were worthy of the attention of a rational being, or in any wise entitled to the admiration and cordial reception of a man professing himself to be a Christian.
About this time Mr. Ralph Mather (who had been first a Methodist, then a Quaker, and was now a warm receiver of the new doctrines,) and Mr. Joseph Whittingham Salmon, (who had been a Methodist Local Preacher, and was now an admirer of Swedenborg’s Writings, a man distinguished for his eminent piety and zeal in the cause of divine truth,) found themselves impelled, as it were, by an irresistible desire, to promulgate the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem by preaching and proclaiming them in the streets, highways, and market-places of many of the most considerable towns in England. For this end they undertook to travel together as joint missionaries, not by any authority or commission from the Society then established in London, but from a feeling of duty and kindness to their fellow-creatures, to make known to the world at large, in a way which they thought agreeable to divine order, those great truths of the new dispensation, with which they had themselves been so powerfully impressed. {65} In this spirit, and with this view, after preaching in the open air, in Moorfields, London, they visited Salisbury, Bristol, Liverpool, Manchester, Norwich, and many other towns and villages in the kingdom, where at first, without notice, or any other means of collecting audiences, than their own personal appearance in the streets and marketplaces, whenever they observed an assemblage of people, they seized the opportunity of calling the attention of the multitude to subjects of religion, and to the doctrines of the New Church, which at that time were almost entirely unknown in the country, and generally regarded, when heard, not merely as novelties, but as errors of the most dangerous tendency. Yet, in the midst of all this irregularity, many individuals were forcibly struck with the important truths, which were thus presented to their view. Particularly the doctrine of the sole and exclusive Divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, and that concerning the necessity, of living according to his holy commandments, fixed the attention of several among them, who afterwards became valuable members of the New Church, and lived to bless the day when they were thus brought out of darkness into the true light of the gospel. Of this number, among others whom I could name, was the Rev. Joseph Proud, a distinguished Minister of the New Church.* Reports of their success were from time to time communicated to me by Mr. Mather and Mr. Salmon; on which occasions they were earnestly exhorted to exercise prudence and judgment in all their proceedings, to adhere strictly to the genuine doctrines of the New Church, and not (as they were then too prone to do, from a want of their thorough knowledge of the Writings,) to mix them with the common errors of the day, from which they were as yet scarcely delivered themselves. Their sincerity and integrity of life, however, were powerful recommendations to the cause they advanced; and those who could not altogether approve of their excentric and irregular manner of promulgating the truth, were yet by the event, justified in the hope, that much good might hereafter result from their exertions, and that the Divine Providence would so over-rule the disorders incident to this mode of preaching, as in the end to produce a positive advantage, by the increase of numbers to the New and True Christian Church.
* See Memoir of this celebrated Minister by the Rev. Edward Madeley, of Birmingham, prefixed to the revised edition of Proud’s Last Legacy, published by Hodson, 1854. – ED.
After a few years both Mr. Mather and Mr. Salmon desisted from travelling. Mr. Mather settled for a time at Liverpool, and preached the doctrines in that town. He then went over to America, and finally settled in Baltimore, where he occasionally assisted Mr. Hargrove in the Ministry, and where he died many years ago. {66} Mr. Salmon, sensible at length of the irregularity and disorder, into which he had been betrayed by the enthusiasm of his companion, was so much affected with regret at the part he had taken, in opposition to the advice given him by some of his best friends, that he declined altogether the office of a preacher. For some time he acted as an amanuensis to Mr. Clowes, at Manchester, while the latter gentleman was engaged in translating the Arcana Coelestia. He afterwards retired to his house at Nantwich, where (being possessed of an independent fortune) he spent his time chiefly in maintaining a private epistolary correspondence with some of his intimate friends, and in writing, as occasion offered, in defence of those doctrines, which he had for so many years espoused. He died the 15th October, 1826, in the 79th year of his age, esteemed and regretted by all who had the happiness of knowing him.*
* The doctrines of the New Church were first introduced to the notice of Mr. Salmon by the before-mentioned Rev. John Fletcher, Vicar of Madeley, in Shropshire, a few months before his decease in 1785. Mr. Salmon published a Sermon on the decease of his first wife, in 1785; a New Translation and Abridgement of the Light of the World, by Madam Bourignon, in 1786; the Beauties of Hawkstone Park, the third edition of which was printed in 1817; A Friendly Address to the Inhabitants of Nantwich, &c.; besides many poems, papers, and letters in Magazines.-ED).
In consequence of the Society having now assumed its proper character, and appearing externally before the world, as well as internally in the sight of Heaven, a regular and orderly Church, though still in the weakness, simplicity, and ignorance of its infancy, it was unanimously Resolved, at a meeting held on the 5th of May, 1788, That, instead of its former name of “The Theosophical Society, instituted for the purpose of promoting the Heavenly Doctrines of the New Jerusalem, by translating, printing, and publishing the Theological Writings of the Honourable Emanuel Swedenborg,” the following be henceforth adopted, as the authorized, scriptural, and heaven-descended name, which can never be forgotten or superseded, viz., “The New Church, signified by the New Jerusalem, in the Revelation.” This Resolution was afterwards confirmed at a meeting held on Sunday, May 18, 1788.
The meetings in the Temple, which had hitherto been attended both by Separatists and Non-Separatists, began now visibly to diminish in number, as soon as it was found that public worship was regularly established, and was likely to be continued. In consequence of this, in a short time afterwards the original Society gave up their chambers in the Temple, and removed to No. 5, Vere Street, near Clare Market; and finally to the house of Mr. Prichard, in Paul Baker’s Court, Doctors’ Commons, where some few of the members continued to meet, and where the books belonging to the Society were ultimately deposited.* {67} At one of these meetings in Doctors’ Commons we were visited by a Mrs. Osbaldiston, the daughter of Lady Pennington, and a person of extraordinary zeal in the cause of religion, who hearing of our Society, was anxious to know the principles of our profession, and to set us right if she should find us to be in error. After much conversation on the subject of religion generally, and the particular sentiments entertained by the members of the New Church, she urged us to fall down on our knees, while she delivered herself of a long prayer, more suited to the band-room of a Methodist audience, than to the orderly and enlightened views of a New Jerusalem Society. Before she took her leave of us, she addressed each one in the room in the style and manner of “a mother in Israel,” though she was herself but a very young woman; and at last observing me as a youth among the elders, who had not as yet opened my mouth in her presence, she accosted me by saying, “And who are you, young man, that have found such an interest in heavenly things, as to lead you to cultivate the society and friendship of men raised above the vanities of this world, and seeking to enjoy the felicities of a better life?” – “Madam,” I replied, “I am one of little estimation, compared with the friends whom you now see, but at the same time ardently desirous of joining them in the pursuit of true wisdom, which I believe is only to be found in the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem.”
* Among these were the eight quarto volumes of the Arcana Coelestia, in Latin, and some other books, all left as a legacy to the Society by the late Rev. Thomas Hartley, translator of the first editions of the Treatise on Heaven and Hell, and the Treatise On Influx.- R. H.
At length the Society originally assembling in the Temple, discontinued its meetings altogether, after having successfully promoted the cause for which it was formed, namely the translating, printing, and publishing, the Theological Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg; and given birth to a new Society, whose members associated together for the express purpose of instituting public worship, and the delivery of discourses from the pulpit, in agreement with the principles of the New Jerusalem Church. While the Manchester Society, with the Rev. Mr. Clowes at its head, was engaged in translating and publishing the great work, entitled Arcana Coelestia, first in Monthly Numbers at sixpence each, then in half-volumes, and afterwards in full volumes, until the whole should be completed in twelve closely printed octavo volumes; subscriptions were set on foot, and measures taken, by the Original London Society, and by individuals belonging to it, in conjunction with the friends at Manchester, to translate and publish other works of the same Author.*
** A List of the various Works so translated and published will be given in the Appendix.- ED. {68}

