CHAP. VI.

 

AGREEABLY to appointment, the Second General conference was held at the Chapel in Great East Cheap, London, on Easter Monday, the 5th of April, 1790, and continued to the 7th. Mr. SAMUEL HANDS, of Birmingham, was unanimously chosen President; and the Rev. FRANCIS LEICESTER, of London, Secretary. A Committee of twelve persons was also appointed, to expedite the business of the present Conference. The proceedings of the former Conference were then read and confirmed.
The first object, to which the attention of the members present was called, was the preparation of a Catechism for the instruction of Children, according to the principles of the New Church. Several sketches of Catechisms were produced, and referred to the Committee to compare and incorporate them together, so as to be properly adapted to the capacity of Children. {110} The Committee accordingly took an opportunity of retiring for that purpose; and, having agreed upon one, which in their opinion was likely to answer the end proposed, submitted the same to the approbation of the Conference. The Catechism, so prepared and recommended by the Committee, was then read, and unanimously adopted.
The next subject, that came under consideration, was a Volume of Hymns, which Mr. Proud had composed, and which, if it met with the approbation of Conference, he was then about to print. The Hymn Book, so announced, was soon after printed, and continued to be used by the different Societies of the New Church for many years.
Another subject of the utmost importance to the welfare and stability of the Church, and which demanded the most mature deliberation of the Conference, was that relating to External Worship. It was proposed as a question, “Whether a Form of Prayer ought, or ought not, to be used in religious worship in the New Church?” This question, after being well considered, and thoroughly canvassed, was determined in the affirmative, without a dissentient voice, for the following, among many others, which might be adduced as substantial reasons:

“1. Because a Form of Prayer and Worship, if drawn from the Holy Word, and consistent with the genuine sense thereof, is calculated to preserve the doctrines of the New Church in their purity, and is at the same time a powerful guard against the introduction of any heresy. For it is presumed, that no Minister, after hearing or reading the prayers of the Church, which have been approved of by a General Conference, is likely to ascend the Pulpit immediately, and pull down or destroy what has been already advanced in the preceding part of the worship.
“2. Because the constant and regular use of a proper Formula, in public worship, has a tendency to implant in the minds of children and Young people, true ideas of the One Object of divine adoration, to familiarize them with the Word of God and his holy commandments, and thus to lay the foundation of their future spiritual life on Christ alone, who is the Rock of ages.
“3. Because it has also a tendency to confirm the faith of those who are in the use of it; as well as because it is an open avowal, before the whole world, of the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem, and a full proof, even in the ultimates, of their actual descent from heaven to earth.”

This Conference was further engaged in revising and amending the Order of Worship, which had been before adopted by the Society in Great East Cheap, and was then used by that in Birmingham, as well as by some others which had recently sprung up in the country. For it is to be observed, that these forms were at first regarded only as provisional helps till the Church should increase in number, and be better qualified by their united judgment, to produce a Liturgy more suited to the wants of its members, and more unexceptional in the eyes of the public. By these and other means the Church gradually improved in its external appearance; and, emerging from a state of relative weakness and imperfection, it acquired a degree of strength and reputation, which nothing but a confidence in the superintending hand of Divine Providence could encourage us to expect. {111}
Among the various amendments adopted were the following, viz., a literal translation of the Lord’s Prayer from the original Greek; also a translation of the Decalogue more conformable to the original than that in common use. The responses at the end of each commandment, being judged an interruption to the solemnity of this part of the service, were ordered to be discontinued in future, and only one used after the tenth commandment.
It was also unanimously agreed, that, in order to open the gates of the New Jerusalem as wide as possible, the only condition of admission by Baptism be an acknowledgment of the two essentials of the New Church, which were ordered to be inserted in the two Forms of Baptism, instead of the Creed. These two essentials are as follow: I. That God is One both in Essence and in Person, in whom is a Divine Trinity, consisting of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, and that the Lord and saviour Jesus Christ is He. II. That in order to salvation, man must live a life according to the ten commandments, by shunning evils as sins against God.
Mr. Joseph Wright, of Keighley, in Yorkshire, and Mr. Manoah Sibly, of London, having been proposed as proper Persons to be ordained Ministers of the New Church, were unanimously approved, and they were accordingly ordained at the close of this Conference.
The following General Letter, addressed to the Members of the New Church at large, was ordered to be prefixed to the Minutes of this Conference.

“GENERAL LETTER.

The Members of the NEW JERUSALEM CHURCH, assembled in General Conference, in Great East Cheap, London, from the 5th to the 7th of April, 1790,
“To all their Brethren of the New Dispensation.

“IT is with particular pleasure we again address all the lovers of genuine truth, on a subject of such great importance as the extension and establishment of the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem. The favourable reception, which the thinking part of mankind now begin to give them, both in this and other countries, we trust is a happy omen of the revival of true Christianity; the rational principles of which seem heretofore to have been but little understood. May the light of truth continue to spread itself over the whole earth.
“This is now the Second Annual Conference of the New Church, held for the purpose of its further promotion and establishment. And when we consider from how many different persuasions and denominations of religion, the greater part of us have been brought to see the truth, it is really matter of astonishment to observe the harmony and union of sentiment that has prevailed in all our consultations, which we pray may be directed, by the Divine Providence of the Lord, to the real welfare and prosperity of his New Church.
“It has long appeared necessary to prepare a Catechism for the instruction of the rising generation; and the more we reflected on the subject, the more we were convinced, that no time ought to be lost in providing means suited to the capacity of children, whereby they may be gradually introduced to the true knowledge of the Lord, and their infant minds trained betimes to the love and practice of his holy commandments. {112} This end, we trust, will, through Divine Mercy, be in some degree promoted by the printed CATECHISM, which accompanies this Letter.
“Herewith you will also receive the MINUTES OF CONFER- ENCE, which will inform you of the nature of our proceedings, and the particular subjects we were led to deliberate upon. May a Divine Blessing attend these, and the endeavours of all others who are engaged in the same cause, viz., of promoting the welfare and prosperity of the New Church.

“Signed, in behalf of the Conference, by

ROBERT JACKSON.
JAMES HINDMARSH.
MANOAH SIBLY.
ROBERT HINDMARSH.
THOMAS WRIGHT.
HENRY PECKITT.
JAMES CRUDEN.”

“Great East Cheap, London,
“April 12, 1790.”

Soon after the conclusion of the Second General Conference, information was received from a gentleman in Wales, stating, that having for some years embraced the doctrines of the New Church, he had already translated some of its most essential articles into the Welsh language, and was disposed to proceed, according to his ability, in spreading among his countrymen a knowledge of the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg. The following Extract of a letter, addressed to the Editors of the New Jerusalem Magazine, will be read with pleasure and satisfaction.

“About four years since I had the happiness to peruse that admirable work, The Treatise on Heaven and Hell, by Emanuel Swedenborg, which was the first of his writings that happened to fall into my hands. I was struck with admiration and astonishment, to find myself in possession of an inestimable treasure, that gave me an account of the invisible world and its inhabitants. Indeed what could be more acceptable to a man travelling towards a strange country, where himself and family are to take up their abode and for ever to reside, than to meet with a fellow-traveller, who had before visited the place, and could give him a faithful account of it from ocular demonstration, concerning its inhabitants, their manner of living, with several other particulars, which he could relate to the inquisitive inquirer?
“I have endeavoured to prevail on some of my neighbours and acquaintance to embrace the heavenly doctrine of the New Church, and to throw off their false notion of a Trinity from eternity, because it carries with it an idea of Three Gods, and to receive the true doctrine of a Trinity in the Lord Jesus Christ, as an essential article of religion and true worship;- to consider, that justification by faith alone is not grounded in Scripture, and that love to the Lord and charity to our neighbour are the only qualifications for eternal life; and where these are wanting, there can be no faith. On this account I have translated some of the most essential articles of the new doctrine into the Welsh language, in order to explain the same to those who are not acquainted with the English tongue, and also with an intention (if the Lord permits) some time or other to publish the fundamental articles of the new dispensation, with some other interesting subjects and extracts from the Writings of Baron Swedenborg; and if I shall be so happy as to find my countrymen likely to embrace this new and most excellent revelation, nothing on my part shall be wanting to spread the knowledge thereof among those, who have not the advantage of perusing the same in any other language, especially such who wish to come at the truth for truth’s sake.

“I am, Gentlemen, yours, &c., “MATTHEW WILLIAMS.”
Landilovawr, Carmarthenshire,
“May the 12th, 1790.”

Another letter, from a gentleman in Beverley, Yorkshire, is to the following effect:

“What spare time I have from the duties of my profession is generally spent in reading and meditating on the Writings of that great and venerable Seer, Emanuel Swedenborg. I am not ashamed to own my hearty assent to every particular doctrine therein contained, which, from the little experience I have had, I have found to be the most comfortable and consolatory. {113} In short, next to the Bible, I am verily persuaded, that no Writings at this day exist, that have a greater tendency to make men wiser and better, than those of Baron Swedenborg.
“When man, from an impartial examination of unequivocal Scripture testimony, is at length become fixed in the true faith and acknowledgment of the One True God, the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, in whom dwelleth a Divine Trinity, the Fulness of the Godhead bodily, and duly considers himself as subordinate to that divine administration, he cannot have a greater incentive to become good. He must then see the necessity of shunning evils as sins, because he cannot otherwise prepare himself to receive the divine influence of the Lord his God, which is the only means of his present and future happiness”.
“The nature of that future and eternal world, which ought to be the object of every man’s hope and joyful expectation, is in these invaluable Writings so clearly revealed to us, that the gloom, which heretofore seemed to hang over the grave, is in a great measure dissipated. These Writings were first seriously recommended to me by a clergyman the latter end of last August, and I have since found infinite pleasure in the perusal of them.
“You are at full liberty to print, if you think proper, any part of this letter; but my present situation will not permit me to have my name inserted at full length: I have, therefore, only signed the initials of it. I congratulate you on your publishing the New Jerusalem Magazine, and am,
“Gentlemen, with sincere respect, &c.,
“Beverly,                    “T. W.”
“May 15, 1790.”

