Benjamin F Barrett BEAUTY for ASHES New York 1855

7/28/2019 Benjamin F Barrett BEAUTY for ASHES New York 1855

1/115

JEAUTY FOR ASHES;oa,

001'ClJ:ll5DCO TBll

STATE OF INFANTS AFTER DEATH,CONTRASTED.

llY

B. F. BARRETT.~" l 'or I l&J unto 100, that their angela In the heaftDI do ahrllJI behold the face

ot 1117 l'alher which II In the heanm." IUftlD1f :nill. 10. .

NEW YORK:D. APPLETON AND OOMPANY,

1148 AND 348 BROADWAY.1855.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


2/115

oigitizedbyGoogle -


3/115

Jlnlered -6ig o Act or Congnm. ID tile J'9&r 111111, byB. r. BABRBTT,In tile Olerk' Ollloe ol Ille lJnlled Btalel D!Rrlct Ooun for U.. llcMitbern Dlaldct " 'Kew-York.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


4/115

err a '.l 11,WHO ~ N O W HOW BWBBT

TH E JOY OF PARENT.AL LOVE,.&.D BOW l ' l ' la&

TUB PANG OP PARTINGWITS .& .

LOVED AND LOVING CHILD,! rBSI& l ' .&.OI .&..a

r rZO TI O NA TXLY I BI CRI BXDT

THE A U T H O R .

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


5/115

. II

I

. o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


6/115

CONTENTS.

INTRODUCTION

PART I.CHAP. 1-TBK OLD DOCl'KID

PART II.CHAP. L-TBK Naw Door.un: 81

" IL-Puono.t.L D111TI11onon 90.. IIL-CoROL1Jll01' 1115


7/115

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


8/115

PREFACE.

IT was once the custom, among Jewish women, to cast ashesupon their heads in seasons of mourning, by way or express-ing their sorrow and grief; and on all joyous and festive occa-sions they wore, as an ornament of the head, an elegant tiara,or diadem, often set with costly pearls. This diadem or head-dress, called in our English version of the Jewish Scriptures"BEAUTY," was indicative of the inward joy and gladnessof the wearer. It .denoted a state the opposite of mourning.It, therefore, became customary aDiong the Jews, when theywished to convey the i ~ e a that a state of sorrow and mourning had been succeeded by one of gladness and rejoicing, tosay that the dia


9/115

vi PREll'AOE,tiful DIADEM, which was worn on occasions of festivity andjoy, is an equally fit symbol of that opposite and joyous state,which the New d0ctrine on this subject can hardly fail to in-duce. The Old doctrine is a sad one, and consorts only withgloom; while the New doctrine is cheerfW, and gladdensthe heart with its serene 1unshioe.

For most of the authorities cited in PART L, the authorthankfully acknowledges his indebtedness to the writerof someinteresting and able articles in the Christian Examiner for1827 and '28, in reply to ihe Rev. Dr. Beecher, on the sub.ject of infant damnation.

To all who may deem the contrast between the Old andthe New doctri.ne, as exhibited in the following pages, suffi-cient to justify the title adopted, I cordially commend a dili-gent and faithful perusal of the writings of the New Church ;asauring them, as I do from a knowledge acquired by a pa:-tient and thorough personal examination of these writings,that, upon all other theological questions, they will find thecontrast between the Old and the New equally striking.

B. F. B.Brooldp, Ootober 80, 186.6.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


10/115

BEAUTY FOR ASHES.----INTRODUOTION.

TmmE is but one Source of the beautiful, the good,and the true; for all the beauty, goodness and truththere are in the world, are only finite expressions-faintimages, as it were--0f the One Infinite Goodness."There is but One Good, that is God."

And we are taught that man was originally made1n the image and likeness of this One Good. Therefore all the finite expressions of this Good, are alwayspleasing to men in the degree that their moral integrity has been preserved, or the lovely image of theirMaker been retained. They interest and attract everymind, from which the native hues 0 innocence havenot faded or been blotted out.

And yet the interest which most men feel in thebeautiful, the good, and the true, is often enhanced bycontrast with their opposites. Beauty never appearsso attractive, as when exhibited along with deformity.o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


11/115

"10 STATE OF INFABTB AFTER DEATH.Virtue never has such winning charms, as when seenby the side of vice. Truth never looks so lovely-never shines with such heavenly lustre, as when con-trasted with the dark shades of ignorance or error.Every good artist understands this. Hence poets,painters, and sculptors, in seeking to present us withtheir highest conceptions of the beautiful, the good,and the true, almost always avail themselves of thepower that exists in contrasts.

It is from a motive akin to that of the artist, thatwe here undertake to exhibit the Old doctrine con-cerning the state of infants after death, side by side~ i t h the New. The reader will thus be enabled tojudge between them ; while the truth and beauty ofthe one, cannot fail to be exalted by contrast with theblackness and deformity of the other.

We have a further object in exhibiting the Olddoctrine upon this subject with some minuteness, andsomewhat in detail. It is, that the reader may seewhat gross darkness enveloped the Christian churchprior to that New Dispensation of Christianity whichit is our high privilege to proclaim; and how urgentwaa the need, therefore, of a new revelation, upon thesubject here treated of, at least. Before men can beexpected to bestow much serious and candid aUentionupoJ,1 the writings of Swedenborg, which contain thisnew revelation, they must be led to see and acknow-ledge that there existed a retil need of some such newrevelation, prior to the time of its announcement.And the beet way to lead them to see and acknowledge

o; 9;1;zedb ,_ Google


12/115

INTRODUCTION. 11this, is, to unfold and exhibit some of the features ofthe Old Theology, especially as that Theology was un .derstood and expo_unded prior to Swedenborg's time.For if there were really a ft8ed of this new revelationat the time it was made, the evidence of such needmust be sought and found in the then reigning Theology of christendom, as expounded by its eminent doctors, and most distinguished writers. I t is, therefore,a matter of deep interest and importance, to those whoare disposed to examine any point in the New Theology,to ascertain, if possible, what was the belief of Chr:ia-tians generally upon that point, at the time of, or priorto, this alleged new revelation. And the importaneeof this becomes the more apparent, when we considerthat 'the doctrinal theology of some portions of christendom, particularly those portions with which we aremost familiar, has undergone very important modifications on some points, since the time when Swedenborg wrote ; -and this, too, in conaequence of the:new revelation made through him, and that memorableevent which occurred in the World of Spirits* in theyear 1757, witnessed and described by him. And onaccount of these modifications, the contrast betweenthe New and the Old Theology, as the latter is understood and expounded by many theologians at the prea- .ent day, is often much less striking than that betweenthe New and the Old of one, two, or three centuries ago.~ e New Theology, we know, has not changed, for it. .;. For a minute description or the e v e ~ t 1181'8 rei\irred to, MIO Swedenborg' treatise on the Laat Judgment.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


13/115

12 STA.TE OJI' IBFANTS . ilTER DEATH.is embodied in the theological writings of Swedenborg; and these writings, which are the same to-dayu they were when first given to the world a hundred;rears ago---0r rather, we should say, the SACREDSo.Rp'TURES as interpreted by these writings, are thestandard to which all New Churchmen appeal. Butthe Old TheolOgy-not, perhaps, as embodied in thewritten creeds, but as understood by its living expounders, and as proclaimed from the pulpits of Chr;stian lands-is perpetually changing, and has been forthe last hundred years or more. Its ministers allappeal, indeed, to the written Word; but, for lack ofsome acknowledged and reliable st.andard of interpretation-eome authorized and uniform method ofeliciting the true meaning of the Word, their interpretations differ widely, as might be expected. Andthe popular interpret.ations of the present day, differon many points still more widely from those of a fewcenturies ago, as will appear from the extracts cited inthese pages. For there is no doubt that the prevailing belief among Christians now, upon the subject ofour present inquiry, is quite in harmony with thedoctrine reTealed throug8 Swedenborg a hundred yearsago ; and how different this doctrine is, from the onealmost universally held as orthodox p1ior to the NewDispensation, will manifestly appear from the following pages.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


14/115

PART I.THE OLD DOCTRINE;o.,

" And when I &hall put thee out, I will oover the heaven, and makothe stan thereof dark; I will cover the sun with a clond, and the moonhall not give her light. All the bright lighta of heaven will I makedal'k o'\'er thee, aud set darknesa upon thy land, 1aith the Lord."-Eu:un Xlli l. 7, 8,

"Thick darkneo broodeth o'er the world :The raven pinioll8 of the night,

Cloee on her silent bosom furled,Re:tlect 110 fletllll ot orient light."

B. H. WBITJ(.u


15/115

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


16/115

CHAPTER LTHE OLD DOCTRINE.

"A da; of darkne88 and of gloomlne111, a day of clouds and of thickdarkness."-JoBL ii. !l.THE prevailing belief of the Christian Church hitherto,in regard to the state of infants after death, il!I a legitimate subject of inquiry, and one which we think maybe pursued with profit. Not only so, but it is a subject in which all Christians might be expected to feela common interest. And if the inquiry be prosecutedin a spirit of Christian candor and fairness, somevaluable instruction may be gathered from it, and noone will have just cause of offense. Observe that ourinquiry relates not to tha prevailing belief on thissubject among Christians now, but to the belief whichhad prevailed in the Church pri-Or f,o Swedenlm-g'B time,or to the revelations made through him. We arehappy to believe that the old, and once popular doc-trine of infant damnation, is looked upon with little orno favor in any respectable Christian communion ofthe present day. All who will, may see, and nearly all

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


17/115

16 STATE OJ!' l.NJ!'.ANTS AFTER DEATH.do see, by the light of the NEW AGE, that this old doc-trine could have originated nowhere else than in thedarkness of the abyss : - that it never came down fromGod out of heaven.In the prosecution of our design, we shall pursuethat course which we deem the fairest, and likely atthe same time to be most satisfactory to the reader :that is, we shall exhibit the hitherto prevalent beliefamong Christians on this subject, by copious quota-tions from authentic documents, citing the ipaiasimaverba of the writers themselves.