As the Church advanced in number and in strength, it was deemed advisable, for the sake of order, to take into consideration the propriety of instituting a regular Ministry for the administration of the sacraments, and the authorized preaching of the Word. Meetings for this purpose were held at different times; and it being the wish of the Society to take no steps in this matter without full and mature deliberation, the following questions claimed their most serious attention. “How shall the regular and orderly Ministry of the New Church commence? How shall the Ordination be established therein? And who shall be the person to undertake so awful a solemnity? Is it necessary that the succession of Ministers should be continued from the Old Church to the New? And if necessary, or agreeable to order, can any reasonable hope be entertained, that any Bishop or Ordaining Minister of the Old Church will lay hands upon a member of the New Church, who, if conscientious in his replies to the questions that would be put to him, must of necessity give such answers, as would disqualify him for the office, in the estimation of such Bishop, and prove a certain bar to his admission therein? And as it is well known, that a simple Minister or Priest of the Old Church has no authority whatever to ordain or introduce others into the Ministry, if such an one were even disposed to assume that office, in breach of the rules which he himself submitted to at the time of his own Ordination, to whom must the members of the New Church turn their eyes, and look for an answer to their prayers on so solemn – so weighty an occasion, as the Ordination of a Minister in the New and True Christian Church, called the New Jerusalem ?” – To whom (it was repeated) – but to the Lord alone?
These questions were most deliberately considered; and it was Unanimously Resolved by all the members of the Society, that the Institution of a regular Ministry in the New Church could not be derived from any authority heretofore recognized in the Christian world. For as the New Jerusalem Church is altogether a New Church, distinct from the Old, and of which it is written in the Revelation, chap. xxi. 5, “Behold, I make all things New;” it was conceived, that this declaration applies not only to the doctrines of the Church, but also to its institutions and ordinances of every kind, and among the rest to that of the Ordination of Ministers, whose authority to teach, and preach, and administer the Sacraments, must be derived from the Lord alone in his own Church, and not from any Priesthood of a fallen, consummated, and finished Church. This was precisely the situation of the Primitive Christian Church, which derived no authority by succession from the regular Priesthood of the Jewish Church, but commenced its Ordination within itself, from the immediate presence and authority of the Lord. Besides, it was argued, how inconsistent would it have been, if not plainly impossible to derive authority from the Old Church to oppose its own doctrines, and thus to undermine and subvert it from the very foundations! {69} A kingdom, a city, a house, or a church, thus constituted, thus divided against itself, could not possibly stand. Matt. xii. 25.
Among the male members present, at the first Ordination, sixteen in number, besides the two, who by experience were found qualified to officiate as Priests or Ministers of the New Church, no one entertained the most distant idea, that he had, in his individual capacity, the smallest right or authority to send forth labourers into the Lord’s vineyard: and hence it was plain to them, that the Ordination could not commence in such a way, or by such individual authority. It was therefore suggested, that twelve persons should be selected from all the male members present, to represent the whole body of the Church, and thus to put on a new character, which they did not before hold, but which the solemnity of the occasion and the necessity of the case now invested them with; that those twelve should be chosen by Lot, as the only mode left to them under present circumstances, whereby the Divine Will could be ascertained; that, when so chosen, they should all place their right hands, upon the head of the person to be ordained; and that one of them should be requested by the rest to read and perform the ceremony. This proposal was acceded to, and adopted, for the following, among other reasons:-
First, Because no individual person, either in the Old Church, or in the New, could be acknowledged by the Society as possessing in himself the smallest title to authority or preeminence over others, in a case of such vital importance to the interests of the Church at large, until by solemn dedication to the Lord, and by a visible test of the divine approbation, some person or persons should be marked out as duly authorized to assume the character of Representatives of their brethren at large, and in this new capacity to lay the foundation of an orderly and regular Priesthood or Ministry in the New Church.
Secondly, Because the future prosperity and well-being of the Church required, that no time should be lost in forming an Institution, which should hereafter become a divinely-sanctioned and well regulated safeguard for the protection, due administration, and perpetual succession of the sanctities of the Ministerial function.
Thirdly, Because, when the Apostles of the Lord found themselves in a somewhat similar situation, in consequence of the defection of one of their number, they, judging themselves incapable of determining who was most fit for the vacant office, from which Judas by transgression fell, had recourse to the drawing of Lots, “that the Lord, who knoweth the hearts of all men, might shew which of the two persons, (Barsabas or Matthias,) proposed to fill up the place of Judas, he had chosen.” Acts i. 24. {70}
Fourthly, Because again, on another occasion, the drawing of Lots was adopted as a decision of the Divine Providence, when there did not appear to be sufficient ground for the determination of human judgment. See the Treatise on Influx, or on the Intercourse between the Soul and Body, n. 19, first edition, in quarto; from which the following extract is taken: “Do not suppose, that this Lot came to hand by mere chance; but know, that it is by Divine Direction, that so you, who could not discover the truth because of the confusion of your minds, might have it thus presented to you in the way of your own choosing.”
Such being the situation of the Church at this time, and such the reasons for proceeding in the way described, it may be proper here to annex an extract from the Minute Book of the Society, in which the first Ordination took place. It is as follows:-