As the Writings, which contain the doctrines of the New Church, now began to be more generally known, by means of translations from the original Latin into various languages, and thereby gave rise to the formation of Societies in many kingdoms of Europe, it may be proper to notice some of them in this place. Among these, one, called the Exegetic and Philanthropic Society, was formed in Stockholm in the year 1786. This Society successively increased, till their number, in 1790, amounted to more than two hundred persons, the greatest part of whom were men holding respectable offices in the State, and of distinguished learning. Many of them were clergymen, not to mention two of the first princes in Europe, who took upon themselves the patronage of the Society. Various translations and treatises of the new doctrine have been published by this Society in the Swedish language: but the press not being free in Sweden, their works for the most part have been printed in Denmark. For some time they suffered considerable persecution; but as a collective body, or Society, can no more be exempt from trials and difficulties than an individual, they have patiently and with confidence in the divine protection of the Lord, waited for a more happy period, which it is hoped is now approaching. The members assemble generally once a week; and they have opened a correspondence, on an enlarged scale, with other professors of the same doctrines in different parts of the kingdom. In one single bishopric, it is said, no less than forty-six respectable and profoundly learned clergymen have cordially embraced the Writings, and have frequently been exposed to severe persecutions on that account; nevertheless they openly and without reserve preach the new doctrines, though with the caution, as yet necessary in Sweden, of not mentioning the name of Swedenborg in the pulpit. {114} In another diocese, which contains about three hundred clergymen, and receives a yearly supply of ten young Ministers, it has been remarked, that six of the ten are generally favourable to the new doctrines. Hence it may be inferred what space of time the whole diocese at such rate will require, to gain the superiority in regard to this dispensation. There can be no doubt but it is of the Divine Mercy and Providence, that a period of persecution has been permitted, as this naturally tends to excite the people’s attention to the cause of such persecution. The consequence is, that the doctrines are more inquired into, than they might otherwise be: and it appears, that at the colleges for education no less than a hundred manuscript copies of the doctrinals of the New Church, are in circulation among the young students.
Prince Charles, Duke of Sudermania, and brother to the then reigning King, honoured the Exegetic and Philanthropic Society at Stockholm, by accepting the invitation to become one of its members. On his first introduction to the Society, Aug. 29, 1787, his Royal Highness delivered the following speech, which marks the condescension of his manners, the liberality of his views, and his devotion to the cause for which they were associated.

“Truth is simple, it is infinite; it may be shaded, but cannot be changed; and if ignorance, prejudice, or private views, hide its true meaning, these clouds are dissipated by an upright inquirer, who, being led by a superior hand, has strength enough to distinguish truth from falsehood.
“This happy period is approaching, and while unbelief is striving with superstition, truth is enabled to re-assume that right among mankind which it had from the beginning of time, namely, of enlightening them concerning their real good, the road which leads to union with their Author and Benefactor.
“From reason, as also from what I have heard, and were it not presumptuous I would say, from what I have already experienced, I am convinced that such a road exists.
“Having found, gentlemen, that your thoughts are consonant with my own, I have with pleasure accepted of your invitation to reckon myself one of your number.
“I wish to assist you in the pursuit of the aim of your meetings. Convinced that the hand of Omnipotence protects your laudable intentions, I trust that by his grace you will reap the fruits of a labour consecrated to his glory. May he bestow his blessing for this purpose, is my ardent prayer.”

A letter from Mr. Christian Johansen, of Sweden, dated Elskilstuna, 2nd March, 1791, states,

“That the Exegetic and Philanthropic Society at Stockholm has received a very interesting letter from Prince Charles of Hesse, which shews the truly noble and respectful sentiments of that great man for the doctrine of truth, in the principles of which he seems to be more and more confirmed. Mr. Manderfelt, one of the members of the New Church, has, at his own expense, lately printed in the Swedish language, at Copenhagen, a plan for a Catechism entirely upon the principles of the new doctrine, composed by the late zealous and learned Dr. Beyer, which has been so much approved of by all the friends in Sweden, that a great many copies have been circulating in manuscript there, till they could get this printed.”

Another letter, dated Stockholm, 2nd of May, 1791, from a friend of great zeal and erudition, is to the following effect:

“It is with the utmost pleasure I am going to tell you, that many of the first people in this kingdom are coming into the doctrines of the New Jerusalem. {115} The eminent constructor of ships, Admiral Chapman, Knight of the Order of the Sword, an acknowledged genius, is now reading Swedenborg’s works in English, with a great deal of joy and approbation. Our great men in these northern kingdoms seem not to fear ridicule, the arms of little witty souls. It certainly becomes a strong mind and a great man to lift himself above such fears: history abounds with examples of that kind. Some months ago we had a most favourable letter from the Prince of Hesse, Generalissimo in Denmark, a Prince of genius, of learning, of experience and abilities. You will certainly read the copy of his letter with feelings becoming a Christian. Its contents are as follows:

“‘A la Societe Exegetique a Stockholm.
“‘Copenhagen, 19 Novembre, 1790.

“‘Il m’est bien agreable, Messieurs et tres Chers Freres, de trouver l’occasion favourable que le porteur de cette lettre me fournit, de vous temoigner toute ma joie des succes dont la Providence a beni votre zele et vos soins, et vos sollicitudes pour son service, que j’ai eu la satisfaction d’ apprendre par lui et par Mr. Haldin. Veuille le Seigneur des Seigneurs vous combler de ses plus precieuses benedictions, et vous eclairer de la sagesse! Que son Esprit repose sur vous, qu’il vous guide, qu’il vous consacre a la gloire d’etre ses serviteurs! Mes voeux ardens vous accompgnent sans cesse: agrees les, mes tres chers freres, de la part d’un frere, d’un ami absent, mais dont le coeur est toujours present avec ceux qui professent l’amour, et l’adoration de notre Seigneur & Maitre Jesus Christ; a lui soit honneur et gloire a jamais. Je vous embrasse fraternel-lement en son saint nom du fond de mon coeur.
“‘CHARLES, Prince de Hesse.’
(The same in English.)

“To the Exegetic Society at Stockholm.
“Copenhagen, 19th of Nov., 1790.

“It is very agreeable to me, Gentlemen and very Dear Brethren, to meet with so favourable an opportunity, as the bearer of this letter furnishes me with, to declare to you the great pleasure I feel on the success, with which the Divine Providence has blessed your zeal, your exertions, and your diligence in his service; which I have had the Satisfaction of learning from him and Mr. Haldin. May the Lord of Lords confer upon you his choicest blessings, and enlighten you with wisdom! May his Spirit rest upon you, guide you, and consecrate you to the glory of being his servants! My best wishes accompany you without intermission: accept them, my very dear brethren, as proceeding from a brother, from an absent friend, but from one whose heart is always present with those who profess to love and adore our Lord and Master Jesus Christ; to whom be honour and glory for ever and ever. I embrace you affectionately in his holy name, from the bottom of my heart.
“CHARLES, Prince of Hesse.”

“Some of our learned members are now translating the Bible from the original text. I trust it will be a most useful work. But as here is no toleration, no liberty of printing, we must wait for some more happy time, when we can publish works of that kind. For my part, I am created to obey; my will is bound by the ties of that society, in which I live; but in my thought I am and ever will be free. It is under the blessing of this internal freedom I am in all tenderness of respect, Sir,
“Your most obedient Servant, &c.,
“PHILANTHROPHER.”

“Stockholm,
“16 May, 1791.”

At Paris, Strasburg, and Rouen, it is said, there is a considerable number of friends to the truth, as well as in various other parts of France. In the year 1790, several wealthy and zealous individuals, readers of the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, at Rouen, formed themselves into a society, under the name of “Societe des Amis de la Paix,” that is, “Society of the Friends of Peace.” They have it in contemplation to publish all Swedenborg’s Works, both theological and scientific. {116} The seal chosen by this Philanthropic Society, bears an olive branch across a sword, with the motto round it,- “Si vous aimez la Paix, soyez toujours armes;” that is, “If you love Peace, be always in Arms;” or, according to the Roman adage, “Would you have peace, prepare for war.” This Society is formed of some of the chief of the national guard of Rouen, and several of the members belonging to the principal cities of France.
In Lisbon some individuals have expressed an ardent desire to see the Writings; but at present they are debarred from such an inestimable privilege, as the inhabitants of that country as well as of Spain, are still led captive by fanatic monks, and groan under the tyranny of the Priesthood. Nevertheless there is good authority to state, that in Madrid the Theological Writings of our Author are often the subject of conversation at the tables of the nobility.
But from Denmark the most pleasing account has been received of the progress of the New Church in that kingdom, in consequence of the liberty of the press having been lately granted; by which means the Society at Stockholm has, at its own expense, printed several of the Writings in Denmark, where the Swedish language is read almost with the same ease as the Danish.
In Russia everything presents yet its wild appearance. A Society of the friends to the new doctrines had begun, as already observed (p. 35), about the year 1783, to meet at Moscow; but the tyrannical and odious principles of the Empress gave rise to some persecution.
It is understood, that many individuals in Holland, Germany, Poland, Switzerland, and some even in Italy, Venice, and Constantinople, are favourable to the Writings of Swedenborg. But it does not as yet appear, that public worship, in agreement with the doctrines of the New Church, is anywhere established or legally sanctioned on the Continent of Europe. This blessing is only experienced by those, who have the happiness of living under free and liberal governments, like those of Great Britain and the United States of America. But surely a brighter day is beginning to dawn, and to shed its vivifying light over the hitherto gloomy and barren deserts of the so-called Christian world.

