of vocal and instrumental music, was closed by singing the Doxology. Mr. Presland subsequently received from a friend a beautiful Pocket Communion Service, "Presented as a token of sincere regard, and in grateful appreciation of his ministrations in a sick-room." March 20, 1872.

Marriages.

March 28th, at the New Jerusalem Church, King Street, Keighley, by Mr. Swinburn of Embsay, Mr. Timothy Mitchell to Miss Martha Dixon.

March 30th, at the New Jerusalem Church, Heywood, by the Rev. R. Storry, Mr. John Glover to Miss Fanny Atkinson, both of Heywood.

At the New Jerusalem Church, Newcastle-on-Tyne, by Rev. W. Ray, March 30th, Mr. Alexander Forster of Gateshead to Miss Mary Dowse of Felling.

April 4th, at the Palace Gardens Church, Kensington, by the Rev. Dr. Bayley, assisted by the Rev. John Presland, brother of the bride, Mr. John Foster Howe to Caroline, fourth daughter of Mr. Thomas Presland of Westbourne, Grove Terrace, Bayswater. The occasion was especially interesting, from being the first marriage celebrated in the Palace Gardens Church since its consecration as a New Church place of worship.

Obituary.

On the 27th March 1872, at Bradford, aged 25, Mary Ann Musgrove passed into the spiritual world. The immediate cause was consumption. Together with her parents she was a member of the society, and was notable for her regular and diligent attendance at the services of the Church. She was of a meek and affectionate disposition, and throughout her illness evinced a calm submission and resignation to the divine will. A year ago she gave in her name with satisfaction and desire to become a teacher in the Sabbath school, which has since been formed, but shortly after her illness commenced, and she was not permitted to realize her desire, and from that time was seldom able to be present at church. In a small society like this, the loss of one so young and so willing to be useful is much felt by her friends, but for her "to live was Christ, to die was gain." May the influence of her quiet and gentle spirit be long felt amongst those she leaves behind.

On 2d April, at his residence, Camberwell, London, Mr. William Renwick, in the 59th year of his age. The deceased cordially received our doctrines whilst at Newcastle-on-Tyne, about forty years ago, and ever afterwards was aithful to his early convictions. For many years he resided on the Surrey side of the Metropolis, and when there fore the South London Society was established, he gladly availed himself of this opportunity of worshipping with his brethren. He took a lively interest in the welfare of the infant effort, and at his death filled the honourable offices of minister's deacon, and member of committee. His kind and unobtrusive manners endeared him to all with whom he came in contact, and his removal will be deeply felt by his colleagues and fellow members.

One by one the earthly links that bind the early New Church to the present are being snapped, and we now record the departure of one who was amongst the first of her children, Sophia, wife of Mr. James Pettet, who exchanged worlds, March 28th, 1872, aged 67 years. She was the daughter of Mr. Daniel Richardson, artist, one of the founders of the Cross Street Society. Associated from girlhood with Mr. Noble, Mr. Hindmarsh, Mr. Sibley, and other worthy pioneers of the New Jerusalem, she never lost the influence of their teaching and example, and always looked back with pleasure and spoke with delight of sweet half hours at home with them, and of her connec tion with their public ministrations. Few, very few perhaps, have lived so unselfish self-denying a life as she of whom we write. Truly her last thoughts and last words were those of care and concern for others, and this heavenly principle ran through the actions of her whole life. Not one of the many to whom she was known but can remember some kind loving action on her part towards them. For years past she had been sorely afflicted with a most painful disease, but in this, as in all her troubles, she never lost a deep unflinching trust in the Lord's good providence, and would quietly endure, waiting patiently for the end that should take her onward to those who had gone before her, but whom she never ceased to love. Her mortal remains were buried with her sister's in Plumstead old churchyard.

ERRATUM.-Page 211, line 1, for "proprietary" read "propriety."

OF REGENERATION BEFORE "THE FALL."

Ir is reasonable to expect that as the New Church progresses there will occasionally arise new questions in philosophy and religion requiring solution. The genius of the new dispensation knows nothing of the policy which would prescribe the circle of its present information for all future time. Attempts of that kind belong to mistakes of the past. The advancement of human knowledge is one of the evidences by which the existence of the New Jerusalem is to be recognized as coming down from heaven. Any attempt to set up the opinions and conclusions of to-day as final things, to be accepted by our successors, would be a presumption in us, and an injury to them. Just views concerning the Divine Providence suggest that each generation should profit by the experience of its predecessor, and that the information. acquired in one period should conduce to the evolution of something superior in that which is to follow. Everything of the Church originates in the Infinite, and no attainments of humanity can reach its fulness. There will always be something to learn and to know about Divine truths; and the more we know the more certain are we that there is more to learn: and so it will ever be.

We may, from the instructions we have received, have some general knowledge of the foundations on which the New Jerusalem will rest -such as the exclusive Deity of the Lord, and the Divinity of His Word; but we cannot reasonably suppose that we are in possession of all the Wisdom by which that magnificent structure is to be distinguished. It seems evident that the new influx from heaven, by

U

which it has been introduced to the world, will induce new inquiries and perceptions among mankind, and that nothing but perversity can arrest its educational purposes.