“ORDINATION OF MINISTERS IN THE NEW CHURCH.

“Sunday, June 1, 1788.
“At a full Meeting of the Members of the New Church held this day, in Great East Cheap after the morning service, it was unanimously agreed to Ordain JAMES HINDMARSH and SAMUEL SMITH, as Ministers and Priests in the New Church, in the manner following, viz: Twelve men to be chosen by Lot out of the Society, as Representatives of the New Church at large, and these to lay their right hands on the person ordained, agreeable to the form of Ordination.
“The following persons drew Lots for that purpose:

1. ROBERT HINDMARSH,
2. THOMAS WRIGHT,
3 THOMAS WILLDON,
4. JOHN WILLDON,
5. JOHN RAINSFORD NEEDHAM,
6. MANOAH SIBLY,
7. ALEXANDER WILDERSPIN,
8. RICHARD THOMPSON,
9. SAMUEL BUCKNALL,
10. JOHN SWAINE,
11. DANIEL RICHARDSON,
12. GEORGE ROBINSON,
13. JOHN AUGUSTUS TULK,
14. ISAAC BRAND,
15. ISAAC HAWKINS,
16. JOHN SUDBURY.

“And the lots fell on the twelve first mentioned, who unanimously appointed Robert Hindmarsh to read the service.”