The Third General Conference met in Great East Cheap, London, on Easter Monday, the 25th, and continued to the 29th of April, 1791-35; when Mr. BENJAMIN BANKS, of Salisbury, was unanimously elected President, and Mr. ROBERT HINDMARSH, of London, Secretary. As it was now thought, in consequence of the publicity, which the New Church had already obtained, that an indiscriminate admission of persons unknown to any of the members present, might be productive of inconvenience, and tend rather to retard than promote the objects of the Meeting, it was agreed upon, and stated by the president, that the following CONDITIONS OF ADMISSION to the Conference were to be strictly observed. {117}

“1. Every person, who is a reader and approver of the Theological Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, and friendly to the establishment of the New Church distinct from the Old, may be admitted to this Conference as a member thereof, and will have a right to deliver his sentiments on all subjects which may come before the Conference, and also give his vote on every question.
“2. All those who read and think favourably of the Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg, but are not yet desirous of separating from the Old Church, may be admitted into the gallery, but not be entitled to speak in this Conference on any question whatever.
“3. Any person in the gallery, though not entitled to speak himself, may yet, if desirous of having any particular subject agitated, procure a member of the Conference to propose the same; as it is the desire of this meeting, that every useful question may be fairly and fully canvassed.”

These Conditions were considered as expedient, at a time when as yet the individuals composing the Conference were not appointed as regular Representatives of their respective Societies, according to a scale proportioned to the number of each. But after the experience of some years, when the Societies became more numerous, and a further degree of order was established in the Church, it was found necessary to make regulations, as well in respect to the admission of Ministers, as to the other constituents of Conference.
Twelve persons, with the President and Secretary, were then appointed as a Committee to expedite the business of the Conference, and to represent the whole body of the New Church until their next Annual Meeting.
A considerable portion of the first day was occupied in reading letters, which had been received from Hull, Liverpool, Keighley, Bristol, Manchester, Wolverhampton, Dublin, Sweden, North and South America; from all which it appeared, that the New Church was gradually extending itself both in England and in foreign parts.
It having been observed, that “the evils which had arisen in the Old Church, in consequence of the Clergy assuming to themselves rights and privileges above the Laity, in matters of spiritual or religious inquiry,” the Conference was requested to take such measures as might be most likely to prevent the introduction of such abuses into the New Church. A motion was accordingly made to that effect; which being duly seconded, it was unanimously Resolved, “That in all consultations and deliberations of this Conference, no privileges shall be attached to the Clergy in preference to the Laity, but that in all respects whatever they shall be on an equal footing.”
Another subject, which engaged the attention of this Conference, arose out of the following question: “Whether Temples, or places of worship, in the New Church ought, or ought not, to be consecrated, prior to the actual celebration of divine worship therein?” {118} After considering this question for some time, when all present appeared to be fully agreed in the propriety of such consecrations,- the following passage from Emanuel Swedenborg’s True Christian Religion, n. 126, was read in confirmation of their sentiments. “A Temple (says he) must first be built, and that with the hands of men, and afterwards consecrated, and lastly sanctified by prayer, that God would make it the abode of his presence, and unite himself with his people assembled therein.”
A Form of Consecration was then directed to be prepared, and laid before the Conference. Such Form was accordingly drawn up, and received the sanction of those present. The same, with some alterations, continued in use among the different Societies for some years, whenever an occasion offered either in the erection of a new Temple, or in the appropriation of new place of worship by the members of the Church. An improved Form of Consecration has, however, been lately adopted, together with the New Liturgy printed in 1827.
The next question submitted to the Conference was, “Whether the Ministers of the New Church should not wear, while officiating in divine service, garments corresponding with their office, without any respect to what has been used in the Old Churches?”
In deliberating upon the above question, many rational and scriptural arguments were advanced in favour of the propriety of Ministers wearing correspondent garments, which were confirmed by the authority of Emanuel Swedenborg, who in various parts of his Writings declares and proves, that it is by Correspondences that the spiritual and natural worlds are united; and consequently that by genuine Correspondences, particularly those in the Holy Word, angels are conjoined to men; and that this approximation of the spiritual and celestial world to men on earth is even according to the things within them and without them, which correspond to the state of angels as to good and truth. It was then unanimously Resolved, “That it is the opinion of this Conference, that the Ministers of the New Church, after Ordination, ought to wear, while in the discharge of their office, an inner purple silken vest, and also an outer garment of fine white linen, having a golden girdle round the breast.” See Rev. i. 13, and Dan. x. 5.*
* This Resolution was acted upon at the opening of the Church in Birmingham, when Mr. Proud and Mr. James Hindmarsh officiated in the dress directed. Mr. Proud also continued to appear in such a dress, while Minister of the Society in Cross Street, London; but on removing to York Street, it was discontinued. In the Minutes of the Fifteenth General Conference, held at Salford, in 1822, it is stated that a wish had been expressed, that the Conference “would consider what dress is the most proper to be worn by Ministers of the New Church in the discharge of their functions.” The subject was postponed for consideration at the next Conference, which was held in London, in 1823, when it was Resolved, “That it is the opinion of this Conference, that WHITE is the proper colour for the dress which Ministers of the New Church should wear in their sacred functions.” At both these Conferences the formation of a new Liturgy was under consideration; and when this was eventually published, the following appeared in the Preface. “Whether any particular dress be worn, [by the Minister,] or not, is perhaps a matter of much indifference: but where one is worn, it certainly ought to be expressive of the functions performed in it. But no colour is so appropriate to the whole of those functions, as white. White robes, especially of linen, are significative of genuine truths, grounded in goodness: now it is by genuine truths, grounded in goodness, that the Minister, in the devotional part of the service, is supposed to approach the Lord; and it is from genuine truths, grounded in goodness, that, in the discourse, he is to instruct and exhort the people. Hence, in the Israelitish Church, all whose service consisted of genuine representations of spiritual things, garments of white linen were prescribed for all the priests, except the high priest alone, into whose magnificent robes other colours were admitted; and even he, when, once a year, he performed the most holy rite of their worship, and went into the holy of holies, wore white garments only. But never was he, or any of the other priests, permitted to wear black. Under a representative dispensation black garments would have been esteemed profane; and therefore the Israelites were cautioned against following the example set them by the priests of Baal and the Chemarim, – a word which means wearers of black robes: (Zeph. i. 4.) nor were such robes adopted in the Christian Church, till over-zealous Protestants determined to differ from the Catholics in every thing, even where the practice of the Catholics was right. How proper soever black may be to express the evil nature of man’s selfhood, a Minister, in the discharge of his functions, does not appear in his private character, but in that belonging to his office.”- ED. {119}

