Höpken's government, which of course Höpken would regard as self-evident wisdom; the second is against absolute monarchy, and is filled with much declamation about the dangers to be apprehended from the insidious seductions of the Babylonian Whore,'-the Popish Religion,-not at all above the level of the common prejudices of the day; the third is on finance, and receives Count Höpken's high commendation.

From 1762 to 1764 Swedenborg probably was at Amsterdam, but nothing is known of his doings. In 1765 he was at home, and afterwards came to England. At Gottenburg he met one Dr. Beyer, who became a convert to his views. On reaching London, Swedenborg went to his bookseller to see how his works were selling, and was disgusted to find they were not selling at all. He accordingly resorts to his peculiar style of revenge, and produces from the spiritual world damaging accounts of certain English bishops. The Three Frogs of the Apocalypse are made to subserve his spleen,-those very serviceable Frogs who have since lent themselves to Mr. E. B. Elliott's theological prejudices,-unhappy creatures, 'every thing by turns, and nothing long!' The amusing part of it is that King George II. over-hears from heaven Swedenborg's conversation with the evil bishops. Our seer was a sad toady to royalty, and he puts many a princely scoundrel into celestial quarters. But though English bishops were indifferent to his spiritual pretensions, and would not read the copies of his books which he presented to them, an English priest,-one Thomas Hartley, rector of Winwick, Northamptonshire,― gave in his adhesion. He seems to have been a simple-minded, good man, who liked Swedenborg personally, and stuck to him and his doctrines without wavering, and without losing his preferment. There were a few other disciples in England, but Swedenborg never sought to gather a sect around him. only desire was to obtain a hearing for his opinions in all the churches.

His

In Sweden, however, something more actively hostile than indifference was shown towards his writings. His only nephew, Bishop Filenius, laid hands upon a boxful of copies of his 'De Amore Conjugiali,' and submitted the book to censure. It certainly was quite open to it, for some of the doctrines it propounds are very questionable morality, and such as no Christian can hesitate to condemn. This seizure led to nothing. But a prosecution was set on foot against two disciples, Beyer and Rosen, by Dean Ekcborn, of the Gottenburg Consistory. After much wrangling, in which Swedenborg took an angry part, the prosecution fell to the ground; and, beyond having the importation of his works into Sweden prohibited, this was all

the persecution he actually suffered. A plot, indeed, was laid by his nephew, Bishop Filenius, to seize him and put him into a madhouse; but Count Höpken forewarned him, and so frustrated the scheme. We quite agree with Mr. White, that, 'considering Swedenborg's offences against established opinions, 'he got through life very easily.' But the fact may be accounted for: Swedenborg was not a clergyman; moreover in his wildest visions he took care to reserve heavenly places for great people. In fact, so pertinaciously had he proclaimed his acquaintance with the spiritual condition of princes, that he was actually consulted by a statesman with respect to a missing prince, John William of Saxe-Coburg-Saalfeldt, who disappeared in 1745, without anyone knowing what had become of him. Nothing was said of his age or person. Swedenborg answered, that the Prince, after living twenty-seven years in the Spiritual World, was in a society to which he could not readily gain admission; that the angels had no knowledge of 'his state; and that the matter was not of sufficient importance 'to warrant an application to the Lord about it. These excuses,' as Mr. White very judiciously remarks, may have been good, 'but it is provoking to observe how often Swedenborg seems to 'evade matter-of-fact inquiries, whilst profuse enough where he 'could not be checked.' This circumstance reminds us that when our own Prince of Wales, returning from his visit to America, did not arrive at the time he was expected, thereby causing much anxiety to the nation,-it was very pertinently asked through the newspapers why the clairvoyants did not come forward and give useful proof of their alleged spiritualistic powers, by giving the much desired information as to what had become of his Royal Highness; but there was no voice, nor any to answer.'

There is little more to be said about the life of Emanuel Swedenborg. After the hubbub about his writings in Sweden he left his native land, never to return. He spent some time in Holland, and thence proceeded to London in 1771. On Christmas eve of that year he was stricken with apoplexy. He partially recovered from this attack. Towards the end of February, 1772, he wrote this remarkable letter to John Wesley :

'SIR,-I have been informed in the World of Spirits that you have a strong desire to converse with me. I shall be happy to see you, if you will favour me with a visit. EMANUEL SWEDENBORG.'

Wesley wrote back that he was about to take a six months' journey, but would wait upon him on his return to London. Swedenborg answered, that the proposed visit would be too

late, as he should enter the Spiritual World on the 29th of 'the next month, March, never more to return. Wesley re'mained unmoved: he fulfilled his programme, and Swedenborg his.' Wesley returned to London on the 10th of October, and Swedenborg died on the 29th of March, 1772. So departed, in his eighty-fourth year, one of the most remarkable of the many religious eccentrics by whom the world has, from time to time, been perplexed. Of his habits and doings little is known, for he had no very intimate friends; he wrote very few letters, and the journals he kept were no more than dry records of what he saw in his travels, or else mysterious reports of his alleged intercourse with the spirit-world. From these scanty sources of information, we gather that Swedenborg's private character was that of an amiable courteous gentleman; deeply religious, according to his own peculiar views of religion; an inoffensive citizen; a severely temperate man, as regarded all personal indulgence;-in short, a highly respectable member of society, whose general conduct and bearing had nothing in it to excite either special admiration or censure. Yet, looking back upon his life as it is exhibited in these volumes, Swedenborg was a man about whom it is almost impossible to avoid starting hypotheses to explain him. He was an oddity that must be accounted for. These hypotheses will vary, according to the bias of their framers, and their disposition to deal leniently or severely, seriously or flippantly, with the monstrosities (we use the word in no invidious sense-but, as one would say in physics, lusus natura) of religious growth. We cannot undertake to exhibit all conceivable hypotheses, but we will venture to state, very fairly, three which will most probably suggest themselves to ordinary minds.