Having stated these particulars of the proceedings of the Society, in respect to the Ordination of Ministers, I may here be permitted to relate a rather singular circumstance, which took place at the time of the first Ordination. Being Secretary to the Society, when it was determined, that twelve men should be selected by Lot from the body of the Church, to lay their hands on the heads of the persons to be ordained, it was my office to prepare the tickets. I accordingly made sixteen tickets, answering to the number of male persons present, members of the Church, and marked twelve of them with a cross. Being desirous, for my own private satisfaction, to ascertain which of the twelve to be selected by Lot, it might please the Lord to appoint to read or perform the ceremony, I wrote, unknown to the rest of the Society, upon one of the twelve tickets, thus marked with a cross, the word ORDAIN. {71} I then put the sixteen tickets into a receiver, when a prayer went up from my heart, that the Lord would shew whom he had chosen for the office of Ordination. The members being properly arranged, I went round to them all; and each one took a ticket out of the receiver, leaving me the last ticket, on which was written, as before stated, the word ORDAIN. Still the other members of the Society were not aware of what I had done; and when the twelve were separated from the rest, after consulting together a few moments, they unanimously requested, that I would read and perform the ceremony of Ordination. Whereupon JAMES HINDMARSH was first Ordained by me, and immediately afterwards SAMUEL SMITH.
This commencement of the Ordination of Ministers in the New Church has been approved of, and confirmed, by the Church in various of its subsequent General Meetings, particularly by the Sixth General Conference of its Ministers and other members held in London in the year 1807; the Minutes of which, after describing the mode adopted as above, contain the following remark. “It is to be observed, that this manner of Ordination by twelve members was used, because hereby the Church in this respect commenced anew, which would not have been the case, had she submitted to have had her Ministers ordained by those of the former Church; and twelve were chosen, because that number signifies all the goods and truths, from the Lord, whereof his Church is constituted.”
The same General Conference further expressed their sentiments on the subject, in the following Resolutions.

“Resolved, That the origin of the Ordination of Ministers of the New Church now read, as adopted by the Society of East Cheap, on Sunday, the 1st of June, 1788, be considered as the most consistent, proper, and expedient, according to the then existing circumstances.
“Resolved, That this Conference recommend a continuation of the Ordination of the Ministry from this origin, and recognize the following persons as having been so ordained. [The names of ten persons are then enumerated.]
“Resolved, That if there are any persons at present officiating as Ministers of the Lords’s New Church, who have not been ordained according to this form, they be recommended to submit to the same as soon as possible, for the sake of order; and that the Presidents of this Conference be requested to write to any such Ministers, of whom they may have knowledge.”

Again in the Minutes of the Seventh General Conference, held at Birmingham, in the year 1808, a similar notice and recommendation are to be found in p. 5. “As the Ordination of Ministers at East Cheap, in 1788, was the first Order appointed and observed in the New Church, the Conference recommends, that the same Order be recognized and continued.”
In the Minutes of the Eleventh General Conference, held at Derby in the year 1818, p. 19, the 37th Resolution is thus expressed. {72} “Mr. Robert Hindmarsh (the President for that year) having been requested to leave the room, and the Rev. J. Proud called to the Chair, the subject respecting the Ordination of Mr. Robert Hindmarsh was then introduced, and underwent a very deliberate and able discussion; when it was

“Resolved Unanimously,
“That in consequence of Mr. Robert Hindmarsh having been called by Lot to ordain the first Minister in the New Church, this Conference consider it as the most orderly method, which could then be adopted, and that Mr. Robert Hindmarsh was virtually Ordained by the Divine Auspices of Heaven; in consequence of which this Conference consider Mr. Robert Hindmarsh as one of the regular Ordaining Ministers.”