It had for some time been the practice of the London Society, to affix two dates to all their transactions; the first date referring to the First Advent of the Lord, and the second to his Second Advent, commencing from the year 1757, at which time the Last Judgment was accomplished, and the New Jerusalem began to descend from heaven. (Thus, 1757-1, 1791-35, &c.) This practice having been submitted to the members of the Conference for their consideration and approval, they agreed to adopt the same, judging, that “by thus continually holding up to the view of the world such a remarkable era, the groundless expectation of the Lord’s personal coming in the natural clouds, may be gradually weakened, and at length dissipated.”
The Conference having examined and well considered the proceedings of the London Society, prior to the sitting of the First General Conference in 1789, relative to the Commencement of public worship in the New Church, and the Ordination of Ministers, unanimously confirmed the same, and recognized by name, as lawful ministers of the New Jerusalem, all such persons, then living, as had been so ordained, viz:
JAMES HINDMARSH, of London;
JOSEPH WRIGHT, of Keighley, Yorkshire;
MANOAH SIBLY, of London;
*FRANCIS LEICESTER, of London; and
ROBERT JACKSON, of Jamaica.
* The Rev. Francis Leicester, A.B., was a Member of St. Peter’s College, or St. Peter House, Cambridge, and was an ordained Minister of the Church of England; but on receiving the Doctrines of the New Church, it appears he was ordained as a Minister, according to the ceremonial therein required.- ED.
It was at the same time also unanimously Resolved, “That, in order to secure the harmony of the New Church at large, no person can in future be ordained a Minister, except he be first recommended by the society to which he belongs, and the approbation of the General Conference of the New Church be obtained for that purpose.” {120}
The consent of this conference was given to the Ordination of Mr. Joseph Proud*, and Mr. Robert Brant, both at that time of Birmingham.
* Mr. Proud was a regular Minister of the General Baptist Connexion, and he also underwent the ceremony of ordination into the New Church.- ED.
The thanks of this Conference were unanimously voted to the London Society for their zealous endeavours in promoting the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem, prior to the meeting of the first General Conference, in the year 1789; also for their conduct in calling the same, and voluntarily transferring to the General Conference, all the powers which they derived, or might be supposed to derive, from their situation, as being the first Society publicly known to have separated from the Old Church.
The thanks of this Conference were also unanimously voted to THOMAS PARKER, Esq., Counsellor at Law, for his legal advice and kind assistance at the Meeting. And after some other business, transacted in the same spirit of harmony and unanimity, which had hitherto marked all their proceedings, the Conference was adjourned to the ensuing year.
It is a remarkable circumstance, that every commencement of a New Church is attended with vain and idle pretensions, on the part of certain individuals, who set themselves up as prophets or extraordinary messengers from heaven, charged with commissions to teach and instruct mankind in things, of which they themselves are entirely ignorant, and of whom it may be truly said, that they run before they are sent, and by their prophecies, dreams, and divinations, cause the people “to trust in a lie,” Jer. xxviii. 15. Such were Korah, Dathan, and Abiram, at the time of the institution of the Jewish and Israelitish Church, who, on offering incense to Jehovah with false fire in their censers, were swallowed up by the earth, and they with their whole company perished from among the congregation, Numb. xvi. 33. Such also was Theudas at the commencement of the Primitive Christian Church, “boasting himself to be somebody, to whom a number of men, about four hundred, joined themselves; who was slain, and all, as many as obeyed him, were scattered and brought to nought. After this man rose up Judas of Galilee, in the days of the taxing, and drew away much people after him: he also perished, and all, even as many as obeyed him, were dispersed,” Acts v. 36, 37. In like manner Simon the Sorcerer “bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one; to whom they all gave heed from the least to the greatest, saying, This man is the great power of God. {121} And to him they had regard, because that of long time he had bewitched them with sorceries,” Acts viii. 9 to 11. And such also, at the commencement of the New Jerusalem Church in our times, were the impostor Richard Brothers, and the false prophetess Joanna Southcott.*
* Many other names of persons of both sexes might be added, who have since that time laid claim to similar blasphemous and absurd pretensions.- ED.
With respect to Richard Brothers, who had previously been a midshipman in the Navy, and now set himself up for a great prophet, it may be recollected that he called himself the Prince of the Hebrews, and said that he was appointed to lead the Jews to their own country, and to re-instate them in the land of Judea, as the chosen people of God, to whom all nations were to become subservient and tributary. In proof of his authority for this purpose, he exhibited a rod, which he cut from a hedge by divine commandment, and which he declared was convertible into a serpent by his throwing it upon the ground, and again re-convertible into a rod by taking it up in his hand; in like manner as it is written of Moses, that “he cast his rod on the ground, and it became a serpent; and when he put forth his hand, and took it by the tail, it again became a rod in his hand,” Exod. iv. 2 to 4. And as this circumstance, coupled with the power of working miracles with the rod, was to be a sign to Pharaoh and the Egyptians, that Moses had received his authority from Jehovah, to be the leader of the Israelites out of the place of their captivity into the land of Canaan; so Richard Brothers most solemnly and publicly announced, that he also was, or would shortly be, invested with the power of working miracles with his rod, in order to convince the people at large, that he was divinely commissioned to restore the Israelites to their ancient inheritance, to wind up and fulfil all the prophecies in their favour, and thus to establish a new kingdom upon earth, in which God himself was to be the Sovereign Ruler, while he, Richard Brothers, was to be universally acknowledged as the Prince of the Hebrews, and at the same time as their great prophet, high-priest, and legislator.
The folly and madness of these pretensions could only be equalled by the fact, that many professing Christians were to be found, who, implicitly relying upon his word, and believing him to be “some great one,” as he said he was, actually made preparations to follow him as the leader of the Israelites into the land of Judea. And not merely by tens (as the prophet says, in a passage totally misunderstood,) did these zealots approach this self-called Prince of the Hebrews, but scores of proselytes* out of the various denominations were eager to “take hold of the skirt of him that” called himself “a Jew, saying, We will go with you; for we have heard that God is with you,” Zech. viii. 23. {122}
* Many of them in most respectable situations of life; among whom was Mr. Halked, M.P. for Lymington, who advocated Brothers’ claim in the House of Commons.- ED.
Brothers was particularly patronized by a Captain Hanchett, who, being desirous of bringing him into public notice, applied to me through his bookseller to print the pamphlet containing his prophecies and pretended revelations, offered to pay double or treble its value. But after examining the manuscript, and finding that it distinctly prophesied the death of the king, which I considered to be unlawful, and highly injurious to the welfare of society*, I declined being a party in any respect to such an abuse of the liberty of the press. The pamphlet was afterwards put into the hands of some other printer, who was less scrupulous on such an occasion.
* Brothers was arrested for treason in 1795.- ED.
Soon after this the Rev. Francis Leicester, A.B., of St. Peter’s College, Cambridge*, who had warmly embraced the doctrines of the New Jerusalem, and was disposed to examine every new pretension to supernatural communications, that he might in the end be more and more confirmed in the rational and scriptural views taken by the members of the New Church, expressed to me his desire to see and converse with this self-denominated Prince of the Hebrews, and begged that I would accompany him in a visit which he wished to pay him. I consented, though almost ashamed to have it known that I could spend one afternoon of a most glorious day, in the examination of a most vain and contemptible delusion. We went to Paddington**, the residence of the great Prince, who received us kindly enough, and entertained us with the particulars of his history, and an outline of the commission which he was enjoined to execute. In the course of conversation we requested, that he would be so kind as to shew us the Rod, wherewith he was to perform his mighty feats. After looking earnestly at us, he said, he thought he might safely entrust us not only with the sight, but also with the handling of it, which was a favour very sparingly bestowed upon visitors: for, as he informed us, two young men had sometime before called upon him, and begged to see his Rod; but by a careful inspection of their eyes he discovered, that one of them had formed the resolution of breaking it as soon as he should have it in his power, which indeed, on being taxed with such a design, he fairly acknowledged was his settled purpose, at the same time expressing his surprise and astonishment that his intention was so readily detected. {123} He then brought us the Rod from an adjoining room: it was about two feet and a half long, and appeared to be a common thorn. “Here,” says he, “this rod is the rod of God, the instrument and the emblem of that power, which will shortly astonish the world, cheer and protect the faithful, but at the same time strike terror and dismay, into unbelievers.” We smiled at the confidence, with which he delivered these and similar denunciations; and after some further conversation we left him.
* In 1788, Mr. Leicester published Two Sermons on Universal Restoration, or Salvation; but, on receiving the Doctrines of the New Church, he published a renunciation of his sentiments in that work, which appeared in the Magazine of Knowledge for 1790.- ED.
** He dated his Pamphlets from “57, Paddington Street,” and from “Fisher Mead-House, Islington.” They were printed by “Riebau, Strand;” who called himself, in the imprint to a collection of Pamphlets, “Bookseller to the King of the Hebrews.” 1798.- ED.
It must be acknowledged, that some of this man’s predictions, particularly those relating to the war, in which the King of Prussia was at that time engaged against France, were afterwards verified by the events. But whether this was a matter of mere guess-work, as is most probable, or the result of human sagacity, or any other species of knowledge, I do not pretend to say. The generality, however, of his predictions were notoriously false. He was at length, after agitating the public mind for a considerable time, confined in a mad-house by order of Government, but was released when Mr. Fox came into power.
As to Joanna Southcott, she appears to have been originally a servant girl in the west of England, who took it into her head that she was divinely commissioned to predict the failure of the harvests, and other natural calamities, that were to visit this kingdom about the time of the breaking out of the French Revolution, and afterwards. She also declared, that the future destinies of different nations were revealed to her by types, shadows, dreams, and visions; and that these were to terminate in the second coming of Christ, and the day of judgment at the expiration of seven thousand years from the creation of the world. Great part of her writings consists in an explanation of her dreams and visions, in language that assumes the form and character of doggrel poetry, and which in reality is the strangest medley of rhyme and nonsense that can be conceived. She gave a seal to her converts, which she said she was authorized to do, until the number of 144,000 was completed; and these were thereby to be assured of their final salvation.*
* She was born at Gittisham, in Devonshire, in 1750. She first declared herself to be the woman spoken of in the Revelation chap. xii. xxii., at Exeter, in 1792; she died on the 27th December, 1814, aged 64, and her body was interred in the burying ground of St. John’s Wood Chapel, London. A tablet is laid over her grave, surrounded by an iron railing; and at a distance of 26 feet, another tablet is erected against the wall, bearing the following inscription:-

“While through all thy wondrous days,
Heaven and earth enraptured gazed;
While vain sages think they know
Secrets, THOU ALONE canst show;
Time alone will tell what hour,
Thou’lt appear in greater power,”
“Behold, the time shall come, that these TOKENS which I have told THEE, shall come to pass, and the Bride shall appear; and SHE coming forth, shall be SEEN, that now is withdrawn from the earth.”-2 Esdras vii. 26.
“For the vision is yet for an appointed time, but at the end it shall speak, and not lie: though it tarry, wait for it, because it will surely come, it will not tarry.”- Habb. ii. 3.
“And whosoever is delivered from the aforesaid evils, shall see my wonders.”2 Esdras vii. 27.- ED. {124}

This is the woman, who for a season had so many admirers and proselytes, that she began to consider herself as the head of a numerous and permanent sect. At length she had the audacity to declare herself to be the very woman mentioned in the 12th chapter of the Revelation, who was seen by John in vision, clothed with the sun, having the moon under her feet, and on her head a crown of twelve stars, being about to bring forth a man-child, who is to rule all nations with a rod of iron. The Devil, she says, has his seat in the moon; and though some have simply enough talked of the Man in the moon, the spirit of divine inspiration revealed to her, that the Devil, as the prince of the air, has his particular abode in that planet; and that is the true reason, she says, why the moon was seen by John under the woman’s feet. As to the twelve stars, she asserts, that they are twelve chosen men, who were to strengthen her hands, and confirm her predictions. Lastly, she declares, that being herself with child by the Holy Ghost, she was to bring forth the man-child spoken of above, who was to be the promised Shiloh. In this ridiculous manner she attempted to explain various parts of Divine Revelation. But the last delusion at once put an end to all her pretensions: for dying before she was delivered of any child, and while she yet supposed herself to be pregnant, her body was opened by medical gentlemen, called in for the purpose, in the presence of some of her most sanguine and confident disciples; but no Shiloh was to be found, though anxiously looked for, nor any appearance of pregnancy in her case. The disappointment, as might naturally be expected, confounded and dispersed the greater part of her followers; but some obstinately persevered in maintaining her absurdities, and still continue her professed disciples to the present day, in different parts of the kingdom.
Such are the pretensions, which men in all ages, and sometimes women, have presumptuously made, in order to gain proselytes to their contemptible notions, and thus to counteract and render null those genuine, authentic, and beneficial revelations, which have from time to time been given to mankind, for the information and improvement of a degenerate race. When really divine miracles were performed by Moses before Pharaoh and his people, the magicians of Egypt stepped in, and endeavoured by their delusive arts, to neutralize the effects produced by the hands of Moses, the true servant of God. {125} And when even the Lord himself appeared on earth, and gave power to his disciples to cast out devils, to heal the sick, the lame, and the blind, and thereby to establish a New Church among the gentiles, separate and distinct from that of the Jews, – first a Theudas, then a Judas of Galilee, and afterwards Simon the Sorcerer, each boasting himself to be “some great one,” bewitched the people, causing them to believe “cunningly devised fables,” and to make light of the true faith, then beginning to enlighten and bless mankind. So, again, in our own times, when a new dispensation of divine truth was about to be ushered into the world, – first of all, George Bell*, a fanatic in the old Methodist connection, began to stultify and terrify the people by predicting the near approach of the end of the world, and the day of judgment. But the time fixed upon by him for this awful catastrophe having passed by without the slightest indication of any such convulsion of nature as he gave his hearers to expect, he soon fell into contempt, together with his idle but noisy prophecies. After him, when the doctrines of the New Church had made their appearance, there rose up other imposters, and among the rest Richard Brothers and Joanna Southcott, already spoken of, each of whom for a time gained a number of proselytes, until they also fell into equal contempt, both having proved themselves to be persons of unsound mind, and characters utterly unworthy of public regard.
* This George Bell was formerly a common soldier in the Guards, who, aspiring to the character of a prophet, fixed upon a certain day for the destruction of the world by fire. When the specified time arrived, the Methodists and many others in London, believing the prognostication, were in the utmost agitation and alarm during the whole of that day and the succeeding night. It is observed by Mr. Wesley, who relates the story in one of his Journals, that many thousands spent the day and night in the streets and at their doors, not daring to rest or close their eyes; while he himself, as if despising the danger, went to bed at his usual hour, and slept the whole of the night as sound as a top. The event not happening, as Bell had vainly and arrogantly predicted, he still continued, for a long series of years, to lay claim to a prophetic spirit, yet wisely, or at least cunningly, giving out, that by supplication and prayer he had prevailed on the Lord to suspend his judgments to a future day, when the calamity he had threatened would be certainly realized in all its fulness and terror.- I once had an interview with him at a gentleman’s house in Cornhill. He was then about eighty years of age, and apparently in good bodily health. He declared to me, that he spake by inspiration of the Holy Ghost, by whom all his words were dictated; that he never had been visited with any illness during the whole of his long life; and that in fact he should never die, as the rest of mankind did, who, he said, were fools to suffer themselves to be overtaken by any disease, or to submit so tamely as they did to the cruel stroke of death. On his assertion that he would never die, I remarked, that I supposed he must mean, that he would never die as to his spirit, but that he would live eternally in a future state of immortality as all other men did, after their departure from the world. To this he answered, “No, my meaning is, according to the plain and obvious sense of the words, that I shall never die even with respect to my body; for I am proof against all the assaults of the enemy, and shall never be afflicted with any of the complaints incident to human nature, much less with the calamity of death.” On this I rose up from my seat, and in a solemn manner pronounced sentence of death upon him, assuring him, that sooner or later he must of necessity go the way of all flesh. We then dropped the subject, and after conversing for a short time on in different subjects, I took my leave of him, but not before he made some indecent allusions to the female sex, which betrayed a state of mind very unfit for any thing like divine inspiration to which he had just before pretended.- A year or two after this conversation, I was informed of his death.- R. H. {126}
A Committee having been appointed by the last General Conference of the New Church, held in London, to transact whatever business might appear to them necessary for the further promotion and establishment of the same; and it having been judged proper to apply to Parliament for the same relief and religious toleration, which others of His Majesty’s subjects enjoy, whether they be Roman Catholics or Protestant Dissenters; a Petition to the above effect was drawn up by a professional gentleman, and presented by LORD RAWDON, (afterwards the EARL OF MOIRA, and the MARQUIS OF HASTINGS,) to the House of Peers, on Monday the 30th of May, 1791, in behalf of the New Church at large, of which the following is a copy.