And we begin with the opinion of Augnstinesometimes called in the short style of the :Middle.Ages,St. Austin-who lived and wrote in the latter part ofthe fourth century. And of this wiiter the Encyclo-predia of Religious Knowledge says: "He was one ofthe most celebrated Fathers of the church, whosewritings for many centuries had almost as potent aninfluence on the religions opinions of christendom, nsthose of Aristotle exercised over philosophy." What.did this learned and influential Father believe andteach concerning the final state of many who die ininfancy I Hear him:

. ' "I t may therefore be truly said, that infants, dying without; baptism, will be in a state of damnation of all the most mild.

. But, GREATLY DOES HE DECEIVE and i1 M rkcoived,. Whor nflirms that they will not be damned....Again, this eminent Father says :-

De Peooat. :Merit. et Belnila. Lib. i. o. 11.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


18/115

TBB OLD DOO'l'RINJE."We aftirm tltat they [infants] tDill not ~ IOWd and have

eternal life, except they be baptized in Christ. Thisnew doctrine, that there is eternal life independent of thekingdom of heaven, that there is eternal salvation independentof ihe kingdom of God, was never before heard of in thechurch. First, see, brother, whether perchance you ought nothence to agree with us, that whosoever does not belong to thekingdom of God, must, without doubt, belong to the number ofthe damned. The Lord will come, and, about to judge theliving and the dead, will, according to the gospel, make twodivisions, the right and the left. To those on the left, he willsay, .Depart into -:iVERLA.STING FIRE prtpared for tAe cUviland hu angeli. To those on the right, he will say, OOJM, yebla1ed of my Fatkr, inherit tM angtlmn. which tJJa1 preparedfor you from the foundation of tM tJJOTl.d. The one he calls akingdom, the other damnation with the devil. THERE IB NOKIDDLE PLACE J,EFT, WHERE YOU CAN PUT I lfFANTS."--"Behold, on the right is the kingdom of heaven. Inlimt, he says,tlu angdmn. He who is not there, is on the left. What willhappen on the left ? Depart into everlalting.fire. On the right,an eternal kingdom; 011 the left, everlasting fire. He that isnot on the right, will indisputably be on the left. Therefore Ti.that i i not in tM angdtJm, 18 DOUBTLESS IN ETERNAL FIRE.Certainly he cannot have etei-nal life, who is not baptized; hewill not be on the right, that is, he will not be in the kingdom.In his [the Lord's] last sentence, that he might teachwliat is the kingdom, and what eternal fire, he says, [Matt.x.xv. 46,] Th.en tM.e ahall go away into wer'l


19/115

18 ST.A.TB OJ' DD'All'l'S .ilTJ:B DEA.TH.' " I feel that thla question is a profound one, ancl I own thatmy powers are not auftlcient t.o fathom its depths. I must herei be content t.o exclaim. with Paul, 0 U.. UptA of U.. riclta !j 1.A.N mrBA..PTI.Zlm Dfl 'UT GOES TO D.A.Jllf.A.TIOM."

Such wea the doctrine held and t.aught by Augus-tine, whose writings, we a.re told, exerted such a po-tent in1luence on the religious opinions of christendom"for many centuries. With good reason, therefore, didBenedict Turretin say: "Augustine holds, 'that in-fants dying without baptism, are punished with the puniahment of eternal, fore.'"

We will refer to but one other ancient authority,that of Fulgentius, who 1lourished during the latterpart of the fifth century, and was a theologian of thesame school as Augustine. This writer often, andwith that apparent confidence which an author evinceswhen he is giving utterance to trutl)s generally be:lieved, speaks of God's condemning little infants to" eternal torments," " eternal burning," "eternal dam-nation," and the like. In one of bis works he gives acat.alogue of the orthodox articles of faith, beginningeach with the words Firmiuime tene et nullatenmdubita-" most firmly hold, and by no means doubt."And among these articles, of which there are forty innumber, OCCW'B the following :

"Mast firmly hold, and by no means doubt, not only thatmen who have come tA> the 1l8e of reason, but also that I'N-

De :Baptiamo Parvulonuu. oontn. Pelaglanoe. Sermo D. A.ugaat. Jdy.capp. 9, 8, " and 'I

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


20/115

19;l'A.NT8, whether they begin to live in their mothers' wombs,and tMre tJM, or, after being born, pass from this life without the sacrament of holy baptism, which is given in the name of \the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, WU.L BE PUNl8HED WITH !THE EVERLASTING PUNISHMENT OF ETERNAL FraE ; because ,although they had no sin of their own committing, they havenevertheless incurred, by their carnal conception and nativity, '.the damnation of original sin." J

It would be easy to cite other similar passagesshowing how prevalent was the belief in infant dam-nation among the orthodox Christians of that earlyperiod. But it will doubtless be more satisfactory tothe reader, as indeed it is more important to ourpresent purpose, to exhibit the belief of the churchon this subject at a later period. We therefore dis-miss the ancient authorities, and cite next the opinionof the celebrated John Calvin, who flourished duringthe sixteenth century, and of whom an eminent writeron theology has said : ".AJJ a theologian he etruidsin the very foremost rank of those of any age orcountry." Calvin was one of the "Ref0Nne1'8," andestablished at Geneva that system of church politycalled Preiby'terianiam, which was originally consid-ered an essential part of Calvinism. And the g r e ~ tnumber of Protestant Christians who have endorsedthe doctrines of Calvin, and who have, therefore, beenknown as Presbyterians, High Calvinist.s, Strict Cal-Tinists, Moderate Calvinists, &c., is proof of the highrepute in which this man and his doctrines have been

* Fulgentiua de Fide ad Pet. Diac. cap. uvi i .o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


21/115

20 STATE OJ' INJ'ANTB .AFTEB DRATH.held by a large portion of the Christian church.What, now, was the doctrine concerning the stateof infants after death, as held and taught by this celebrated " Reformer" I If this can be ascertained withcertainty, we may then form a pretty correct conclusion respecting the belief, on this subject, of thatgreat multitude of Christians, who have embracedthe doctrines taught by him, and consequently havetaken the name of Oal/IJ'iniata. And Calvin's belief onthe subject under consideration might easily be inferred from his doctrine concerning election and reprobation, or predestination, which, in his "ChristianInstitutes," he has thus explained :

" Predestination we call the eternal decree .or God, bywhich He bath determined in Himself what He would havebecome or every individual or mankind. For they are notall created with a similar destiny ; but eternal life is foreordained for some, and eternal damnation for others. Everyman, therefore, being created for one or thP, other of theseends, we say he is predestinated either to life or to death.',.

Now this, when viewed in connection with whathe says in another place, that "election is not madefrom any forue,en faith, obedience of faith, holiness,or any other good quality or disposition, as a pre-requiaite cause or condition," were sufficient to convince us that Calvin, if consistent with himself, musthave believed in the damnation of 8om6 at least, whodie in infancy, But fortunately we are not left to* lnBtitu\ea, Book m. Ch. Di. I lS.-Allen'1 Trana. VoL II. p p . ~ .

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


22/115

T.HE OLD DOOTBINE. t1in.fer his belief on this subject, for he has himselfsmted it in the most clear and unequivocal terms.In his account of the doctrine of Michael Servetns,who was c o n d ~ m n e d and burned for heresy by theOouncil of Geneva, at the instigation of Galvin, thefollowing is reckoned by him and the Genevan Pastors among the dreadful heresies of Servetus :

"In the mean time certain salvation is said [by Servetus] !to await all at the final judgment, except those who have lbrought upon themselves the punishment of eternal death, by \their personal sins (proprii1 1cekrilnu). From which it is Ialso infei:red, that all t111w are ta.l:en from life t11laila INPANTSAND YOUNG CHILDREN, are exempt from ETERNAL DEA.TU,although they are elsewhere called accursed." 1

This, then, was one of Michael Servetus' heresies,to wit, that he held a doctrine from which it.might beV..ferred that " infants and young children are exemptfrom eternal death" ; and this was one of the crimesfor which John Galvin thought him justly condemnedto the :flames. Ooncerning the above passage it hasbeen justly remarked: "It is the more important,because it stands in a work that was rit ten as anapology for putting his victim to death, and is subscribed, not only by Galvin, but by the Ministers andPastors of the Genevan church, to the number of fourteen. I f it bas not, therefore, all the formality, it hasall the authority of a confession of faith, with the ad-

Tnoti. Theol.-Bef'at. Error. M.loh. Serfftl.

o .,,, b,Google


23/115

i i STATE OJI D l J ' ~ AF'1'BB DEA.TH.ditional weight derived from the solempity of the oc-casion on which it was published."*Again, in his work on the Eternal Predestinationof God, written more particularly against AlbertusPighins, a Catholic writer, who opposed the doctrineof unconditional election, Calvin says:

" I f Pighius does not think original sin sufficient for thedamnation of men, and will make no account of the secretjudgment of God, what will he do with INFANT CHILDREN,who have been snatched out of this life before they were able,on account of their age, to give any such proof [of wicked-ness] ? Since the same condition of birth and death wascommon to the little ones who died at Sodom and Jerusalem,and there was no ~ e r e n c e in their works-why WILL CmusT,.A.T THE LAST DAT, SEPARATE BOKE OF THElC TO ms LEITHAlTD, from others standing at hia right P Who does not hereadore the admirable judgment of God, in that it has been or-dered that some should be born at Jerusalem, whence $eypresently pass to a better life, and that Sodom, the ENTIU.NCBOF HELL, should be. the birthplace of others ?"t