Accordingly in all the subsequent Conferences, where Lists have been given of all the regularly Ordained Ministers of the New Church, the name of ROBERT HINDMARSH is inserted at the head of those, who are recognized by the General Conference, and authorized to Ordain others into the Ministry, he himself being considered as the person appointed by Divine Providence to commence that Institution in the New Church, and therefore described as one Ordained by the Divine Auspices of the Lord, agreeably to the form and circumstances above related.
And here it may be observed as somewhat remarkable, that JAMES HINDMARSH and ROBERT HINDMARSH, the father and the son, should have been separately appointed by Lot to act those prominent parts in the formation of the Visible Church, which neither they nor any others of the Society would of themselves have had the assurance to undertake. On the first solemn occasion, that of first bringing the New Church into a visible external form, by Baptizing a given number of persons, desirous of entering the Church in a formal manner, as was done on the 31st of July, 1787, Mr. JAMES HINDMARSH was chosen by Lot to perform that ceremony; and the first person so Baptized was his son, Mr. ROBERT HINDMARSH, as above stated, p. 58 et seq. And on the next solemn occasion, when it was found expedient to commence the Institution of the Ordination of Ministers, Mr. ROBERT HINDMARSH, being himself the first that was ever admitted by Baptism into the New Church, was in like manner chosen by Lot, as well as by the unanimous voice of the members of the Society assembled for that purpose, to Ordain his father, Mr. JAMES HINDMARSH, as a Minister of the said Church: see p. 71, &c. Thus it appears, that two individuals of the same family, having no pretensions beyond those of the humblest of their companions, and certainly with qualifications much inferior to those of several others who assisted at both the ceremonies above mentioned, were placed in situations, which they could not have anticipated, and from which they could not conscientiously recede, after having once committed themselves to the Divine Disposal, by joining with the rest in prayer, that the Lord would lead, direct, and guide them in all their proceedings. His primitive disciples were men of humble abilities, despised perhaps for their plainness of manners, by the great men of their day, and deemed utterly unworthy of the distinction with which they were honoured. {73} So in the present day, the day of the Lord’s second advent among men in the true spirit of his Word, equally obscure individuals, and insignificant in the eyes of the world, may be made choice of, as humble mediums, through whom the Divine Wisdom may bring forth great events from apparently trivial causes and small beginnings. For the Lord sees not as man sees; neither are his ways to be judged of by the light of mere human reason. The weakest instruments are often made subservient to the most important ends. This has been conspicuous in all ages of the world; and doubtless the same laws, which tended in former times to the production of much eventual good, even to those who were ignorant of them, are still in operation for the benefit of the human race at large, and especially of the New and True Christian Church.*
* A correct List of all the Ordinations that have taken place, from their first commencement in 1788; with the times when, the places where, and the persons by whom, these Ministers were severally Ordained, will be given in the Appendix- ED.
The foundation of the Ministry of the New Church having been thus laid in the manner above described, with a provision for its succession and perpetuity, the benefit of such an Institution was soon perceived and very generally acknowledged, by all who wished well to the prosperity of Jerusalem. Disorderly spirits were hereby kept in a state of subjection to true order; and the first ebullitions of an over- heated imagination, or fanatical zeal, which might have been injurious to the rising Church of the Lord, were thus wisely controlled, and prevented from bringing discredit on its cause. Yet the Society had difficulties to contend with, which by divine help were gradually overcome. It was scarcely to be expected, that all, who received and cordially embraced the same doctrines even in heart and in life, should still entertain the same views of the best mode of promoting their publication in the world. While some conscientiously thought, that the most effectual way of increasing the New Church was by a candid and open declaration of its doctrines, neither flattering the prejudices, nor apparently justifying the errors, of those who by education and habit were most sincerely attached to the doctrines and worship of former establishments; others, of no less scrupulous and amiable a character, both as men and as Christians, hesitated to give their sanction to measures, which they feared might injure, rather than benefit, the cause most dear to the hearts of all the recipients of divine truth. By a premature and sudden display of the superior light of the new dispensation, before minds as yet unprepared for so great a blessing, some of our friends in the country, and particularly those of Manchester, were apprehensive, that the good already acquired by such characters, in their states of simplicity and ignorance, might possibly be deteriorated, or at least checked in its progress towards perfection. {74} It was therefore, no doubt, a suggestion of pure charity towards the good and pious of all denominations, that the Society in London was addressed by their friends in Manchester, and earnestly intreated, both by letter and otherwise, not to separate themselves from the communion of the Established Church in this country, but to wait till a more convenient opportunity offered, when perhaps the very bishops, or other persons in authority in the Church and State, should, from conviction of the truth, give their sanction to a change in the forms of public worship. This recommendation, Coming from such a quarter, from men who, we had every reason to believe, had the real interests of the New Church at heart as much as ourselves, caused us to reflect on all our proceedings, from the first moment of our resolution to become a distinct people: and the result was, after the most mature deliberation we were able to give the subject, and considering the improbability of bishops and other dignified clergymen risking their ecclesiastical benefits, that, as Englishmen, free by the constitution of our country, and entitled to act in obedience to the dictates of our own consciences, as far as no violence was offered to the religious sentiments of others, we were unanimously resolved to go forward in the path already struck out, not at all doubting but a divine blessing would attend our well-meant endeavours.*
* The first Member of the New Church Society who was removed from the natural into the spiritual world was Mr. James Rayner. He departed this life on Saturday, the 19th July, 1788, aged 33. On the Wednesday following, his mortal remains were interred in the burial ground adjoining Northampton Chapel, in Spa Fields, Clerkenwell. The Rev. James Hindmarsh performed the funeral service by reading E. Swedenborg’s statement of the Resurrection as contained in the New Jerusalem and its Heavenly Doctrines from n. 223-228: to which were prefixed a few introductory remarks suitable to the occasion, and concluded by repeating the Lord’s Prayer. There were present nineteen Members of the Church, a relation of the deceased, and a few other friends.
The following remarkable circumstance occurring at the time of Mr. James Rayner’s decease, is recorded on the authority of the Rev. M. Sibly. Two days previous to his removal, the window of his room being open, a Red-breast came in and perched upon his feet, as he lay in bed, and sang in a most delightful manner, for a considerable time, to the great surprise of several persons, who were then present. It then flew away. About half an hour previous to his decease, it returned again to the window, but did not enter, and only hovered about for a little while. About five minutes before his death it came again, and perched upon the window, where it continued to sing in its former delightful strain till about five minutes after his death, and then flew away. It visited the window frequently till the third day after his decease, when the body began to change; after which it returned no more.- ED.
From the first agitation of the question of separation from the Old Church, by which expression are meant all the Established and Non-established Churches in Christendom, among Roman Catholics, Greeks, and Protestants of every denomination, it was found, that a certain portion of the readers of the New Church Writings were altogether averse from the formation of themselves and others into a distinct body of Christians. {75} They conceived it to be their duty to remain in their respective connexions as before, and to continue in the exercise of public worship at those places, which they had heretofore been accustomed to attend; though at the same time they knew, that such worship was not in agreement either with their newly- adopted principles, or with the true sense of the Divine Word itself. But judging that, upon the whole, more good might result to society from the course they took, by the opportunities it afforded them of insinuating the truth among their former associates, than if they were hastily to withdraw themselves from all spiritual communion with them; and perhaps, in some cases, unwilling to be reputed Sectarians, or stigmatized as Fanatics, they were content to do some violence to their own feelings, and to suffer a kind of voluntary martyrdom, rather than give unnecessary offence to their uninformed neighbour. To his own Master every man is accountable: it is therefore a duty incumbent on all, who profess the same faith, however they may vary in their modes of spreading it abroad in the world, to regard each other as brethren united in one common cause, under One Common Head, who crowns with success the separate or joint exertions of all his faithful servants.
Several letters passed between the Society, now formed into a distinct body, and those of their friends who thought it was as yet premature to separate themselves from former Establishments. Each party, as might naturally be expected, urged the propriety of their respective views of the question; and, in the true spirit of charity and brotherly affection, each party left the other freely to determine for themselves. As a specimen of the friendship and candour, in which this correspondence was maintained, and at the same time for the purpose of shewing the grounds upon which public worship was first established by the members of the New Church Society in London, their printed Answer to a Letter received from the Manchester Society is here subjoined, under the title of-