“To the Right Honourable the Lords Spiritual and Temporal of Great Britain, in Parliament assembled.

“The humble Petition of Benjamin Banks, Junior, of Salisbury; Robert Hindmarsh of Clerkenwell, London; Thomas Wright, of the Poultry, London; Francis Leicester, of Spa Fields, London; Anthony Hunt, of Bristol; Samuel Hands, of Birmingham; and John Hoyle, junior, of Halifax, Members of the New Church, called the New Jerusalem, for themselves, and in Behalf of the other Members of the said Church;
“Sheweth,
“That your Lordships’ Petitioners having embraced the heavenly doctrines of the New Jerusalem, as published by the late Honourable Emanuel Swedenborg, which they believe to be an authentic and true explanation of the Holy Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, and finding that they cannot conscientiously make and Subscribe the declaration required by the l9th of His present Majesty, to be subscribed by His Majesty’s Protestant subjects, dissenting from the Church of England, in order to obtain to their Ministers, Teachers, and themselves, the protection of the laws of Toleration: And your Lordships’ Petitioners having a further difficulty in certifying their places of public worship agreeable to the terms of the said laws, for the purpose of having the same registered as places of public worship: And your Lordships’ Petitioners being loyally and affectionately attached to His Majesty’s Royal Person, Family, and Government, and being ready to prove their loyalty and attachment by taking the oaths of allegiance and supremacy, and by subscribing a declaration against Popery: And your Lordships’ Petitioners being desirous to provide for the religious education of their children, for the support of their poor, and for the useful employment of other members of the said Church:
“Your Lordships’ Petitioners therefore humbly pray for leave to bring in a Bill, to allow the Ministers, Teachers, and others of the said New Church, to perform all the duties, offices, and ceremonies of religion within the realm, and in the colonies and dependencies of Great Britain, upon the condition of their taking an oath of their true allegiance to His Majesty King George, and subscribing a declaration against Popery, and of their being Christians and Members of the said New Jerusalem; and to allow them to certify their places of public worship as such, without being required to describe themselves as Protestants or Dissenters: And to incorporate certain Members of the said Church, to enable them to contribute to the common stock of such institutions, as may be necessary for the religious education of their children, and for the employment and maintenance of their poor, without being answerable for any greater sums than they may severally advance into such common stock; and for such other purposes as shall be set forth in the said Bill, and as to the wisdom of Parliament shall seem meet.
“And your Petitioners shall ever pray, &c.

(Signed)    BENJAMIN BANKS, Jun.
ROBERT HINDMARSH.
THOMAS WRIGHT.
FRANCIS LEICESTER.
ANTHONY HUNT.
SAMUEL HANDS.
JOHN HOYLE, Jun,” {127}