According to Calvin as here quoted-and thou-sands of his followers have held the same opinionthe little ones of Sodom and Gomorrah will stand "onthe left hand." And to ascertain what he meant bythis, we have only to refer to that chapter in Matthew,to which he alludes. We there read that "the Kingshall say also unto TBEJ( ON THE LEIT HARD, Depart

Reply to three Lettera ofBev. Lyman Beecher, D.D.1 p. ll8.t Traoti. 'rheol.-De &ter. Dei Pnlde1t.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle

IllI'IIIIIIII


24/115

from me, ye cursed, into JIVBBLASTIJJG l 'IBB preparedfor the devil and his angels.-Theas shall go away intoJWERLASTil!iG PUNISllKENT, but the righteous into lifeeternal." Matt. xxv. 41, 46.Again, in his famous reply to Sebastian Oast.alio,whose heretical opiI!ions had incurred the displeasureof the stem Genevan, Calvin says :

" Al to what you object, that no one is jastly damned, unless on account of transgression, and after transgression ; ondie first point we have no dispute, since I everywhere teachthat no one perishes except by the just jadgment of God. Y ~it cannot be dissembled that a hidden poison lurks in yourwords ; because, i f the similitude you propose is admitted,God will be unjust in that he involves the whole race of Abnrham in the guilt of original sin. You deny that it is just inGod to damn any one, unleBB on account of transgressions.Persons innumerable are taken out of life while yet infants.Put forth now your virulence against God,"'" PRECIPITATESINTO ETBBNAL DJU.m HARMLESS INFANTS (inno:rit11 fmtlu)TORN m ox THEIB HOTHEBB' BREASTS. He who will notdetest this blasphemy [of yo111'8] when it is openly exposed,may curse- me at his will For i t cannot be demanded that Ishould be safe and free frtm the abuse of those who do noispare God. ..

Once more, in his Christian Institutes, he says:" I ask again, how has it happened that the fall of Adam r

1r

bas involved so many natiom tllith tMit- infant cl&ildrm, in , Trectt. Theol.-Calumni111 Nebulonis oujuadam adv. DoctPn. Joan,

Celvini de Oooulta D8i Provld. 8' ad eu ejaadem c.lvini Beepomio.-An.xiv.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


25/115

M BT.A.TI: OJI' IlQ'ANTS .AJl'TEB DEA.TB:. / eternal death tDitlwul remd9, but because it so seemed good-. . in the sight of God?"-" It is a dreadful decree, I confess."I

No one, we think, after reading these citations, willdoubt that John Calvin believed and taught the mon-strous doctrine of infant damnation. Yet he was oneof the most distinguished of the " Reformers," and aman to whom multitudes in the Christian Church havelong been accustomed to look with reverence, as to ateacher of more than ordinary wisdom.But this doctrine was not peculiar to Calvin ; nordid it originate with him or the Reformation. Tur-retin, an eminent Calvinistic writer, assures us that" theOrthodox Church has alAoaya held the doctrine of thedamnation of infants."t For centuries prior to theReformation it bad been deemed a heresy to denythis doctrine. A writer in the Christian Examiner for1828, treating of this subject, says:

" I t had been adopted by the Roman Catholic Church: forages, and the Reformers are not exclusively entitled to thepraise of giving this last finish to their doctrines of predesti-nation and original sin. They had become familiar with itshorrors in the common belief of that church, that such as diewithout baptism, including of course all heathen infants, havenothing to save them from hell, or at least from future punish-ment somewhere. Though moat Protestants at last dissent.edfrom the church they abandoned, in denying the necessity ofthis rite to s a l v a t i o n ~ the damnation of infants was, neverthe-less, held to be a necessary consequence of th.eir guiltiness

Inst. Lib. iii. c. :uiii. I T. t lnatit. TheoL P. I. p. 895.

Digitized bys;oogle

l1

III


26/115

THE OLD DOOTBINE. 25by nature, and reprobation by God. The Catholics, in thesuperabundance of their compassion, had provided a. limlnuin f ntum, a place reserved especially for these little ones, inwhich they were to suffer something less than the full tormentsof hell-a notion which was ridiculed by the Protestants, whoheld that there are but two places for all who are to appearbefore the judgment seat of Christ, a. heaven and a. hell-thoone on the right hand, the other on the left of the Judge; andthat such as are not admitted to the former, must necessarilytake up their abode in the latter."

And we might show from the writings of Luther,Melancthon, Zanchius, Beza, Perkins, Whitacre, Piecator, Marlorat, Martyr, Ridgley, Watts, Edwards,Bellamy, and a host of others, who have been longregarded as shining lights in the church, that theybelieved and taught the same doctrine on this subjectas Augustine, Fulgentius, and Calvin. Thus Zanchiue- than whom there is scarcely a commentator of theage of Calvin, who is quoted oftener or with more re-spect-writes in opposition to Pighius as follows:

"Says Pighius: 'Infants a.re without actual sin. There-fore,although exiles from the kingdom of heaven, they willnot be damned, nor receive any punishment of sense, exceptthose of them who, in the course of nature, sin, either in theirexternal or internal senses [nisi etiam qui 1en&ibus internisvel enernis naturaliter peccant.] '

" I answer. They are nevertheless wicked, and beingborn adapted to sin, ARE THEREFORE JUSTLY DAMNED althoughthey have not yet sinned after the similitude of Adam's trans-gression. For as temporal death came upon them on accountof original sin, BO DID .U.80 ETERNAL; for God threatened

2

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


27/115

26 BT.A.TE OF INF'ANTB AFTER DE.A.TH.I both when he said, 'In dying you shall die.' Even youngi 1erpent1 and the whelp1 of wolves, who cannot as yet hann: anybody, are put to death, and with justice. How so ? Be-cause they are of such a nature, that they easily can do harm.

Therefore EVEN INFANTS .A.RE DESERVEDLY DAMNED, onaccount of the nature they have, to wit, a wicked nature andrepugnant to the law of God. "

Theodore Beza was the colleague and successor ofCalvin in the church and univel'l!ity at Geneva. Andin Beza's exposition of the doctrine of Predestination,the following passage occurs :

"Some," he says, "are born out of the church, and so re-main, to whom God vouchsafes nothing of that call which isnecessary to salvation, that is, nothing of a revdation of hisgratuitous covenant, and they are THEREFORE NECESSARILYPLACED BEYOND THE HOPE OF SALv A.TION, since faith comesby hearing, and without faitk it i1 impossiUe for any one topkase God. Nevertheless they are inexcusable, so far as re-lates to the execution of the divine decree, partly because allare born children of God'BWTa.th, not of the promise, (Ephes.ii. 3,) partly because all adults, without Christ (or who are notChristians], are found guilty."t

It is plain from this, that Beza consigns all heatheninfants to the torments of hell. But to make his opin-ions on this point still plainer, he says in another partof the same treatise :* Op. Theol. D. Hieron. Zanchii. Tom. IV. Lib. I. De Peccat. Orig. cap.iv. thee. v.t De Prredestinationis Doct. et vero Usn. Tract. absolutissime., ex Th.Bezm Prrelectt. in nonum.Epist. ad Rom. Cap. pp. 68, 1591 Ed. Gen. 1582.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


28/115

THE OLD DOCI'BINE. 27"The grace of believing is not truly said to be offered to

all men, unle11 perchance toe dream that the grace of faith is,in some internal and extraordinary way, infused into themany INFANTS that die in all parts of the earth, as well asinto the myriads of adults who leave this life before they haveheard anything of Christ-a DOT.A.GE," he adds, "which medlno refutation."

And Bellamy says:" I t was at God's sovereign election,-to give every child

of Adam born in a Christian land, opportunit9, by living, tohear the glad tidings, or only to grant this to some, whileothers die in infancy, and never hear. Those who die in infancy, may as justly be held under law in the next world, asthose that live may in this. God is under no more-obligationstc save those that die, than he is to save those that live ; togrant the regenerating influences of his spirit to them, than heis to these."

Dr. John Edwards, who wrote near the close ofthe seventeenth and ~ e beginning of the eighteenthcentury, who has been styled the Paul, the Augustine,the Calvin of his age, and of whom it is said "thatall unbiassed and impartial men voted him by universal consent to be one of the most valuable writers ofhis time"-tbis learned divine, referring to the calamities and sufferings to which infants as well as adultsare subject in this life, and which he regards aspwnialimems, argues thus :

"We may well argue from these things, that INFANTS are... Jd. p.18. ":Bellamy' Works, ii. pp. 869, 870

o; 9;1;zedbyG_oogle


29/115

28 BTATB OJI' INFANTS All'TER DEATH. not looked upon by God as sinless, but that they are by naturechildren of wrath; seeing this terrible evil comes so heavily onmankind in infancy. But besides these things, which are observable concerning the mortality of infants in general, thereare some particular cases of the death of infants, which theScripture sets before us, that are attended with circumstances,in a peculiar manner giving evidences of the sinfulness ofsuch, and their just expoeednees to divine wrath. As particularly,"The destroying of the INFANTS in Sodom, and the neighboring cities; which cities, destroyed in so extraordinary,miraculous, and awful a manner, are set forth as a signal example of God's dreadful vengeance for sin, to the world in allgenerations ; agreeable to that of the apostle, Jude, verse 7.''*

The text here referred to is in these words : -"Evenas Sodom and Gomorrah, and the cities about them,in like manner giving themselves over to fornication,and going after strange flesh, are set forth /or an eaJ-ample, BUFFERING THE VENGEANCE OF ETERNAL FIRE."From which it is plain that Edwards believed theinfants who perished at the destruction of Sodom, arenow " suffering the vengeance of eternal fire."