“REASONS for Separating from the OLD CHURCH, &c.: In Answer to a Letter from the Friends at Manchester; by the Members of the New Jerusalem Church, who assemble in Great East Cheap, London.*
* The full title is, Reasons for Separating from the Old Church; In Answer to a Letter received from certain Persons in Manchester, who profess to believe in the Heavenly Doctrines of the New Jerusalem Church, as contained in the Theological Writings of the late Hon. Emanuel Swedenborg, and yet Remain in the External Forms of Doctrine and Worship now in Use in the Old Church, notwithstanding their Direct Opposition to the Heavenly Doctrines of the New Church. To which are added, Sundry Passages from E. Swedenborg, on which the Expediency, and even Necessity, of a Complete Separation from the former Church, is founded. By the Members of the New Jerusalem Church, who assemble in Great East Cheap, London. 1788.

“Dear Brethren,
“We received your friendly Epistle of the 14th of November, 1787; and after mature deliberation on the contents thereof, we think it necessary to deliver our sentiments as follows:

“It appears to be written in a spirit of charity, and accordingly we receive it as expressive of your best wishes towards us and the New Church at large. {76} But in regard to that part of it, where you advise us not to separate from the present established forms of worship in the Old Church, as no argument is advanced from the Holy Word, or from the Writings of EMANUEL SWEDENBORG, which to us are dearer than every other consideration on earth, we dare not comply with any requisition of man, that in our judgment would tend to crush the Lord’s work in his infant New Church. It appears to us from the Writings of EMANUEL SWEDENBORG, that the faith of the Old Church is diametrically opposite to that of the New Church, and consequently that they cannot remain together in the same house, much less in the same mind, without the most dangerous consequences to man’s spiritual life.
“With respect to the Universality of the Divine Mercy, which you seem to consider as a sufficient ground and reason for not separating from the Old Church, inasmuch as the Lord accepteth the sincere worship of all men, howsoever imperfect their forms, we conceive this might as well have been applied to the Primitive Christian Church, when separating from the Jewish, and with much greater propriety to the Reformed or Protestant Churches, when they withdrew from the Roman Catholics, than to us in the present case. For the consideration of the Lord’s mercy being extended to Pagans and Idolaters, and even to the wicked, doth not seem to us to be a sufficient reason for continuing either in idolatry or wickedness, when the means of reformation are in our power. If the Lord accepteth the sincere worship of all men, notwithstanding the imperfection of their forms, surely we may hope that his mercy will be extended to us even in our new form, while we worship him alone in sincerity and truth. And if so, even upon your own principles of Universality, we beg leave to ask, wherein consisteth the evil or danger of separating from the forms of the Old Church?
“By a Separation we by no means wish to circumscribe the limits of the Lord’s Universal Mercy, much less to confine it to ourselves, or to the forms which we have adopted for present use, as may appear from the Address to the Reader prefixed to our Liturgy, to which we refer you for our sentiments on this head. Nay, so sensible are we of the Universality of the Divine Mercy, that we believe it is perpetually extended even to the infernal spirits, in preventing them from falling into deeper hells; the Lord from his divine love being ever desirous of elevating all into heaven. But this is impossible, by reason of their acquired evil, which they have confirmed to such a degree, that it cannot be removed or extirpated to eternity. Heaven and Hell, n. 521 to 527.
“You will be pleased to observe, that the friends in London by no means wish to confine the New Church to any forms, which they may think most suitable for themselves; for we know that all perfection consists in variety. (Arcana Coelest. n. 1285. Heaven and Hell n. 51 to 58.) There will therefore be many varieties of worship in the New Church; but all these varieties will harmonize by the ACKNOWLEDGMENT and PROFESSION of ONE GOD in the DIVINE HUMAN PERSON of the LORD JESUS CHRIST. This is the Universal, that must enter into every Particular and Singular, as the very life and soul thereof; and this will unite all the members of the New Church, howsoever different their modes of worship may be. But it is plain to see, that this cannot extend to the forms in use in the Old Church; for the Universal that prevails therein, particularly in respect to its doctrine concerning God, the Person of Christ, Charity, Repentance, Free-will, Election, the Use of the Sacraments of Baptism and the Lord’s Supper, and in every other the most minute Singular, is a Trinity of Gods, (see True Christ. Rel., n. 177;) and this Trinity of Gods as naturally begets the pernicious doctrine of Justification by Faith alone, as the acknowledgment of ONE GOD in the DIVINE HUMANITY of the LORD JESUS CHRIST produces a life according to his commandments.
“We trust, therefore, our dear brethren of Manchester will not impute to us a sectarian spirit, when we profess and endeavour (through divine assistance) to maintain charity towards all mankind, and declare that we have nothing in view, but the worship of the true God, and the advancement of his New Church, both in doctrine and in life.