At the time of presenting the above Petition, (it being too late in the Session to proceed with the Bill,) Lord Rawdon informed the House, that he had recommended to the Petitioners to print the Heads of their intended Bill, and not to proceed in it till the next Session of Parliament, which advice the petitioners had adopted.
In the mean time the Bill was prepared; but no further steps were taken in the endeavour to bring it to a successful issue. The law, it appears, which was considered so obnoxious to the members of the New Church, was afterwards repealed; and it is now generally thought, that in consequence of that measure, and the late repeal of the Test and Corporation Acts, no other concession from the Government is required, than liberty to perform the ceremony of Marriage*, without being, as at present, under the necessity of complying with the forms of the Established Church.
* This liberty was granted, by the New Marriage Act, passed 1837.- ED.
During the time of this application to Parliament, the Committee had frequently occasion to wait upon Lord Rawdon, whose friendship and urbanity of manners were honourable to his station in life, to consult with his Lordship on the steps proper to be taken in forwarding their views. At one of these interviews his Lordship informed us, that he had spoken with some of the Bishops, and with the Lord Chancellor Thurlow, on the nature of our application. The Bishops, he stated, were much opposed to us, particularly the Bishop of Durham*, who asserted, that Swedenborg and his followers denied the Divinity of Jesus Christ! and that therefore we were not entitled to those privileges, which we sought to obtain. By what strange misapprehension of the tenets of the New Church the Bishop could have arrived at this conclusion, it is indeed most difficult to conceive; since no writer ever appeared in the Christian world, who more plainly and clearly maintained the Divinity of the Saviour, than Swedenborg. Nay, so far was he from justly incurring the charge brought against him by the Bishop, that it may with truth be said, no writer before him ever attempted to place the doctrine in its only proper, its only consistent point of view, and to demonstrate from the Sacred Scriptures, as Swedenborg has done in the most ample and satisfactory manner, that the Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is himself the One Only God of heaven and earth, consequently that He alone is possessed of Sole, Supreme, and Exclusive Divinity. Had the Bishop designedly turned his back to heaven, and in that posture heard a voice from behind him proclaiming aloud in his ears, that Jesus Christ was God, and God alone, he could not more palpably and effectually have perverted the sentiment so uttered into its direct opposite, by declaring, that the voice expressly denied the Divinity of Jesus Christ, than he has done in his charge against Swedenborg and his followers. {128} Lord Rawdon was not sufficiently acquainted with the tenets of the New Church to undeceive the Bishop; but his Lordship was furnished with such books, as were likely to give the necessary information. The Lord Chancellor Thurlow**, unlike the Bishop, acted upon the most liberal principles towards the New Church, and in all the conversations on the subject of our application to Parliament, his Lordship expressed himself decidedly in favour of our claims. From the different conduct of the Lord Chancellor, who may in this case be considered as a Representative of the State, and the Bishop of Durham, who may well pass for a Representative of the Church, we may fairly draw this conclusion, that the former, viz., the State, to which we most willingly profess attachment and allegiance, is more disposed to listen to and redress the grievances of the people, than the latter, or the Church, to which we owe neither attachment nor allegiance; because, though many apparently excellent things are to be found in its rituals and services, it is yet, as a Church, founded on principles plainly repugnant to Divine Revelation, and therefore in its tendencies and effects injurious to the well-being and true happiness of human society.
* Dr. W. Van Mildert, the grandson of a Dutch merchant settled in London. He was a distinguished theologian. He died in 1836.- ED.
** Edward Lord Thurlow, retired from the office of Lord Chancellor, in 1792, and died in 1806. He appears to have been a great favourite with the Royal Family- ED.
A new Temple having been erected about this time in Birmingham, for the use of the New Church, (being the first of the kind erected in England, or in any part of the world,) it was opened and consecrated on Sunday the 19th of June, 1791, by the Rev. Joseph Proud, who, after being a respectable Minister for many years in the connexion of General Baptists*, had now for some considerable time been a zealous advocate for the cause of the New Jerusalem. Divine service was performed three times on that day, and each time the place was crowded to excess. Mr. Proud preached in the morning; Mr. James Hindmarsh in the afternoon; and Mr. Proud again in the evening; both Ministers officiating in the robes, which were prescribed by the preceding General Conference. I was myself present on the occasion, and can bear witness to the extraordinary sensation that was produced by this first public annunciation of the new doctrines in that town. Professors of all denominations were assembled, excited either by curiosity to hear something new and strange, or by the more praise- worthy desire of being made acquainted with the great truths of the new dispensation. {129} Among the rest, the celebrated Dr. Priestley was an attentive bearer, who afterwards expressed his surprize, and indeed satisfaction, at the proceedings of the day. He was invited to tea by Mr. Samuel Hands, an active and zealous member of the Church, at whose house a number of friends were assembled to give the Doctor a meeting.
* See Memoir by the Rev. E. Madeley, prefixed to the revised edition of Proud’s “Last Legacy.”- ED.
He came the next day in the afternoon, when a most interesting conversation took place on the doctrines of the New Church. He acknowledged, that he was altogether ignorant of the existence of such a body of Christians as he found us to be; and was particularly pleased with the arguments he had heard advanced in favour of the Divine Unity, in opposition to the idea generally entertained of the Divine Trinity. But he was much puzzled, and perfectly astonished, to find that we maintained the Sole and Exclusive Divinity of Jesus Christ; imagining, at first, that it was impossible for any set of Christians, who believe in the absolute Unity of the Divine Being, and rejected the unscriptural notion of Tripersonality, as we did, still to ascribe to the Saviour of the world the undivided Majesty of the whole Godhead. This, he said, was a doctrine altogether new to him, and in his judgment incompatible with the many declarations to be found in the Apostolical Writings, and the general tenour of Divine Revelation. Seeing, however, that we appeared to be reasonable men, and that we cited the authority of scripture in support of our views, he admitted that we were entitled to a candid hearing, and expressed his intention of examining the Writings of Swedenborg, from which we professed to have derived our information on the subject.
After much agreeable discourse on this and other topics relating to the peculiar doctrines of the New Church, against some of which he could scarcely raise an objection, the conversation turned to subjects of a lighter character. Anecdotes, of which the Doctor possessed a rich fund, amused and enlivened the company. One, however, of a complexion calculated to excite painful emotions rather than entertainment, I can never forget. It was indeed of a very extraordinary nature, and tended to shew to what excess of folly and fanaticism the human mind is capable of being carried by false principles and persuasions, under the pretence of religion, if the term religion can for a moment be allowed to mix with such wickedness, as the event about to be related discloses.
The Doctor began by stating, that the Government of the United States of America, in their zeal to prove their love of religious toleration, at one time provided a building as a place of worship for any new sect that might start up, to give them an opportunity of gaining proselytes to their cause. They were gratuitously allowed the use of this building for one whole year; in which time, it was thought, if their religious opinions were at all worthy of countenance or support, they would be sure to obtain as many converts to their doctrines, and as much pecuniary assistance from their friends, as would enable them to secure their continuance as a body in some other place of worship, to be afterwards provided by themselves. {130} This was in Philadelphia, the capital of Pennsylvania. It so happened, that a wild fanatic, with a few adherents as wild as himself, claimed the use of this Chapel, to try their luck in raising a Society, as other adventurers had done before them. It was one of the leading doctrines of this sect, “That whoever died suddenly, no matter by what means, whether by the visitation of God, by accident, by the unjust violence of another, by his own hands, or by the hands of the executioner, such a one was sure of his final salvation, and a joyful entrance into the kingdom of heaven hereafter.” Strange as this doctrine may appear to be, the delusion wrought most powerfully and unfortunately on the mind of one individual of this dangerous Society. Being determined to secure his own salvation against the mischances and uncertainties of a protracted life, and at the same time willing in his kindness to confer a similar boon on some other of his fellow-creatures, he sallied out of his house one morning into the street of the city, with his gun loaded and primed, fully intending to kill the first individual he should meet. The person, whose fortune it was to be passing by at the moment, was a Quaker, who immediately, and before the other had time to present his piece, accosted him in a cheerful and friendly manner, saying, “Good morning, my friend: I hope thou art well.” This salutation struck the fanatic as something uncommon, or unexpected, as coming from a stranger, and a Quaker too. He therefore paused a moment, and ruminated on the singularity of the occurrence; while in the mean time the Quaker, little suspecting the danger of his situation, passed nimbly on, and escaped the sudden death, which was intended to prove his sudden salvation. Not so the poor unfortunate man, who next came in the way of the fanatic: for as soon as he came up to him, he levelled his gun, and shot him dead upon the spot.
Immediately an alarm was given, and the culprit was seized. Being asked if he knew what he had done, and why he had perpetrated such an atrocious act upon a passenger in the street, without provocation, and indeed without a word passing between them? (for the crime was witnessed by more than one;) he calmly replied, that he was perfectly aware of what he had done; he had committed murder, and was willing to abide the consequences. He was of course taken to prison, and in due time tried, convicted by his own confession, as well as by the testimony of others, and afterwards executed. {131}
The American Government now perceived its error in Keeping a place open for the indiscriminate occupation of all sorts of adventurers, and thus holding out encouragement as it were to the inventors and propagators of every species of fanatical, phantastical, and diabolical whims, that might eventually endanger the peace of society. The place of worship was therefore immediately closed, and the custom of lending it to strangers abolished.
This anecdote, which Dr. Priestley related to the company as a matter of fact, he declared he had from the mouth of the celebrated Dr. Franklin.
Soon afterwards, in the same year, 1791, the riots took place at Birmingham, where Dr. Priestley resided; and as his political sentiments were deemed inimical to the Government and Constitution of this country, his house, library, and valuable scientific apparatus were destroyed by the mob, while he himself narrowly escaped from their fury.* It appears, that he had prepared for the Press a pamphlet, entitled, “Letters to the Members of the New Jerusalem Church**,” which he was on the point of sending to the Printer, at the very time when the rioters besieged his house. This Manuscript was destroyed with the rest of his papers: but as he was still desirous publishing his thoughts on the doctrines of the New Church, he came to the resolution of writing his Letters over again. For this purpose, being in London, he applied to me for the loan of such books of Emanuel Swedenborg, and others, as he conceived were necessary to assist him in the undertaking. I readily promised to furnish him with any he might require, not in the least doubting but some good would result to the Church hereafter, in consequence of the notice he might take of Swedenborg’s Writings, whatever might be their effect upon his mind, or whatever complexion his promised Letters to the Members of the New Church might wear.
* The houses of several of the leading Unitarians, and both their places of worship, were also destroyed. The New Jerusalem Church had a narrow escape; but a collection having been made the day before, the minister, who lived next door, with great presence of mind, threw the money among the mob, informing them, in a brief but energetic address, that the minister and worshipers were not Unitarians, nor inimical to the Government. A shout was raised, – the New Jerusalem for ever, and the mob dispersed.- ED.
** Hindmarsh’s Letters in reply to this celebrated production of Dr. Priestley, have rendered the name of the latter familiar to the receivers of the New Church Writings. Dr. P. died in America, in 1804. Letters in reply to the Dr. were also published by Proud, Spence, and others.- ED.
In his visit to me, the Doctor was accompanied by his friend Dr. Towers, a celebrated Dissenting Minister of his day, who resided in my neighbourhood.* {132} After a good deal of conversation on the character of Swedenborg, and the extra ordinary nature of his Writings, Dr. Priestley jocosely observed, that, in sitting down to write a refutation of Swedenborg’s doctrines, he might possibly, after reading and digesting them, rise up a convert to them, as he understood some others had been known to do under similar circumstances. “No, Sir,-” I replied; “I fear this will not be your case, for the following reasons. 1. Because you have already, by your numerous writings on Theology, committed yourself as the head of a party, as a kind of champion, to whom others now look up both for argument and for authority. And, 2. Because your peculiar sentiments have, in all probability, gained a fixed form and permanent habitation, not only in your mind, but what is still more, in every part of your body, even to your tongue, your hands, and your fingers. For such I considered the principles of a man’s life to be, that whatever of affection and of thought was deliberately confirmed by him, it became as it were a second nature in him, disposing the very organs of his speech and the movements of his hands to a facility of speaking and writing, in all respects as if the mind itself were seated in the very material substances of the body.” The Doctor and his companion looked at each other, and smiled, but did not attempt to deny the conclusion. After this and some other friendly conversation, they departed; the Doctor observing, that he would make out a list of such books as he wanted, and would shortly send to me for them.
* He resided at this time in Warner Street, Clerkenwell. He was originally a printer. He became a preacher among the Dissenters, and the degree of LL.D. was conferred on him by the University of Edinburgh. He died in 1799.- ED.
It may perhaps gratify some readers to see the purport of the Doctor’s various Notes or Letters to me on that occasion: these I copy from the originals, which have been in my possession ever since they were written. They are as follows.

No. I.

“Dr. Priestley presents his compliments to Mr. Hindmarsh, and will be much obliged to him if he will lend him Swedenborg’s Universal Theology, his Account of the Last Judgment, the Magazine [of Knowledge, &c.] No. 6, and the Proceedings of the Conferences. He had ordered the first, and had borrowed the last of Mr. Hands at Birmingham, and does not yet know whether any of them be preserved in the wreck of his library.
“If any of the books be in the least damaged, Dr. Priestley will be ready to take them, and pay for them.”
“No. 72, St. Paul’s, Aug. 24, 1791.”

These books were immediately sent to the Doctor, at Mr. Johnson’s, Bookseller, No. 72, St. Paul’s Church Yard.

No. II.

Dr. Priestley presents his compliments to Mr. Hindmarsh, and will be much obliged to him, if, to the books he has already favoured him with, he will add Mr. Swedenborg on the Different Earths, and the Doctrine concerning the Lord.”
Aug. 25, 1791.”

The whole of the books sent to Dr. Priestley, at different times, were the following:

1. True Christian Religion, containing the Universal Theology of the New Church.
2. The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem concerning the Sacred Scripture. {133}

3. A Treatise concerning the Last Judgment, and the Destruction of Babylon.
4. A Continuation concerning the Last Judgment, and the Spiritual World.
5. The Magazine of Knowledge concerning Heaven and Hell, &c.
6. Minutes of Conference for 1789, 1790, and 1791.
7. A Short Account of the Hon. Emanuel Swedenborg, and of his Writings.
8. A Treatise concerning the Earths in the Universe; with an Account of their Inhabitants.
9. The Doctrine of the New Jerusalem concerning the Lord.”

No. III.