It is common for New Churchmen to appeal to the wonderful evolutions of knowledge which have taken place in the present century, as clear indications that we are living in a new era of intelligence. The unseen influences which have created and explained so many questions in philosophy and religion, and swept away some of the follies by which both have been surrounded, have not completed their work; they are still operating, and we of to-day are not acquainted with all their providential purposes. To be reasonable we must admit, not only that there are new truths to be unfolded, but that those with which we have formed some intimacy are awaiting a fuller development, nor will it ever be becoming for any one to suppose that he is at the head of that ladder the top of which reaches unto heaven. The declaration of the Lord, "I have many things to say unto you, but you cannot bear them now," will be applicable to all ages of His Church; and, therefore, we ought not to be surprised if questions should arise leading to the correction of some opinions which we may have cherished, or to the fuller development of some truth which we may have but imperfectly apprehended.

The heavenly doctrines which we receive concerning the structure of the Divine Word, and the glorification of the Lord's humanity, which that Word reveals, are peculiar to the New Church. By these doctrines she is distinguished from every other dispensation. We acknowledge them as higher and clearer developments of truth on those subjects than any which have been known to her predecessors. But advanced and satisfactory as may be our perception on those subjects, the most intelligent student among us will always feel that there is much to learn respecting them, and that more will be unfolded as the educated future arrives. Of course the source of that superior knowledge is contained in the Divine Word, and no doubt all such developments will be aided by and be consistent with the writings of the Church. Still it will always be a requirement of wisdom for the men of one age, to confess that what they know of spiritual truths is as nothing to that which may be known by their earnest and faithful

successors.

But our present apprehension of some subjects which Swedenborg has taught may not be so full and complete as he intended it should be. We may have failed to gather his teaching into that logical focus

which is requisite to see their real significance. Hence it is that many readers of his writings, among whom are some who are in an affirmative principle, and who have been endowed with considerable penetration and learning, have experienced difficulties with some points of the religious doctrine and spiritual philosophy which he has taught. This is well known, and the interests of truth are best served by confessing it. When a difficulty is acknowledged, a step is taken towards its removal: then other students may be induced to bring to our assistance what help they can; and if the acknowledgment is made in good faith with an "honest heart," it is not unreasonable to suppose that the mind may be prepared by such a course for the reception of an influx of light upon difficult subjects which could not otherwise be obtained.

Men in general are not gifted with deep insight into that spiritual truth about which Swedenborg has written; and if it should happen that a difficulty is occasionally experienced with something he has said there need be no scruple in making the acknowledgment. Our difficulty is not to be considered as a result of his mistake but of our obscurity, and the profusion of light which is seen to distinguish so many other parts of his wonderful writings ought to be sufficient to assure us that every problem on which we may alight, and by which we may be perplexed, will be satisfactorily resolved as the spiritual education of the Church progresses.

Now there is one problem connected with what Swedenborg has said of the first chapter of Genesis which has been suggested to us and which it may be useful to consider. He tells us that the six days therein mentioned mean so many successive states of regeneration. The question is, in what sense is the term regeneration there employed? It is thought, as man had not then eaten the forbidden fruit, and that as the gospel process of regeneration was designed to repair the mischief of that calamity, that it must have been made use of in some specific if not different sense. It is asked how the same term can apply to men so differently circumstanced in two such different epochs of our race? How can the process by which primeval men were first carried into Eden be described by the same term as that which indicates the process of their return? Thus the condition from which the process starts in each case is presumed to be different, and from this it is argued that the processes themselves must have been different, and therefore do not admit of being described by the same term. Why then has Swedenborg so employed it?

Those apparent difficulties have been urged in good faith, and therefore deserve consideration; but they all spring either from some relics of mistaken orthodoxy about the fall, or from some oversight of what Swedenborg has said upon the condition of primeval men. They suppose that those men were originally created to receive and at once to evolve the influx of spiritual life; that they had in them nothing contrary to the purposes of that life, and were introduced to Eden with all its blessings without experiencing any opposition or resistance. But that is not Swedenborg's teaching on the subject. He considers the second verse of the first chapter of Genesis as treating of men who were in a dark condition. It is because the successive removal of this darkness from them, and their consequent reception of spiritual light and life, are treated of in the subsequent portion of the chapter, that he has described the process as regeneration. Hence it was the same kind of work as that which regeneration has to accomplish now, and therefore there is no reason for supposing that Swedenborg employed the term in reference to primeval men in a sense different to that which is proper to its gospel meaning. In both cases it refers to the evolution and establishment of heavenly life. It is quite true that the regeneration of every individual is different in some respects, the difference depending on the idiosyncracy of his internal condition and the consequent peculiarity of his disposition to receive those divine influences by which, under every circumstance, it must be effected; but in all cases it consists in the removal of evil and the implantation of goodness, and therefore regeneration is the right term by which to express them all. Hence its application to the men who are treated of in the first chapter of Genesis is not to be excepted. The regeneration therein treated of is not to be considered as the complete regeneration of the individuals on whom the process was began, but that the advantages of one generation were taken up and carried forward with improvements by another, and this successively until the highest were attained. In other words, one age of men acquiring the state of life represented by that which was created on the first day, and another age acquiring the state represented by that which was created on the second day, and so on until the state represented by the seventh was secured.

And this enables us to understand the meaning and importance of Swedenborg's exposition of the passage, "Let us make man in our image after our likeness" (Gen. i. 26). This, he tells us, refers to the ministry of angels in the work of our regeneration, and also that all