“In separating from the Old Church, and in framing a Liturgy agreeable to our perceptions of the heavenly Truths of the New, we conceive we are only exercising that liberty of conscience, which the Lord in his divine providence has been pleased so peculiarly to favour us with, and which as members of the New Church, and subjects of a free land, we have a most undoubted right to. Indeed the propriety, and even necessity, of this measure appears the more striking, when we consider, that all the present forms of worship in use in the Old Church, are calculated to implant in the mind a divided idea of the One God; and to lead from the true Object of worship, which is JESUS CHRIST, to an imaginary God of a superior order, who is on all occasions to be addressed for the sake of the merits and sufferings of his Son. {77}
“We consider it, therefore, as a duty incumbent upon us, to forsake whatsoever is calculated to oppose and obstruct the free reception of good and truth from the Lord; and howsoever trivial it may appear to some, whether we use or reject the forms of the Old Church, yet we are firmly persuaded (by certain experience) of the truth of EMANUEL SWEDENBORG’S assertion (speaking of the forms of prayer now in use), that whatever is implanted in the memory in a person’s younger years, becomes the subject of all his future thoughts. (True Christ. Rel. n. 173.) This being the case, it is evident, that the forms of worship in the Old Church have a pernicious tendency, inasmuch as they lead the mind to conceive Three Gods in idea, and teach a justification by faith in the merits of one, who suffered death to appease the wrath of the other.
“The danger resulting from such erroneous sentiments to the rising generation, is too evident to escape notice; but rather awakens us to a sense of the duty we owe to our families and offspring, in guarding them, as much as possible, against receiving and being confirmed in principles, that cannot fail hereafter to prove highly prejudicial to their eternal life.- See True Christ. Rel. n. 23.
“But it is not our design to point out to you all the sad consequences of the faith of the Old Church, as no doubt you must be well acquainted with them already from the works of our Author. Suffice it to observe, that we consider them as sufficient reasons for withdrawing from the former Church. And we hope and trust, that our dear brethren of Manchester, and elsewhere, will also in due time see the importance and necessity of relinquishing, both internally and externally, those destructive forms ff faith and worship, which have already been the means of vastating and consummating the Old Church, and which, if persevered in, will doubtless threaten the most dangerous consequences to the New.
“You, as well as we, believe there is only One God in One Person, and that the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is He. So do the angels of heaven. But they profess the same with their lips also; and thus the acknowledgment of their hearts, descending into the confession of their mouth, is in its fulness and in its power. Why then should we be ashamed or afraid to profess our faith in the open day? Why speak with our tongues what we know in our hearts to be false? Shall general custom, or any human establishment on earth, be allowed a sufficient plea? Is evil to be done, that good may come of it? O friends and brethren! let us no longer deceive ourselves! let us no longer halt between two opinions! But let us seek truth for the sake of truth; and when we have found it, let us acknowledge and profess it in humility and simplicity, as knowing that nothing short of genuine truth, derived from genuine good, can constitute us real members of the New Jerusalem.
“As a Church has lately been opened in London, wherein the Lord Jesus Christ ALONE is worshiped, and the doctrines of the New Jerusalem are avowedly preached, we can from some experience declare, that we think your fears about a Separation from the Old Church were entirely groundless. Many persons have already by that means been brought to the knowledge of the truth; and we have a good hope, from present appearances, that the efforts of those concerned therein will, through divine mercy, in the end be crowned with the desired success.
“Sensible of our own weakness and infirmities, and how much we stand in need of the divine assistance, it is the sincere prayer of our hearts, that we may be preserved in the truth of the Holy Word, and in the genuine spirit of charity towards all mankind. For we are well assured, that the most perfect forms of external worship and profession will avail us nothing, unless, by the divine mercy of the Lord, we enter into real states of repentance and regeneration, which can only be effected by shunning evils as sins against God, and by a life conformable to the genuine truths of his Holy Word.
“We do not wish to lay a stress on any reasoning derived from man’s propriety or self-intelligence, but simply to receive the truth as the Lord has been pleased to manifest it by means of his servant EMANUEL SWEDENBORG. And where we cannot all agree in sentiment or opinion on any particular points, we trust we shall ever be united in the bonds of mutual love and charity.
“We think it proper, at the close of this letter, to point out to you some of those passages in the writings of EMANUEL SWEDENBORG, on which we ground the necessity of a separation from the Old Church, and which appear to us of sufficient weight to authorize our conduct. The application of the same passages, however, to your own breasts, we shall leave entirely to yourselves. We do not wish to urge the example of our separating as a just reason for yours; being well persuaded, that every man must judge and act for himself, particularly in matters of such importance as have respect to his conscience. And although it is possible you may not at present see the expediency of forsaking the Old, and adopting the New Church, in an external as well as internal manner; yet we trust, the Lord will in mercy preserve you from your present danger, and in his own good time deliver you from the power of all your enemies, by setting your feet on sure and certain ground. {78}
“This is our ardent prayer for you, for ourselves, and for all others who desire to worship the Lord in spirit and in truth.”