And even Dr. Watts, whose natural tendcrheartedness led him to plead most earnestly andtouchingly for the rescue of little infants from everlasting torments, and who would fain, as he says," find out aome milder puniahment for their share ofthe guilt of Adam in the Bible," even he supposesthem to be reduced after death to a " state of non-

* Works, vol. vi. pp. il52, a.

Digitized by.Google


30/115

THE OLD DOCTBINE. 29existence," which he designates as "a sort of ~punishment witlwutpain.""Upon the whole," he says, "the opinion of the salvationof all children, a& it kaa no countenance from the Bibk, so itkaa no foundation in the reaaon of things."-" The Scripturebrings down the infants of wicked parents to the grave, andleaves them there, and so do I. The Scripture has not provided any resurrection for them, neither can I do it."

And the learned Theophilus Gale, the author of awork quite famous at one time, entitled the "Courtof the Gentiles," says:" So great is the Majestie of God, and so Absolute his Dominion, as that He is obnoxious to no Laws, Obligations, orTies from his Creature : this absolute justice or Dominion re

gards not any qualities or condition of its object; but God canby virtue hereof inflict the highest torments on his innocentCreature, and exempt from punishment the most nocent. Bythis Absolute Justice and Dominion God can inflict the greatest torments even of Hell itself, on the most innocent Creature."t

TESTDIONY 011' THE AUGIBUBG OONFESBION.Leaving here the opinion of individuals on thissubject prior to Swedenborg's time, we will proceednext to consider, what is more important to our present purpose, the opinion of religious bodies or sects.

And let us first consult the famous Augsburg or Au- Ruin 11.11d Recovery. Quest. zvi.t Christian Examiner, vol. iv. p. '41.-Court of the Gentilei, Part iT.

Book ii. Chap. vi. s1.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


31/115

30 STATE OF INFA.NTS AFT.EB DEA.TH,gostin Confession of Faith, drawn up by Melancthonat the Diet of 1530, and which may be considered asthe creed of the German Reformers, especially of themore temperate among them. The ninth article ofthis Confession says:

"They (the Lutheran ehurcbea] teach concerning baptism, that it i1 neceBBary to salvation; and that the grace ofGod is offered through baptism; and that infants ought to bebaptized, who, being offered to God through baptism, are :re-ceived into God's grace.

"They CONDEMN the Anabaptists, who disapprove of infantbaptism, and AFFmK THAT THE!" A.RE 8&.VED WITHOUT BAP-TISX."

And Melancthon in his Apology, which is anotherof the Lutheran symbolical books, remarks upon thisarticle:

"The ninth article is approved, in whic\J. we confeBS thatBAPTISK IS NECESSARY TO SALVATION."-" And as we 001\demn most other errors of the Anabaptists, so this also, thatthey contend that the baptism of infants is useless. For it ismost certain that the promise of salvation pertains even toinfants. But IT DOES NOT PERT.A.IN TO THOSE WHO A.REWITHOUT THE CHURCH OF CimulT, where there is neitherthe Word nor the sacraments, because the kingdom of Christexists only with the Word and sacraments. Therefore it ismceBBary to "baptize infa11t1, that the promi1e of lalvation maybe applied to them."

In the Epitome of Articles about which controversies have arisen among the Lutheran Theologians,there are passages still stronger. Among the " Ana-

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


32/115

THE OLD DOCTRINE. 81baptistical Articles which cannot be tolerated in theChurch," we find the following:

"That infants not baptized, are not sinners in the sight ofGod, but just and innocent; and that in this .innocence oftheirs, when as yet without the nse of reason, THEY O B T A I ~SALVATION WITHOUT BAPTISM, (which indeed in theiropinioathey have no need 0) And in this manner they re,ject tltewhok doctrine of original, sin, and all that depends upon ii be-.ides."Thus we see that Melancthon, and the GermanLutheran churches generally, believed and taught thatchildren, dying unbaptized, could not possibly besaved. And a doctrine which taught that they might"obtain salvation without baptism," was "not to betolerated in the church."

TF.sTIMONY OF THE ENGLISH CONFESSION'.Passing now from the German Lutheran to the

English Confession, we find abundant reasons for believing that the framers of the Articles and Liturgy ofthe English Church held- the common doctrine of thatperiod, viz., that baptism was e88entiaJ, to salvation ;and that all who died without it, whether heathen,infidel or infants, must certainly be damned. In a workby the Rev. Henry John Todd, Chaplain in Ordinaryto his Majesty, we are presented, from authenticdocuments, with the "Doctrines of our [the English]Reformers, which are the groundwork of certainof the Thirty-nine Articles of Religion." On thesacrament of Baptism, we have the following passage

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


33/115

39 STATE 0"8 INF.AlfrB AFrEB DEATH.from the "Articles devised by the King's Highness:Majesty, to establish Christian quietness and amityamong us, and to avoid contentious opinions, &c.1536:""Item, the promise of grace and everlasting life, which

promise is adjoined unto this Sacramentof Baptism, pertainethnot only unto such as have the use of reason, but also to infants, innocents, and children ; and they ought therefore, andmwt needa be, baptized: And that by the Sacrament of Baptism they do also obtain remission of their sins, the graceand favor of God, and be made thereby the very sons andchildren of God; insomuch as infants and children dying intheir infancy shall undoubtedly be saved thereby, and ELSENOT."

And the same opinion was maintained in the English Church, certainly as ]ate as Swedenborg's t imepossibly it may bo held by some in that church evenat this day. Thus :Matthew Scrivener, the learnedauthor of a work on the use of the Fathers, teUs 1l.Bthatr-"Either all children mwt be damned dying un1xzptized, orthey must have baptism. The consequent is plain from that

, principle in Christian religion, which Anabaptists have beenconstrained to deny, to uphold their other, That all sin nottca&hed away or expiated, expo1es to damnation : lll:ld theprinciple in Christian religion is, That children come into theworld infected with original sin ; and therefore i f there be noremedy against that provided by God, all children of Christian parent.a, which St. Paul says are holy, are liable to eter-

, \ nal death, without remedy. Now there i1 no r e ~ d y but

DigitizedbyGpogle

.

.JIIl


34/115

THE OLD DOCTRINE. 83Ohri.e ; an.d ki1 death andpauion are not communicated unto /any but by outward signs an.d sacraments. .And no otAer d!Jj' 1toe read of but thi1 of water in baptism."

And some eminent divines of the Church ofEnglandhave even maintained, that baptized infants would belost if not among the elect. The learned Dr. Edwards,whose opinion on this subject has already been cited,and who wrote in the earlier part of the 18th century,says:

"There are other privileges, fruits and effects of baptiBm,M the collation of inward grace, effectual regeneration by theHoly Spirit, renewing and sanctifying the corrupt nature,pardon of sin, and salvation ; but these are not common to allthat are baptized, but are peculiar to some only; namely, theelect. For though l>aptism is to be administered to all theinfants of Christian parents, as we are to preach the gospel toall persons without distinction, yet it is (as preaching) effectualto none but those that are chosen of God, and predeterminedto life and salvation. But all are to be admitted to it, becausewe cannot distinguish between them: we do not know who areelect and who are reprobates."

This passage leaves us in no doubt that Edwardswas a believer and defender of the dreadful doctrineof infant damnation. Equally explicit, too, is the lan-guage of Archbishop Usher, another eminent divine ofthe Church of England, who lived and wrote in theearlier part of the 17th century :

Scrivener's CoUl'lle of Divinity; or an Introduction to the Know-ledge of the True Catholic Religion, eapeci&lly 1111 profe&11ed by the Churchof England. Fol. p. 195. Lon. 167'. 2

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


35/115

34. STATE OF JNP'AllTS AFTER DEATH."HotD dotA God aujfer Oum to ron into condemnation 1" In a divers manner: SoKE REPROBATES, DYING IN:rANTS, other of riper Years ; of which latter sort, some are notealled, others called." HO'IJJ dotA God J.ea], tDi.tk Reprobatu dying Infant& 1"Being once conceived they are in a state of Death, (Ro

mans 5. 14,) by reason of the sin of Adam imputed, and ofOriginal C.Orruption cleaving to their Nature, wherein alsoDYING, THEY PERISH: As (for instance) the Children ofHeathen Parents. For touching the Children of Christians,we are taught to account them holy, 1 C.Or. 7. 14."*

And Stackhouse, another distinguished Church ofEngland divine, writing nearly a century later, andcontemporaneously with Swedenborg, s!).ys:

"The Calvinists carry the matter much farther [than theschoolmen], asserting that original sin (besides an exclusionfrom Heaven) deserves the punishment of damnation; andtherefore they conclude that such infants as die unbaptized,and are not of the number of the elect, (which have alwaysa particular exemption,) are, for the transgression of our firstparents, condemned to the eternal torments of hell-fire. Itmust be confessed that the doctrine o f the Ohurch of Englandmalce1 too near approaclie1 to tki1 opinion, when it tells u ~that ' in every person born into the world, original sin doserves God's wrath and damnation.'"

Let this suffice by way of evidence going to showwhat was the belief of the English Church on this subject prior to the time of Swedenborg.