“Dr. Priestley presents his compliments to Mr. Hindmarsh, is much obliged to him for the use of the books which he returns, and keeps the Accounts of the Conferences, and the Short Account of E. Swedenborg, for which Mr. Johnson will pay him.
” His Letters to the Members of the New Jerusalem Church are in the Press, and he will beg Mr. Hindmarsh’s acceptance of a copy, as soon as they are printed.”
“No. 72, St. Paul’s, Monday, Sept. 1791.”

In a few weeks after the date of the last Note, the Doctor published his Letters, and presented me with a copy of them. Hereupon a Meeting of the Society in London was called, to take into consideration the propriety of giving him a public Answer; and it being their unanimous request, that I would prepare such Answer, I thought it my duty to comply; though from the press of business, in which I was then engaged, (as Editor and Compiler of six periodical publications, besides correcting the Press for them all, and for various other works which I was employed to print,) no opportunity offered for writing, except on an evening, or at night, when the regular business of the day was concluded. Notwithstanding these daily interruptions, I proceeded with the work; and in a Letter to Dr. Priestley I informed him, that at the request of the members of the New Church in London, I was preparing an Answer to his Letters. In the meantime Mr. Proud brought out a shorter Answer in a small pamphlet, which is noticed by the Doctor in the following Letter to me.

No. IV.

“Sir,
“Your former Letter being inclosed in the parcel with the books you were so obliging as to present me with, I have only just received it, along with other parcels for me, which Mr. Johnson did not send till I was got into my present habitation. I thank you for that, and the other pieces I meant to have purchased, and shall be glad to see your Answer to my Letters at your own convenience. I have not seen Mr. Proud’s, though I hear they are published. If I reply at all, it will hardly be before I have seen yours; and for that purpose I may have occasion to trouble you again for the loan of some of the Baron’s Writings. I have no doubt, that both you and Mr. Proud will write like Christians, and lovers of truth; and in this controversy what is usually called scholarship has little to do.

“I am, Sir, yours sincerely

“Clapton, Nov. 18, 1791.”            J. PRIESTLEY.”

In the course of a few weeks from this time, my Answer appeared, under the title of Letters to Dr. Priestley, &c., a copy of which was immediately forwarded to the Doctor, in return for the copy of his Letters, which he had the kindness to send me. After this, a twelvemonth or more elapsed, without my seeing or hearing anything from him. {134} At last, the Rev. Francis Leicester, (of whom mention has already been made in this History, p. 109, 122), finding that Dr. Priestley was making preparations to leave England for America, requested that I would pay a visit to the Doctor, then residing at Clapton, for the purpose of inquiring of him when we might expect his Reply to my Letters, which he had so long ago given us reason to calculate upon. Mr. Leicester offered to accompany me: and we accordingly waited upon him on a Sunday, in the Vestry of the Unitarian Chapel, Hackney, immediately after the morning service. At first the Doctor affected not to know me, which indeed might possibly have been the case, as he had not seen me for a considerable time. But he also affected a total ignorance of the nature of my business with him, even after I had explained it to him. And he actually put me upon the necessity of expostulating with him on the apparent loss of his memory; although he was evidently in perfect health of body. I was, however, determined not to give up the object of my visit, without another effort to rouse his slumbering powers of memory; and I at last succeeded in eliciting from him distinct answers to the following questions: “Do you not remember, sir, that you lately published Letters to the Members of the New Jerusalem Church; and that you sent me a copy of them?” “Yes, I do.” – “And do you not also remember, that I published Letters to you in answer; and that you received a copy of them from me, after having expressed a desire to see them, and intimating your intention of going on with the controversy?” “I recollect the circumstances now very well.” – “Then, Sir, the purport of my visit to you this morning is, to know when we may expect your long-promised Reply; or whether we are to look for it at all, or not. And the only reason of my troubling you with these questions is, that I may have it in my power to satisfy those who repeatedly make their inquiries of me.” Here the Doctor’s countenance began to brighten up, and having now perfectly recovered his memory, he answered to the following effect: “I well remember, that both you and Mr. Proud addressed me on the subject mentioned. I have of late been very much engaged: but it is my full intention, if I should publish a second edition of my Letters, to answer you both together in an Appendix, which I shall then add to those Letters.” The conversation ended here; and we took our leave of the Doctor, wishing him health and happiness.
Soon after this, the Doctor went over to America, where he lived many years, continuing to write on other subjects, but never once opening his mouth, or handling his pen, in opposition to the doctrines of the New Jerusalem; although it has been said, that in every other matter of controversy, in which he once engaged, the last word was with him. He died Feb. 6, 1804, in the 71st year of his age. {135}

It is to the credit of Dr. Priestley, that, unlike many of the opponents of Emanuel Swedenborg and his doctrines, he never attempted to calumniate his memory, by charging him with madness, or a wilful design to mislead and deceive his readers; nor did he ever represent those, who sincerely believed his testimony, as a set of weak and bigotted enthusiasts, prepared to countenance every idle tale that the ingenuity of an impostor could invent. On the contrary, he considered the members of the New Church, with several of whom he had opportunities of conversing, as fairly entitled to the respect of the public, and as well qualified to judge of the reasonableness of an argument, drawn from Scripture or from common sense, as any other individuals to be met with in the field of rational investigation. And if, upon trial, he found that he could make no more impression on them, than they in their turn could on him, he was content to allow to other; what he claimed for himself, – full liberty to pursue the convictions of their own minds, without calling in question their sincerity or integrity. But widely different has been the conduct of the greatest number of our adversaries, some of whom openly display their banners by boldly announcing their names, and the sect to which they belong*; while others slily and secretly attack us in ambuscade, by their anonymous efforts to bring us into contempt. {136} Of this latter description is the following communication sent me by Post, soon after the publication of my Letters to Dr. Priestley, which I here insert, not so much on account of myself being the individual to whom it was addressed, as to shew the malignant character of those underhanded assaults, which have been so repeatedly made against the members of the New Church at large.
* Among these was the late Rev. Cornelius Bayley, D.D., of St. James’s Church, Manchester, a man, it must be acknowledged, of exemplary piety and zeal in the cause of religion; a character which he had obtained while among the Wesleyan Methodists, long before he was ordained in the Established Church, and which he retained ever after. He was well versed in the learned languages, and published a Hebrew Grammar, which I printed for him in the year 1782. Being intimately acquainted with him in the early part of his life, and having acquired from him in my youth a knowledge of the Hebrew myself, I had many opportunities of conversing with him on literary, philosophical, and theological subjects. But I must confess, that, though I always found him to be a most upright and conscientious man, I could never discover in him any traits of a strong and vigorous mind, elevated above the vulgar apprehensions of the literal sense of the Word, and the fallacious appearances presented by many of the objects in nature. For example: he disputed the diurnal motion of the earth round its own axis, as well as its annual motion round the sun; maintaining that the sun, together with the stars, rose and set every day according to the appearance, having this small globe of earth for the real center of their revolutions. And this view of the subject he would confirm by an appeal to the authority of the Scriptures, which frequently allude to the motion of the sun, but never to that of the earth. Joshua, he would say, bade the sun and moon stand still, not the earth, Jos. x. 12: and it was the shadow of the sun, not the earth, that returned backward ten degrees, by which it had gone down in the dial of Ahaz, 2 Kings xx. 10, 11. With this kind of language he was perfectly satisfied, and would not listen to the reasonings of philosophers and infidels, which, he said, tended to a denial of the Bible. “Besides,” said he, “if the earth moves, and not the sun, how is it that we do not feel the motion? Wherefore the want of this sensible evidence is sufficient to render the whole hypothesis doubtful and improbable.” In this way Dr. Bayley argued with me on the subject of the earth’s motion; and though I observed, in reply, that it was no more reasonable to expect, that men should be sensible of the motion of the earth, than that mites should feel the motion of an old Cheshire cheese when carried across the room, he still persevered in treating the whole cue as a matter of great doubt and uncertainty; thus evidently leaning to the vulgar belief, that the sun’s apparent motion is also its real and true motion. Yet this gentleman was one of the avowed opponents of the New Church; and it is for the purpose of shewing what kind of adversary it had in him, that the preceding anecdote is related.
But I have not done with him yet. The same Dr. Bayley, on another occasion, stated to me, that, in his opinion, a knowledge of the Hebrew language, acquired in this life, would be a good introduction among the angels of heaven in another life; because, said he, it being the language in which God himself spake to the prophets of old, it must of course be the language of angels in heaven, and they who could speak that language with the greatest facility, or who could pass as good Hebrew scholars, after due trial and examination, would hereafter be the best qualified to understand, and to join in, the beauties and sublimities of angelic conversation! – The vanity and delusion of such a notion as this, will scarcely bear a remark. Were it true, it would indeed be thought good news to some few of the bearded Israelites, but heavy tidings to the poor, the illiterate, and, in short, to the great mass of mankind. Yet Dr. Bayley, who could countenance and indulge such idle conceits, had the temerity to call in question the rational and scriptural views of heavenly things, which Swedenborg has so ably laid down in his voluminous writings. Many years ago he published a Sermon on the Divine Trinity, in which he took occasion to argue the point in favour of a Trinity of Persons, in opposition to a Trinity of Essentials in One Person; and he concluded his observations with a pious wish, that “the waters of strife might be quenched in the fire of divine love!” But how water, was to be quenched in fire, instead of fire with water, he did not inform the reader. Dr. Cornelius Bayley was the Clergyman alluded to in my Letters to Dr. Priestley, p. 357, first edition, who, “after writing pretty freely against the doctrines of the New Church, candidly confessed to me, that he did not understand what Swedenborg meant by the three terms, celestial, spiritual, and natural!”- R. H. {137}
(Dr. Bayley was the founder of St. James’s Church. He published his Sermon on Gal. iv. 6, in 1784. It was preached on Trinity Sunday at Hayfield. In Derbyshire. Immediately afterwards appeared a pamphlet entitled, The Scripture Doctrine of the Trinity Vindicated according to the Principles of the Illuminated Emanuel Swedenborg. With Remarks upon the Sermon. In reply, Dr. Bayley published in 1785, at Warrington, his Swedenborgian Doctrine Considered, pp. 91; in which he makes a great parade of learning, and logic to no purpose, in support of Tripersonalism.- ED.)