“Great East Cheap, London.
“Dec. 7, 1788. “(Signed)

JOHN AUGUSTUS TULK.
BETTY TULK.
ROBERT HINDMARSH.
SARAH HINDMARSH.
THOMAS WRIGHT.
GEORGE WILLIAM WRIGHT.
ROBERT BRANT.
C. B. WADSTROM.
ISAAC HAWKINS.
BETTY HAWKINS.
ROBERT JACKSON.
JOHN LEGG.
DANIEL RICHARDSON.
ELIZABETH RICHARDSON.
ROBERT ATCHISON.
JOHN FERGUSON
RICHARD THOMPSON.
THOMAS WILLDON.
MARY WILLDON.
J. R. NEEDHAM.
ROBERT CRANE.
JOHN WILLDON.
JAMES HINDMARSH.
PHILLIS HINDMARSH.
ANNA HAWKINS.
HENRY SERVANTE.
SUSANNA SERVANTE.
HENRY SERVANTE, JUN.
THOMAS BOWES
RALPH MATHER.
ALEXANDER WILDERSPIN.
SAMUEL BUCKNALL.
JOHN HAWKINS.
JAMES CRUDEN.
MANOAH SIBLY.
SARAH SIBLY.
BENEDICT CHASTANIER.
JOSEPH JEROME ROUSSELL.
ISAAC BRAND.
MARY BRAND.
JOHN DOWLING.
WILLIAM ATTWELL.
WILLIAM CHILD.
JOHN FREDERIC OKERBLOM.
ELIZABETH OKERBLOM.
SAMUEL HANDS.
CHARLOTTE WILLDON.
JOHN BALL.
JOHN SUDBURY.
MARY SUDBURY.
HENRIETTA EDMONDS.
BENJAMIN BANKS.
HENRY PECKITT.
ROBERT IVES.
GEORGE ROBINSON.
HANNAH ROBINSON.
WILLIAM BELL.
LAWRENCE HILL.
THOMAS BRANT.
CHARLES BRANT.
THOMAS FOSTER.
JOSEPH LEE.
TIMOTHY MORRIS.
JOHN MORLEY.
MARGARET MORLEY.
NANNEY YANDELL.
SAMUEL BEMBRIDGE.
ELIZABETH BEMBRIDGE.
BENEDICT HARFORD.
JOHN CITIZEN.
ELIZABETH CITIZEN.
BETTY WELCH.
ANN DICKINSON.
MARY JACKSON.
ANN HUGHES.
BENJAMIN BOND.
SAMUEL SMITH.”

The passages in the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, alluded to above, on which the Society grounded the expediency of forming themselves into a distinct body, were annexed to this Letter, as an authority acknowledged by all who embrace the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem: but they are here omitted, being thought unnecessary in the present advanced state of the Church, when the question of Separation, which formerly agitated the infant Societies, has at length subsided, and almost ceased to be a subject of conversation. For it is seen and perfectly acquiesced in by all parties, (if such a term can be allowed, when now more than ever they are united,) that the common cause, in which they are embarked, must proceed, and that nothing can hinder its future progress; because, having already gained a respectable footing in this and other countries, it is beginning to bless all lands with its superior light, and cannot reasonably be expected to forfeit the divine promise of being made “a praise in the earth,” Isa. lxii. 7; “an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations,” chap. lx. 15. {79}
In the course of two or three years after this correspondence, the friends in Manchester came to an almost unanimous resolution to follow the example of the London Society, and to erect for themselves a commodious and spacious building in Peter Street, to be called the New Jerusalem Church.* Other Societies also in Lancashire, Yorkshire, &c., which heretofore only held their reading meetings and friendly associations, soon perceived the utility of public worship, from the examples thus set them by their brethren in London and Manchester, and gradually formed themselves into little communities and churches, all vying with each other in zeal to propagate the truths of the new dispensation, and most earnestly endeavouring to stem that torrent of infidelity, which about this time began to infest and infect the whole of the Christian Community in Great Britain.
* This erection is still in the possession of the New Church, the original cost of the building is paid off, and a new and commodious School Room is just completed (1858). This Church was opened, on Sunday, August 11th 1793; on which occasion the Rev. J. Proud preached two discourses from Isaiah lx. 1, 2.- ED.