Usher's Body of Divinity, p. 165.t Staokhouse's Body of Divinity, pp. 292, 293-Fonrth ed. 1780.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


36/115

THE OLD DOOTRINE. 35

TESTIHONY OF THE SYNOD OF DORT.We come next to the testimony furnished by the

famons Synod of Dort, which was convoked in theyear 1618, by the authority of the States General ofHolland, in consequence of the dissensions which hadarisen from the prevalence of certain new opinionspromulgated by James Arminius and his followera.Dr. Lyman Beecher says, that at this Synod there was" a most ample representation of the opinions of thewhole Calvinistic world." Besides the deputies fromthe Belgic churches, there were present representa-tives from the churches of England, Scotland, Geneva,Switzerland, Embden, Bremen, and the Palatinate ofHesse. The Arminians had published a paper calleda REMONSTRANCE, containing ten articles, wherein theyhad taken the liberty to dissent from the standards ofthe Belgic church, on several points of doctrine, andat the same time to explain and defend their owno}>inions. These articles were taken up in order, andthe deputies from the several reformed churches ofEurope, composing the Synod, were requested to de-liver their judgment in writing respecting the allegedheresies of Arminius; which they did. And we aretold by the Encyclopredia of Religious Knowledge,that " these papers, read before the Synod, famish arich body of SOUND THEOLOGY, and are all preserved inthe jour.aal 0r minutes of the body, the whole of whichhave bee:::i published." One of the alleged heterodox

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


37/115

36 BT.A.TE OJI' INFANTS AFTER DEA.TH.tenet.a of the Remonstrants, or Arminians, which theSynod had to consider, was, that "there is no repr-bation of infants;" for "no one," say they, "is damnedfor original sin alone." Upon this heterodox opinion,as it was pronounced, the deputies from the severalEuropean churches gave their judgment in writing.The British divines said:

" I f this be the meaning of the position, that there is_noelection of infants, that is, of one infant in prejerence to another,.A.s !IF ALL PROMISCUOUSLY WERE SAVED, certainly the hy-pothesis HAS NO FOUNDATION; nor if it were granted, wouldthe [main] position follow. For according to the method ofGod's election whether to be maintained or disproved [namad rationem ekctioniB divin nve ponendam Beu tolkndam],THE cmCUMSTANCE OF AGE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH IT[eat quid.dam imptrlinem], and has no influence.''*

And in support of their opinion, as here expressed,they quoted this sentence from Prosper to Augustin:

"Infants who have as yet no wills, no actions of their own,are not separated one from another without the judgment efGod ; aome are taken aa heira, othera paaa away aa delJtor1.''

The deputies from Switzerland said :" That there is election and reprobation of infants as well

as of adults, we cannot deny against God, who tenderly loves,WJ.d inculpably hatea them before they are born.''

The Genevan Professors expressed their judgmentthus:

* Acta Dordr. Judicia Theologorum Exterorum1 p.10.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


38/115

THE OLD DOC'J'BINll:." Of tlia inf


39/115

. jI

88 STATE OF INP'A.NT8 i lTER DEA.TH.judgment on this point. We may, therefore, safelysay, that the doctrine of infant damnation was a cher-ished doctrine of the Synod of Dort, and of such ofthe reformed churches of Europe as were representedin that Synod. And we might add to the evidencealready adduced, that the same doctrine was very dis-tinctly taught by the theological writers of that day,who were held in highest repute by this Synod fortheir soundness of doctrine. Among the most emi-nent of these, may be mentioned the names of Fran-cis Gomarns, Antony W alaeus, Henry Alting, andWilliam Perkins. In his " judgment" concerningthe first article of the Remonstranta on Election andReprobation, Gomarns says :

"For original sin alone there i1 damnation, which is thewages of all sin, even of that which is not actual, Rom. v. 12,14, 21. Therefore the INFANTS ot unbelieving parents whoare aliens from the covenant of God, not born again, are by

1 nature children of wrath, without Christ, without hope, without\ God, Ephe. ii. 3, 12, even as in the deluge the INFANTS ofthe world of the ungodly, and in the conflagration the INFANTS;' \ of the wicked Sodomites PERISHED AND WERE JUSTLY .SUB-JECTED TO THE WRATH OF .GOD WITH THEm PARENTS, 2I Peter ii . 5, 6.11

Walaeus, who was a distinguished member of thisfamous Synod, professor of theology at Leyden, and oneof the authors of the Belgic version of the Bible, says :

Gomarua, Dieputt. Theolog. p. 279. Act.a Dordrechtana, Judicia.Theologorum Provincilllium, p. 24.


40/115

THE OLD DOCTRINE. 89"WE BELIEVE, indeed, with Augustin, in his Enchiridion

and elsewhere, that those WHO SHALL PERISH on account oforiginal sin alone, will receive the mildeat punishment."-"Butit does not follow there will be any punishment of loss withoutthe punishment of sense ; for in the first place, to be for everexcluded from the assembly of the blessed and the presence ofGod, of itself would bring a sense of grie Even for originalsin alone, we are ' children of wrath,' Ephes. ii. 3, and there-fore worthy to feel God's wrath; and of all sin the ' wages isdeath,' Rom. vi. 23. But of the whole nation of the Sodom-ites and Gomorrites, among whem there were. HA.NY INFANTS,it is said in Jude, vs. 7, that they A.RE SUFFERING THE VEN-GEANCE OF ETERNAL Fm E ; but in tohat manner or tbgru,we leave to the judgment of God."

Henry Alting wdalso a member of the Synod, adeputy from the Palatinate, and professor of divinityat Heidelberg and Groningen. And among the "cal-umnies" against the orthodox doctrine on the punish-ment of sin, he reckons the following, which we give,'vith his answer:

"The Calumny. That we indifferently exempt all infants,dying without baptism, from the punishment of original sin,and place them with the happy in heaven.

"The Answer. No TRULY ORTHODOX THEOLOGIAN hassaid that or written it; not Zuingl e, not Calvin, nor any otherof the same stamp. But we distinguish between the infantsof believers and unbelievers. Those indeed who are born inthe covenant, if they are cut off by death so that they cannotbe baptized, we number among those to be saved, and that

.. WaJaeus, Op. tom. I. pp. ISM, 585.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


41/115

4() ST.A.TE OF INFANTS .A.:FTEB DEA.TH.because of the covenant promise which was made alike toparents and children. But THE OTHERS, since not less thantheir parents they have no lot in the oovenant, and are aliensfrom the promises of grace, WE LEAVE TO THE MERITEDJUOGHENT OF Goo."j "We do not subject to the punishment of original sin, allinfana promilC'UOtUltJ, but THOSE ONLY, who, born of unbe-i ieving parents, a.re aliens from the grace of the covenant,j and do not partake of righteousness of life in Christ."tAnd Perkins, who was a leading writer in thocontroversy with Arminins, writes as follows "con-cerning the execution of the decree of reprobation :"

"REPROBATES ARE EITHER INFANTS, or men of riper age.In REPROBATE INFANTS, the execution of God's decree is this:As soon as they are born, for the gudt of original and naturalsin, being left. in God's secret judgment unto them.selves, they,dying, ARE RE.JECTEO OF Goo FOR EVER."t

The evidence, then, is conclusive, that the Synodof Dort, which has been pronounced by an eminentauthority " a most ample representation of the opin-ions of the whole Oalviniatic 1001'1,d," held the doctrineof infant da.mnation. The circumstance that not On6of the several deputations denies it, while it is dis-tinctly affirmed by a number of them, may be takenas proof positive that it was the common belief of thatbody."Alling, Theolog. Elonch. Loo. ix. p. 885, Ed. 165'.t I bid. p. 892.t Works of th&t Famous and Worthie Minister or Christ, in the Uni-veraitio of C&tnbridge, M. W, Perkin;s, vol. i. p. 107. English copy,.l!'vl., 1603. .

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


42/115

THE or.n DOOT.BINlil. 41TESTIM:ONY OF THE WESTMINSTER .A.SSEKBLY.

We come next to the famous Westminster Assem-bly of divines, convoked by authority of Parliament,in the year 1643. And concerning the Confession ofFaith drawn up by this Assembly, the Rev. Dr. Beecher says:

"THE SYNOD OF C.umRIDGE, 1648, which representednot Massachusetts only, but New England, adopted, unanimously, the 'Confession of Faith published of late by thereverend .Assembly in England,' judging it ' to be holy andorthodox, and judicious in all matters of faith.' The sameconfession was, in 1608, adopted by the churches in Connecticut represented at Say brook, as the symbol of their faith; andthe same is now the confession of faith of the Presbyterianchurch in the United States."

Now, that this "reverend assembly" believed andtaught the doctrine of infant damnation, is a fact notto be disputed. Two of the articles in the chapter oftheir Confession on Effectual Calling, read as follows :

"Eketinfants, dying in infancy, are regenerated and savedby Christ through the Spirit, who worketh when, and where,and how he pleaseth. So also are all other elect persons,who are incapable of being outwardly called by the ministryof the Word." Otker1, not ekcted, although they may be called by theministry of the Word, and may have some common operationsof the Spirit, yet they never truly come unto Christ, and therefore camwt be 1aved; much less can men not professing theChristian religion be saved in any other way whatsoever, be

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


43/115

49 STATE 07 INFAlrl'S AFTER DEA.TH.they never so diligent to frame their lives according to the lightof nature, and the law of that religion they do profess ; and toassert and maintain that they may, is very pernicious, and tobe detested."