“Copy of a Letter received by Post, from an Unknown Hand, in the year 1792.

“Mr. R. Hindmarsh,        “Kidderminster, June 28, 1792.
“Sir,
“In Swinney’s Chronicle of this day, I have read and perused your pompous and wicked advertisement, under the title of Letters to Dr. Priestley. I must be laconic on the occasion. You yourself, and Counsellor Parker, (who I believe has had a hand in these Letters,) are under as great, melancholy, and awful a delusion, as Dr. Priestley is; yea, more so; for Dr. Priestley, with all his awful extravagance, has too much understanding to suffer his mind to be carried away with the reveries of a Swedenborg; and yet this Madman, (namely Swedenborg,) and his foolish and vain Writings, are by you, and such wicked men as you, (for you should know better, and must know better, for your father was one of Mr. Wesley’s preachers; but I am afraid that worldly interest has led you aside,) set in opposition to the blessed Scripture. You would, by your vain and false philosophy, set up yourselves as men of consequence: but God knoweth, that real Christian experience, and the root of the manner [matter] is not in you. Against the glorious gospel of Jesus, You set up Swedenborg and yourselves; and under the cloak of opposing Dr. Priestley, (who by the by is a far more excellent character, and more sensible man, than E. Swedenborg was, or any of you are,) endeavour to introduce a new gospel. Eternal ruin and condemnation awaits you: you are now under the curse of GOD; and will be damned, unless you fly with broken heart unto the blessed JESUS, and receive pardon from God through his blood and righteousness: and if your heart is ever changed, you will retract your wicked writings, which are so repugnant to the holy gospel of my Lord. {137} And know, Mr. Hindmarsh, that he who writes this letter, could have wrote it far more accurately, had he thought proper. As a proof of this, he takes the liberty of giving you a specimen of accurate writing on the other page, not by way of exalting myself, but to convince you, that all wisdom and understanding is not absolutely hid from those who dare to oppose you.
“I find not the name of Swedenborg in all my Bible: but this I find, That if harlots, thieves, publicans, and sinners, or even the quondam followers of Swedenborg, go as lost, undone, and condemned criminals, to JESUS CHRIST, and believe on him, they shall be eternally saved. This is gospel: and any thing in opposition to it, is nothing more than the doctrine of devils.
“From one who wishes your repentance, and to see your retraction of such abominable writings as you at present exhibit.
“Amicus.
“Look at your 4th Article, [query 13th] under LETTER THE THIRD, concerning Charity. You here lead one to think, that your brains are turned, and are absolutely in the same predicament that your false Apostle was; that is to say, MAD!
“Mr. Paine might condescend to notice the furious rhapsodies of EDMUND BURKE; but I’ll be bold to assert, that he will never, never mind the more unmeaning fooleries of Mr. HINDMARSH.

“The Specimen I spoke of.

“The glorious APPROACH of the SAVIOUR’s KINGDOM.

“SHOUT, all ye nations, at the dawning ray
Of bright Salvation’s long-expected day.
Ye favour’d climes, its grateful steps invite,
And bid your kingdoms drink the golden light.
O’er ev’ry realm* it gleams: great Salem, see
A richer glory bursting upon thee.
Rejoice, ye distant isles, and gentile lands;
And thou, O Afric, clap thy sable hands.
O pour th’ applause, ye empires, now arise,
And with your voices shake the pearly skies.
For lo! his orb o’er earth MESSIAH rears,
Illustrious as the GOD of gods appears.
Wide as the world, th’ enliv’ning radiance streams,
Imparting free its salutary beams.
Death flies before it, with his ghastly train,
And Falsehood shuns its truth-displaying reign:
While, by it heal’d, the blind pursue their way;
Their eye-lids ope, and catch immortal day.”
* Isaiah lii. 10.

“Dr. Priestley is a false apostle, and so was that filthy dreamer, Swedenborg. Both, in their writings, are as opposite to the blessed gospel of JESUS, as GOD is to the Prince of the bottomless pit. Your Publication seems to me to be a mere Catch-penny. Pray, don’t affect to imitate HOGG in the Row, i.
e., publish any thing to get a groat by.”

From the tone and spirit of the preceding Letter, (apart from the lines of Poetry, which are certainly worthy of a better pen, if indeed they are the production of this anonymous writer), it is pretty evident, that it is the offspring of some zealous, hot- headed professor of religion, probably a Methodist, who, having consulted Mr. Wesley’s Arminian Magazine, for suitable epithets to bestow upon Swedenborg, is liberal enough in applying them both to him and his admirers; while at the same time he seems to entertain a very high opinion of his own abilities. But all such assaults, however frequently repeated, uniformly prove impotent, and fail of their intended effect. They are like “the floods of water issuing out of the mouth of the serpent, and directed against the woman in the Revelation, to cause her to be carried away by the flood.” {138} Yet we read, that “the earth helped the woman, and opened her mouth, and swallowed up the flood which the dragon cast out of his mouth. Then was the dragon wroth with the woman, and went to make war with the remnant of her seed, which keep the commandments of God, and have the testimony of Jesus Christ.” Rev. xii. 15 to 17.

On Sunday, the 16th of October, 1791, a place of worship for the New Church was opened in Liverpool, by Mr. Ralph Mather. The interest excited in the town by the novelty of the doctrines preached, as well as by the superb dress which Mr. Mather wore in the pulpit, was so great, that it was found impossible to accommodate with seats the crowds that attended. Weekly meetings were also established on Tuesdays, when the works of Emanuel Swedenborg were publicly read and explained. But it does not appear, that the Church was as yet likely to obtain a permanent footing in that populous town. The excentricity of the preacher, and various other causes, combined rather to retard than to promote the successful establishment of a New Church Society, the members of which were for a considerable time divided amongst themselves on certain points of doctrine, which, it is supposed, were not rightly understood by some who took an active part in their propagation. The consequence was, that some time after Mr. Mather’s removal to America, the Society divided itself into different parties, each vying with the other in zeal to maintain their respective opinions, until by experience and a returning spirit of conciliation, they found it their interest to unite together as one body, for the promotion of one common cause. In Liverpool the Church has fluctuated more than in any other part of the kingdom, unless indeed we except Bristol, where the members have in like manner, for some years, been alternately in a state of union and of disunion, arising from circumstances, which could neither be foreseen, nor perhaps prevented. Yet there is now good reason to hope and believe, from present appearances, that in both the places above- mentioned, as well as in some others, where similar inconveniences have arisen, the difficulties, which the Church has had to contend with, are no longer felt.*
* In Liverpool, a School-room was at first licensed in Lancelot’s Hey. The elegant Chapel in Key Street was taken in 1791, where Mr. Mather was ordained by his congregation. On his removal to America, he was succeeded by the Rev. W. Hill, then a young man of considerable talents, who afterwards translated the Apocalypse Explained. In 1792, this chapel was relinquished for a room in Marble Street, and the worship was conducted for only a short time by Messrs. Leadbeater and Walker. The external Church at Liverpool has passed through many vicissitudes. Originally its prospects were very encouraging; and it seems that there is some hope of its recovering itself. There are now two societies in this populous town, one of which has been long in existence under the leadership of Mr. R. G. Sheldon; and the other, whose place of worship has been recently erected, is, at present supplied by Missionaries. They are both in the Conference connexion.
At Bristol there is also a Society again in existence, and in the Conference connexion. The original New Jerusalem Temple was opened at Bristol in June 1792; and the Rev. Robert Brant was for some time the Minister.-ED. {139}
The Magazine of Knowledge, &c., having been discontinued after October, 1791, that work was succeeded by another, entitled The New Jerusalem Journal. This latter was comprised in Ten Monthly Numbers at sixpence each; the first of which was published in January, 1792, and the last in October in the same year. Having printed this and some other publications at my own expense, without meeting with sufficient encouragement to proceed, I contented myself for a time with the reflection that some good had been produced in society by these humble efforts, to spread the knowledge of divine truth in a dark world; still looking forward with hope to the day, when more able and more successful labourers in the same glorious cause, would be raised up by the Divine Providence of the Lord, to extend the territory of the New Jerusalem, to build up its “jasper” walls, and to “bring the glory and honour of the nations into it.” (Rev. xxii. 26.)
About this time, I received a letter from Halifax, in Nova Scotia, containing an account of the first opening of a place for the separate worship of the members of the New Church in that town, agreeably to the recommendation of the First General Conference, held in Great East Cheap, London, in the year 1789. The following is a copy of that letter.

“Halifax, N. Scotia, Nov. 19, 17 9 1.
“Sir,
“Agreeable to your 30th Resolve of Conference, held in Great East Cheap, 1789, we have separated ourselves from the Old Church by fully embracing the doctrines of the New Jerusalem Church, as now first organized by you. We therefore, though small in number, wish to hold a correspondence with your Society, as it will serve to strengthen and excite us to pursue, with more order, those pure revealed truths contained in the Writings of the Honourable Emanuel Swedenborg. We know it will afford you pleasure to bear what progress the Church is making in any part of the world; and we therefore shall now inform you, that we have for more than six years met together for the sake of reading, and conversing on, the subjects unfolded in the important Writings of Emanuel Swedenborg: and since the publication of your Liturgy for the New Church, we have in every respect conformed thereto in public worship, and read some part or other of the Theology, forenoon and afternoon, every Sabbath-day. We likewise meet every Friday evening, for the further improving ourselves in the knowledge of the said truths, with psalmody and Christian conversation. Also, agreeable to the 22nd Resolve, we have formed ourselves by Baptism into a Church, and have since baptized our children, and thus hope to increase by degrees. We shall be very glad to receive any further instructions, which you may think necessary and useful for us.
“I conclude with sincerely wishing to hear a great increase to the New Church, and am, in behalf of the Society,
“Your very obedient and humble Servant,
“JOSEPH RUSSELL.”

This was one of the first Societies in North America, that instituted public worship on the avowed principles of the New Church. {140} That at Baltimore was another. But others soon followed the example; and great has been the increase of divine knowledge, as the sure consequence of preaching the Word indiscriminately to all who have ears to hear it.