Setting aside his

The first hypothesis is that of insanity. religious pretensions, there is nothing whatever in his general life and conduct to favour this view. He went through life and about his ordinary business in the most sober and unobtrusive manner. Religious monomania is the utmost that could be alleged against him, even by those who assume that he was a maniac. For the conclusion of general derangement, there is no true evidence exhibited; and how far a person ought to be considered to be generally deranged because he is found to be a monomaniac, is a question we do not pretend to solve. The remarkable Thwaites will-case is still fresh in public recollection, and they who desire to be informed upon this point had better look up the report of the trial in that cause. We will content ourselves with observing that the charge of madness is more readily made, and promises at first sight an easier solution of questions of idiosyncracy, than an investigation of the charge

generally justifies. It is a trite remark, that the world knows nothing of its greatest men: and side by side with it might be set another reflection-to the effect, that the world knows not how much it owes to its madmen. 'He is mad,' sounds a crushing allegation; but it often disappears under scrutiny, and fools are the most apt at bringing it forward. If horses could speak, we should frequently hear a three-legged jade try to ruin the character of a good horse by saying 'he bolts.'

The next hypothesis is that Swedenborg was an impostor. He may have been an impostor, but we must confess that the evidence of his life goes against the supposition. An impartial judge would say that Swedenborg believed most deeply in himself and his religious pretensions-that he certainly was the chief among his own dupes. The common motives of advantage are wanting to account for his imposture. His opinions were a source of loss, not profit, to him. The books in which he promulgated them cost him large sums of money, little or none of which, as we have seen, ever returned to him from their sale. He indeed appears always in earnest when advancing his theories, and desirous that others should embrace them; but the strong personal anxiety in their success, which we should expect to find in an impostor, is not to be found in him. In his lifetime his opinions made very little way-in fact, so far as obtaining credence, or even notice went, they were a signal failure. This would have been disappointing to an impostor; but he manifests no disappointment-on the contrary, he bears it with equanimity. It is true that he was annoyed, because the English bishops would not read the books he sent them, and he also waxed wrathful when his nephew Filenius agitated against him; but these instances are sufficiently accounted for, without the hypothesis of imposture. We do not meet with any instance of his being chagrined because a person refused to accept his theories after having attended to them. From what we know of his personal intercourse with people, it does not appear that he ever made any strenuous efforts to win a convert: he seems rather indifferent about gaining disciples. There is, indeed, nothing in the mere facts of Swedenborg's uneventful and tranquil life to test the question whether he was, or was not, an impostor. M. de Presseusé truly remarks: L'imposteur vit de son mensonge, et ne meurt pas pour lui.' But as Swedenborg had no need, from his ample means, to live by his religious opinions; so, owing to the tolerant indifference with which they were received by the world, he was never called upon to suffer for them; consequently, in his case, there is a

1 Vie de Jésus Christ, p. 161.

total absence of external proof either for or against the notion of imposture.

The last hypothesis we shall adventure is that of a morbid desire for fame. This is even more hopeless to establish by the evidence of his life than the other two. His earlier and most remarkable theological works were published anonymously. He might, indeed, have been ambitious of that peculiar kind of reputation which is achieved in becoming a great unknown, and have craved the eccentric delight of hearing himself anxiously inquired after. If it were so, he certainly missed his mark. Until he made himself known by putting his name on the titlepages of his books, he was simply unknown, without being great. Moreover, he enjoyed sufficient distinction, both social and scientific, in his own country, to satisfy any reasonable ambition.

With regard to Swedenborg's theology, we have already declined to take it in hand. We have neither space nor inclination for the task; and we shall content ourselves with making these few superficial observations according to what has struck us in the perusal of Mr. White's book. He appears to have knocked his head against a good many heresies, ancient and modern-a good many more than we care to specify; but there are three salient points standing out from the mass of his opinions, which touch theology in general. Two are of a negative, and one is of an affirmative, character. The two former are protests-the one against tripersonalism, the other against solifidianism, as he and his followers affect to call the belief in three Persons, in the ever-blessed Trinity, and the doctrine of Justification by Faith alone. We shall not attempt to explain the grounds of his objection to tripersonalism, beyond observing that in Swedenborg's mind three Persons could mean nothing else than three Gods-tripersonalism was identical with tritheism -and that as he believed in one God he could not believe in three Persons. Swedenborg professed his complete ignorance of dogmatic theology, and quotes supernatural authority for maintaining that ignorance. As a proof that he scrupulously did so, his opinion that three Persons were, and could only be, the same as three Gods, may be accepted as evidence. With regard to his strong and repeated abhorrence of solifidianism, we may remark that it was partly the fruit of home-teaching, for his father, Bishop Svedberg, is reported to have entertained the same objection; and partly a not unnatural recoil of an educated and intelligent mind from the bald, hard, and barren dogmatism about abstract faith being the sole ground of salvation, which the Lutherans of his day formally and coldly preached. The affirmative opinion we refer to touches the subject of the