'!'he meaning of this language is sufficiently obvi-ous. But to remove all possible grounds of doubt. onthis score, we have but to consult the theologicalwritings of some of the most distinguished membersof that body. The Rev. Wm. Twiss, D.D., whomthe Assembly, by a unanimous vote, honored with theoffice of Prolocutor, or Chairman, and who, from thiscircumstance, may be taken as a fair exponent of theopinions of the body, expresses himself in the man-ner following, concerning the final condition of manywho die in infancy:" It were worth the knowing of thia .A.utlwr, whether anyinfants of Turks and SaraceD.s, departing this lif'e in theirinfancy, ue left in this woful estate. H none are left, but allare saved, ia it not a preuy guilt of eternal death, for whichtwt any aujfed And you may guess by this whether thia.A.uthora pretence of acknowledgment of natural corruptionbe not only from the teeth outward." Again-" H many thou-sands, even all the Infanu of Turka and &racena dying iaoriginal ain, are tormented by him [the DeityJ in Jlell .ftre, ishe to be accounted the father of cruelties for this?" Again" Touching punishment IN HELL, it is either spoken of IN

F A N T ~ or Men of ripe ye&l'S. If of Infants departing in in-fancy, i f guilty of eternal death, 'tis no injustice to inflict it;and though he be slow to anger toward some, yet it is not ne-

, cessary he should be so to others." Again-" It is true manyinfants we say perish in original -sin only, not living to .be

oigitizedbyGoogle


44/115

THB. OLD DOCTRINE. 43guilty of any actual sin of their persons." Once more--" Every man that is damned, is damned for original, as well '8actual sins, and HANT THOUSAND INFANTS ONLY FOB ORIGINAL."

Sir Edward Leigh, another distinguished memberof the Assembly, and the learned author of CriticaSacra; writes thus:

"Arminians say, That there is neither election nor repro- ,bation of infants, and that no infants can be condemned fororiginal sin.

"Jacob was in a state of election in his mother's womb,Romans ix. 11. All men in the council of God are either 'elect or reprobate. But Infanll are men, or part of mankind,therefore they are either elect or reprobate.

" 1. Infants are saved, therefore there is some election ofinfants, for salvation is a fruit of election, and pYOper to theelect, Romans :d. 7. There is a manifest difference amongInfants, between those that are born in and outt of theChurch. Children of unbelievers are unclean, and aliensfrom Christ and the Covenant of promise, Ephesians ii.11, 12.

" 2. That opinion, that no Infants are condemned for original sin, seems to be contrary to that place, Ephesians ii. 3.t* The Riches of God's Love unto the Veaeels of Mercy, consistent withhie Absolute Hatred or Reprobation of the Vessels of Wrath, &o., fol.

Ed. 1653, pp. 39, 136, 186. Book II. pp. 149, 186.i; "The Apostle, 1 Cor. v. 19, forbids ne to judgs of them who are with-out. Wherefore we leave these infants to the free jndgment of God ; wedare not promise salvation to any one remaining without the covenant ot

Chriet.-Molin11ene."-1Aigh'1 not1.i " The Arminians say that no one ia damned for original sin : that is,the ohildren of Turks, Saracena, Gentile11 who have died in infancy, en. ter the kingdom ot heaven, and consequentJy are in a better oondit.ion. .

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


45/115

.STATE OP' INJl'ilTS AFTER DUTIL

H this were true, the condition of a Turk's child dying inhis infancy, is far better than the condition of Abraham, Isaac,' or Jacob living, for they might fall from grace (say they)and be damned, but a Turk's child dying, according to theiropinion, sha.11 certainly be saved."

Anthony Burgess was a member of this famousAssembly, and may be cited as another good authority. And in his work on Original Sin, he not onlymaintains the doctrine of infant damnation, but givesa history of it ; and furnishes us at the same timewith an authority in addition to his own, and an admirable illustration of Edwards' doctrine, that thehappiness of heaven receives a zest from contemplating the miseries of hell.

"Fourthly, The consideration of God'1 jmt and severeproceedin91 agaimt Pagani and their children, may make theethe more admire the grace of God in saving of thee. Forhow many Heathens perish in hell, who, it may be, never committed such gross and foul sins in their lifetime, as thou hastdone? To be 11ure THEIR INFANTS never committed suchactual iniquities, as thou hast done ; yet they appear, according to God's ordinary way of proceedings, to be l.efl in thatlo1t u t ~ of nature. And therefore that is a good quickeningmeditation which Vedeliua useth, ( Hi'lar. cap. 3. page 119,)to make a godly man thankful for God's grace, seeing by na-than Ab!'aham, Moses, and the Virgin Mary while apon earth. For theymay perish, acoording to your doctrine, but not the children of Turkawho have died in infancy. Yet the Apostle declares that all and everyone of them are born children of wrath, and what imaginable reason canthere be why they may not also tJw Mild,. of ' '"'all 1 Twiaa. ContraCorvi.nnm, c. 9. S8.-Lrigl1.'amarginal note.

Leigh' Body of Divinity, pp. 416, 41'/'. Fol. Ed. 1662.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


46/115

THE OLD DOCJTBINE. 45ture we deserve otherwise. 'Ah qvot runt, erunt in infM"nO 'mi1elli infantuli,' 4'c. Au! BOW MANY LITTLE INFANTS ARE,, Ii/'AND SHALL BE IN BELL, who never had the knowledge of 'good and evil I And might not God have left thee in the same 1 Imisery?' This (I say) is a pious meditation.[!!] Though'that scoffing Remonstrant prefix this expression amongstothers in the front of his Book, as i f it were no less thanblasphemy."

Dr. :Manton, who wrote a hundred and thirty-ninesermons on the hundred and nineteenth psalm, and whose orthodoxy we believe was never called inquestion, though not a wember of the Assembly, wasa popular preacher at Parliament, and in favor withso many parties, that he may be taken as the fit exponent of religious opinions generally prevalent in hisday. And he compares infants to "serpents beforethey be grown," and shows us that the doctrine of infant damnation was not only taught in the systematicdivinity of that day, but actually preached from thepulpit, as may be seen from the following extract:

"Arminians say, That of Infants there is neither Electionnor Reprobation, and that no Infant can be condemned forOriginal Sin; l>oth which assertiom are fahe; for we findthat the Predestination of God hath plainly made a differencebetween Infant and Infant. Rom. 9. 11, 12, 13."-"That noneis condeuu!'ed for Original Sin, is also groundless, and contrary to the Scripture; for we read, Eph. 2. 3, that we wereby nature children of wrath, even as others. It is mercy,

Anthony BaflltlBS on Original Bin, pp. 6601 551. :Ed. 1 6 6 ~ .

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


47/115

~ STATE 01 ' INll'ANTS AFl'EB DEATH.that God will say to any that are in their blood and filthiness,

, Live. Who can quarrel with his Justice, that he should da.tp.DI any, though he see nothing but Original Pollution in them?\

Among men we crush the Serpents' Eggs before the Serpentbe grown; and might not God destroy us for our Birth-Sin?''*

Few works, perhaps, have been held in higher repute by the orthodox schools of divinity, or are to befound more frequently referred to in the outlines ofthe Course of Theology taught in these schools, thanRidgley's Body of Divinity, and Stapfer's PolemicalTheology. It is therefore important to our purposeto ascertain the opinion of these writers upon the doctrine in question.

Now, as to Ridgley, there can be no doubt thathe believed in infant damnation ; though, much tothe annoyance of some of his brethren-President Edwards in particular-he thought with some others, thatit would be of a mitigated kind. He was evidentlyanxious to rid himself of the doctrine, as thousands ofothers have been ; but he had such a deep sense ofits adhesiveness to certain other doctrines which hehad never thought of questioning-he saw that it wasso closely interwoven with his entire system of theology-that he could not give it up altogether. As anauthority, therefore, he is the more important for being a reluctant one. His "Bo_dy of D i v i n ~ y ' ~ is thesubstance of several lectures on the Assembly'sLarger Catechism. The following_ quotations from it,

*Manton'& Sermons, Vol. III. Berm. :u:v. on Heb. id. 6.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


48/115

..

THE OLD DOOTRINE. 47therefore, go to show not only his own opm1ons onthe subject immediately before him, but also what hethought was the belief of the Assembly:

"lt is necessary for us to consider the punishment due toOriginal Sin, as such, and how it differs from a greater degreethereof, which is due to its increasing guilt.

"The punishment due to Original Sin, as such, namely,in those who are charged with no other guilt, but that ofAdam's first sin. This more especially respect.a those thatdie in their infancy, before they are capable of making anyaddition to it. C o ~ c e r n i n g these, I cannot but conclude withAugustin, in his defence of Original Sin against the Pela-gians, that the punishment thereof is the most mild of any,and cannot be reckoned so great, as that it might be saidof them, that it had been better for them not to have beenborn.

"Those, who die in infancy, will appear, at the last day,to have been a very considerable part of mankind. Andsome tender parent.a who have bad a due concern of spirit abouttheir future state, would be very glad, were it possible forthem, to have some hopes concerning the happiness thereof.

"Various have been the conjectures of divines about it.The Pelagians, and those who verge towards their scheme,have concluded, that they are all saved, as supposing thatthey are innocent, and not, in the least, concerned in Adam'ssin: but this is to set ande tM doctrine 10e a r ~ maintaining;and therefore I r.annot think their reasoning in this respect,very conclusive.

"Others, who do not deny original sin, suppose, notwith-standing, that the guilt thereof is atoned for by the blood ofChrist. This 10ou!d be a very agreeabk notion could it beproved, and all that I shall say, in answer to it, is, that

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


49/115

48 BT.A.TE OF INFARTS An'EB DEA.TH.wants confirmation. As for those who suppose, with thePapists, that the guilt of original sin is washed away by baptism, as some of the Fathers have also asserted, this has so

1 many absurd consequences attending it, that I need not spendtime in opposing i t . -" Others have concluded, that all the infants of believing

parents, dying in infancy, are saved, as supposing that theyare interested in the covenant of grace, in which God promises, that he will be a God to believers, and their seed. Thi1tDould H a "er'!/ comfort


50/115

THE OLD DOCTBINE.objections" which he undertakes tO solve, are drawnfrom a treatise " On the Imputation of Adam's Sin,"by Daniel Whitby, published in London in 1711, andwhich he says contains "whatever sophistry can beurged against original sin." The ninth of these "ob-jections" is this: "To subject infants to eternal punish-ment for Adam's sin, is to treat them worse than thedevil himself, or than Adam, who himself committedthe sin." To this Stapfer replies:

"That infants, being corrupt by nature, and thereforeobnoxious to condemnation, contain within themselves theroot of all sins and so of all the evils which flow from it, eothat guilt and punishment cannot but be naturally and neces-sarily connected with that sin. And then that the infants ofbelievers are punished with eternal punishment we by nomeans hold, since they are considered as standing in the faithof their parents. .As to the infants of unbelievers, we believethat they are separated from the communion of God, and thusthat they, as being children of wrath and condemnation, willbe DAHNED by the very act by which they are excludedfrom the blessed communion of God. But there are variousdegrees of that punishment and damnation, so that the p u n ~ishment of infants and their sense of it will be least of any,and will therefore differ much from that of the devil, or ofadults who voluntarily persevere in sin. So here too theways of God are justified."

We have already quoted from Dr. Manton's SQrmons to show that the doctrine of infant damnation, not only entered into and made a pa1t of the sys-

"Stapfer, Theo!. Polem. vol. iv. p. 618, Ed. 1756.B

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


51/115

tematic divinity of two centmies ago, but that it wasproclaimed from the pulpit in the ears of Christiancongregations, and printed in sermons designed forspiritual edification. And we here add a quotationfrom Arthur Hildersham's .Lecturu on the Fifty-firstPsalm, in further corroboration of our statement onthis point:

"It is evident that God bath witnessed his wrath againstthe sin of infants, not only by hating their sins, but even tlieirper3


52/115

THE OLD DOCl'BINE. 61he not exhausted, is by this time thoroughly convinced

that the doctrine of infant damnation was a generallyreceived doctrine among Christians prior to the timeof Swedenborg. This extract is an important one, be-ing from Wigglesworth's " Day of Doom," " a work,"says a writer in the Christian Examiner, "repeatedlypublished in this country, and, according ~ CottonMather, in England ; a work which was taught ourfathers with their catechisms, and which many anagea person with whom we are acquainted can stillrepeat, though they may not have met with a copysince they were in leading strings ; a work which washawked about the country printed on sheets, like com-mon ballads ; and, in :fine, a work which fairly repre-sents the prevailing theology of New England at thetime it was written, and which Mather thought might'perhaps :find our children till the day [of doom] i t - ~self arrives.' "-Vol. V., p. 581. ,

Wigglesworth was the minister of Malden, and a"fellow and tutor," as Cotton Mather calls him, inHarvard College. The " reprobaU infants" are intro-duced by him at the Day of Doom, in the manner fol-lowing:

"Then to the bar all they drew near,Who di'd in infan


53/115

59 STATE O ~ Dl'P'Alfl'B . i lTEB DlU.TIL" Behold we see Adam set free,

Aud sav'd from his trespass,Whose sinful fa.II bath split us all,Aud brought us to this pass.

Canst thou deny us once to try,Or grace to us to tender,

When he finds grace before thy faceThat was the chief offender ?"

And .then the stern and inexorable jndge is represented as closing his answer to the little petitioners'prayer with these lines :~ ' You sinners are, and such a share As sinners may expect,Such you s/wJ,l h a v ~ ; for I do B < J f J ~

NM but mg OtDn elect.Yet to compare your sin with theirWho liv'd a longer time,

I do confess yours is much less,Though every sin's a crime.

'A crime it is, tlierefore in fiiu 1 You mag not l w p ~ to dtDell;' l But unto you I shall allowThe ecuiut room in hell."' !

Such are the views entert.ained by the Christianchurch prior to Swedenborg's time, respecting thefinal state of multitudes who die in infancy. Such is abrief exhibition of the evidence on which we base theassertion that the belief in the doctrine of infant dam-

o; 9;1_zedbyGoogle


54/115

THB OLD DOOTBINE. lS3nation was then the prevalent belief among Ohristians,- f iO prevalent, indeed, that those who denied it wereamong the exceptions and the heretics. The reasonwhy we have cited so many and such eminent author-ities, even at the risk of exhausting our readeTS' pa-tience, is, because we wished the evidence to be ampleand satisfactory ; and because, moreover, it is no un-common thing, at the present day, to meet with evenprofessed Calvinist.a, especially among the laity, whodeny that they believe, or that their church ever be-lieved, a doctrine so revolting as that of the damna-tion of infants. But the evidence is irresistible, thatthis was once the prevailing belief among the variousbranches of the Christian church.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


55/115

CHAPTER I I .

"The auiker-worm 1pOileth, md ll.eeth away. Thy crowned are u thelooultB, and \by oaptaiwl u the great grushoppera, which camp in \hehedp in \he cold day; but when the aun arise\h, they ll.ee away, andtheir place ill not known where \hey are."-N.urn: iii. 16, 1'1.

W RA.T, now, are the inferences forced upon us bythe testimony exhibited in the foregoing chapter,viewed in connection with the prevailing beliElf ofChristians of the present day upon the subject we havebeen considering 9 In view of the dense cimmeriandarkness which had overspread the Christian worldprior to the time of Swedenborg, who will deny thatthere waa need of a new revelation from God out ofheaven 1 And who can doubt that, ere long-datingfrom that dark period of the church when men"groped as if they had no eyes"-euch a revelationwould be vouchsafed as would effectually dissipatethese shades of night 1Besides, this old doctrine of infant damnation is partand parcel of a stupendous heap of theological errors,which had been accumulating for more than fifteen

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


56/115

66hundred years. It is seen to be logically and intimately connected with the popular doctrines of foreordination, election, reprobation, imputed ein andimputed righteousness-clearly of the so.me familyand household as these. Nor is the doctrine one whitmore immoral in its tendency, nor more dishonorableto the character of the Divine Being, than is the doctrine of a vicarious atonement, to which, indeed, insome respects, it seems intimately allied. For, saysthe learned Theophilus Gale:

" There is no justice properly so termed in respect of theCreatures, whereby God stands obliged to them, antecedent tothe constitution of his own Will. Nothing more unjust thanto deny unto God an absolute Dominion to dispose of theCreature made by him as it pleaseth him. And that GonDID, DE F AOTO, INFLICT THE WGHEST TORMENTS ON ANINNOCENT, PURE, SPOTLESS CREATURE, EVEN THE liUJU.BNATURE OF HIS OWN SoN, is most evident."

And now the question comes, Why is it that thisdoctrine of infant damnation, which once stalkedabroad so boldly, and was treated everywhere withsuch cordial respect and affection, has become so dis-agreeable and unpopular of lateW Why is it that inthese latter times it so shrinks from exposure, andanxiously seeks to hide its hideous head I Why is ittho.t this doctrine has become so much more odious toChristians now, than it was one or two centuries ago IWhy is it that you no longer hear it mentioned from

Court of the Gentilee, Part iv. B. ii . chap. vi. S1.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


57/115

56 STATE OJ' DO'il'l 'S i lTEB DEA.TH.the pulpit, or defended in theological treatises I Whyia it that Christians of every name, not even exceptingCalvinists themselves, e.re now so ready to reject anddisown it I Why, indeed, but because a new Sun hasrisen upon the moral world, making more and moremanifest the things of darliness I Why, but becausethe heavens have been opened, and the glad beamsof heavenly light have begun slowly to penetrate thedark corners of the earth, and to drive to their hidingplaces the creatures of the night1 Why, but becausethis is the beginning of a Nxw AGE-an age of genero.1and rational illumination-the day of the Lord's sec-ond appearing, which He himself declared would be"88 the lightning, which cometh out of the east, andshinetb evea unto the west;, 1 Why, but because thepresent is the dawn of that great and glorious day in'.Vhich, 88 saith the prophet Isaiah, " a man shall casthis idols of silver and his idols of gold, which theymade each one for himself to worship, to the molesand to the bats ; to go into the clefts of the rocks, andinto the tops of the ragged rocks, for fear of the Lord,and for the glory of his majesty" I And as the lightof this New Dispensation diffuses itself more and moreabroad, .it will fare with other doctrines, popular andin good repute at present, as it has already fared withthe one we have been considering. Before the lapseof another century, the doctrines, as hitherto ex-pounded, of three persons in the Godhead, a vicariousatonement, justification by faith alone, the resurrectionof the material body, and others of kindred character,

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


58/115

57will take their places among the rubbish of the past;and teaching ministen will be as unwilling to defendthem, or even to name them approvingly, 88 they arenow to defend or name the old dogma of infant damnation. This will result inevit.ably from the steadydiffusion of the light of the New Dispensation-fromthat clear rational illumination of the popular mindof Christendom, which is now everywhere going on inconsequence of the descent of the New J ernsalem.

We have not attempted here any ,,.efutati,on, of thedoctrine of infant damnation ; nor shall we attemptany. There is no occasion for that. Bnt, in strikingcontrast with the Old doebine, as herein exhibited,we shall present the New doctrine concerning the stateof infants after death, 88 set forth in the revelationsmade for the New Church. Then let the reader decidebetween them ; let him say which is from above, andwhich from beneath-which is true, and which is false.

3

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


59/115

Digitized byGoogle


60/115

PART II.THE NEW DOCTRINE;

OB

"The people that 1nlted in darku- ban aeen a great light; the7 that dwell in the land of the 1badow of death, upon them bath the lighthined."-1.a. ix. I .

"Welcome Life I The Spirit 1trivea IStrength retnl'DI and hope re't'ivea;Cloudy feara 1111d 1bapea forlornFl7 like ahadowa at the morn.O'er the earth there oomem a bloom,Sunn7 light for 1ullen gloom,Wum perfume for n.por cold-I 11111ell the !'OM above the mould."

TBOK.UI HOOD.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


61/115


62/115

OH.APTER!.THE NEW DOC',l'RINE.

"How be&utitul upon the mount.aina are the feet ot him that brinptbp>d tidings, that publiaheth peaoe ; that bringeth p>d tidings of good,\hat publiabetb aalvat.ion."-18. ill. 'r.

WE have seen how prevalent-how almost universalwas the belief in the doctrine of infant damnation,prior to the time of Swedenborg, throngh whom, as itis believed; a new dispensation of Christianity wasvouchsafed unto men. This has been shown by co-pious extracts from books and other printed documents, whose authority no one will call in question.We have seen that this doctrine, false, cruel, loathsomeand absurd as it now seems to almost every one, wasonce believed o.nd taught for Bible truth, by men whohave been looked up to and revered as distinguishedluminaries in the ~ h u r c h . We have seen that it washeld by those celebrated " Reformers," Luther, Me-lo.ncthon, Calvin, and Beza-by many eminent ministers of the gospel and professors of theology, wbo havetaken the lead in theological opinion since their t imeby the English and German churches-by the famous

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


63/115

69 ST.A.TB 01' INF.lN'l'S .A.JTEB DEA.TH.Synod ofDort-and by the W estwinster Assembly ofDivines, whose Confession of Faith still forms theplatform of the Presbyterian Church in the UnitedStates.

But rarely do we hear the belief in this doctrinepublicly asserted now. Even the rankest Calvinists,if they believe it, are chary about avowing their be-lief, and prefer to pass the question 8Ub ailentio. Thetime was, however, wit,hin the memory of some nowliving, when the case was quite otherwise. Some co.nremember to have once heard clergymen assert fromthe pulpit, and in the presence of large and intelligentaudiences, that they ho.d no doubt there were myriadsof infants groaning in hell I But what intelligentChristian congregation, in these days, would toleratelanguage like this 1 What clergyman, o w e v e r ortho-dox or Calvinistic in sentiment, would dare to utteriti We doubt if there be any. The revealing lightof the New Dispensation, and the resisting power of ,the new heavens, render it well nigh imposeible.

Seeing, then, that doctrines so monstrous as this-nnd others, equally unreasonable, which might bementioned-have been taught for Scripture verities bythe professed expounders of the Christian faith, canwe wonder that infiaelity rank and virulent has for solong time been festering in the heart of almost everycommunity throughout Christendom 1 Is it not rathera cause of wonder that infidelity has not been, and isnot now far more bold, and its advocates far morenumerous 1 Who, indeed, would not prefer to be an

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


64/115

THE NEW DOOTBINE. 63infldil, if, to be a Christian, he must believe a doctrineso horrible as tho.t of infant damnation1 Yet this doctrine is seen to be the legitimate offspring of others,still held in tolerably good repute among many, suchas the doctrines of election, reprobation, and the impu-tation of Adam's sin. Do you say it is a most unreasonable doctrine 1 True : but tho.t is no objection toit in the minds of those who diiscard reason, and deprecate the exercise of it in matters of religions faith.Neither is the fact that the doctrine is monstrous, unjust and cruel, any objection to it in the minds ofthose, who ho.ve persuaded themselves that the divineand human ideas of justice o.nd mercy have nothing incommon ; or that an act may be right and just inGod, which would be wicked and abominable in man.B u ~ there is cause for joy and t h a n k f u l n e s ~ thatthis doctrine has been compelled to retreat before thedawning light of the NEW AaE-Compelled to hide it.ahead " in the holes of the rocks, and in the caves ofthe earth, for fear of the Lord, and for the glory ofHis majesty." For the light of the New Jerusalem,which is a glorious light from the Lord out of heaven-a ight breaking forth from the spiritual or heavenlysense of the Sacred Scriptnre--is now shed abroadwith greater or less effulgence in the minds of multitudes, who have never heard of Swedenborg or thechurch of the New Jerusalem by name. And one ofthe immediate effect.a of this universally diffused light,is, to put to silence, or drive into obscurity, doctrines,whose hideous deformity it so faithfully reveals.

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


65/115

64: STA.Tll: 0'8 INF.A.BTS .APTER DEA.TH.They flee before it, and hide themselves, as owls, andbats, and all creatures of' the night, retreat to theirhiding-places as soon as the dawn of a new morningcomes.

We tum now from the absurd, dark and dreadfuldoctrine concerning the final condition of' many whodie in infancy, as believed and taught by the firstChristian Church, to that more rational, bright andbeautiful doctrine on the subject, as set forth in therevelations made for the use of' the New Church.And as the traveller in the desert, weary, and worn,and wasted by his journey, scoJ;"ched by the sun'sburning heat, faint from parching thirst, and almostblinded by the drifting sands, hails with rapture thesight of green herbage and the music of babblingbrooks, so do we joyf'olly turn from the Old to theNew Christian doctrine upon the subject under consideration ;-from the doctrine held to be ortlwdoz byJohn Calvin, the Synod of' Dort, and the Westminster.Assembly, to that revealed by the Lord through hisown chosen servant, Emanuel Swedenborg.According to the New doctrine on this subject,then, all who die in infancy go directly to heaven, orpass immediately into some of' the angelic societies,and in due time become themselves angels. Nor doesthis depend at all upon the character of' their parents,as whether they be virtuous or vicious, pious or impious, in the church or out of' it, Christians or Pagans;nor upon the circumstance of'. the infants themselves

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


66/115

65having been baptized or not. And the same is true ofchildren dying at any age prior to the period when theymay properly be said to have become free agents, and tohave confirmed, by their own free choice, either good orevil principles. To cite the language of Swedenborg:

" Soine believe that only the infants who are born withinthe church are admitted into heaven, but not those whoare born out of the church; and they assign as a reason., thatinfants within the church are baptized, and are thus initiatedinto the faith of the church. But they are not aware that noone receives heaven or faith by baptism ; for baptism is onlya sign and memorial that man is to be regenerated, and thathe is capable of being regenerated who is born within thechurch, because the church possesses the Word which con-tains the divine truths by which regeneration is effected, andin the church the Lord is known, by whom it is accom-plished. Be it known, therefore, that every infant, whereso-ever he is born,-whether within the church or out of it,whether of pious parents or of wicked parents,-is receivedby the Lord when he dies, and is educated in heaven. He isthere instructed according to divine order, and is imbued withaffections of good, and by them with knowledges of truth; andafterwards, as he is perfected in intelligence and wisd9m, heis introduced into heaven, and becomes an angel Everyman who thinks from reason, may know that no one is bomfor hell, but all for heaven, and that man himself is in fault i fhe goes to hell; but that infants cmmot be in fault."-H. B.829.

Thus, according to the New doctrine, ALL who diein infancy and childhood go to heaven. They are notangels, however, immediately after their decease,

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


67/115

66 ST.A.TB OJI JJD'.ilfl'I A F T D DEA.TH.though they are in the society of angels ; for they aredestitute of that intelligence and wisdom by whichthe angels are characterized. Or, they are rudimenta.langels, as the ovary or seed-bud is the rudiment ofthe yet immature fruit, or as little children here onearth are initial or rudimental men. They have thesame infantile form and infantile mind which they hadbefore their decease ; for the death of the body worksno immediate change in the spiritual organism, or inthe mental characteristics. So long, therefore, as in-fants in the other world are destitute of heavenly wis-dom, they are not angels, although associated withangels. Accordingly Swedenborg says:

" When infants die, they are still infants in the other life.They possess the same infantile mind, the same innocence inignorance, and the same tenderness in all things. They areonly in rodimental states introductory to the angelic; for infants are not angels, but become angels. Every one, on hisdecease, is in a similar state of life to that in which he was inthe world ; an infant in a state of infancy, a boy in a state of boyhood, and a youth, a man, or a.Ii old man, in the state ofyouth. of manhood, or of age ; but the stat.e of every one isafterwards changed. The state of infants excels that of allothers, because they are in innocence, and evil is not yetrooted in them by actual life ; for innocence is of such a nature, that all things of heaven may be implanted in it, becaUBeinnocence is the receptacle of the truth of faith and of thegood of love."-H. H. 830.

The state of infants in the spiritual world is farmore perfect than that of infants in this world ; for

o; 9;1;zedbyGoogle


68/115

GTthey are not invested with a material body, but with abody like that of the angels. They are in that higheror more interior sphere of human life, where all things are more perfect than they are in this lower sphere ;for it is a universal law, that the perfection of thingsincreases; according to the progre&'! towards interiors.Being spirit.a untrammelled by gross matter, they actimmediately according to the promptings of their in-terior affections ; and all their mental and bodilypowers are more rapidly unfolded than those of in-fant.a in this world. Then they are far more wiselygoverned and instructed, being in constant associationwith, and under the immediate care and direction of,some of the best of the angels. To quote again thetreatise on Heaven and Hell:

' ' The state of infants in the other life is much more per-fect than that of infants in the world, because they are not.clothed with an earthly body, but with a body like that ofangels. The earthly body in itself is obtuse, and does not re-ceive its first senaat.i.ons and first motions from t.he interior orspiritual world, but from the exterior or natural world. In-fants, therefore, in the world; must learn to walk, to nse theirlimbs, and to speak ; and even their senses, as the senses ofseeing and hearing, are to be opened in them by use. It isotherwise with infants in the other life. They are spirits, andtherefore they a.cl immediately according to their interiors.They walk without previous teaching, and speak also ; but atfirst they speak only from general affections not clearly dis-tinguished into ideas of thought. In a short time they areinitiated also into these, and acquire them speedily, becauset.heir exteriors

Documents

Benjamin F Barrett BEAUTY for ASHES New York 1855