THE UNFETTERED CONSCIENCE: A STUDY OF SECTARIANISM,

SPIRITUAUSM, AND SOCIAL REFORM IN THE

NEW JERUSALEM CHURCH, 1840-1870

Scott Trego Swank

A DISSERTATION

in

History

Presented to the Faculty of the Graduate School of Arts and Sciences

of the University of Pennsylvania in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philo,sophy.

1970
 70-25,7~0

SWANK, Scott Trego, 1941­

THE UNFETTERED CONSCIENCE: A STUDY OF SECTARIAN­
ISM, SPIRITUALISM, AND SOCIAL REFORM-IN THE NEW
JERUSALEM CHURCH, 1840-1870.
University of Pennsylvania. Ph.D., 1970
History, modern

University Microfilms. A XEROX Company. Ann Arbor. Michigan

,;' CO PYRI GH T

Scott Trego Swank

1970
 INDEX

abolition, see slavery, abolition of Ballou, Adin, 181, 358-359,

Academy, 47, 52, 70, 78, 107n,

359n, 448-449

113-114, 115-142, 119n, 158n,

Baptists, 207, 210, 324

159-161, 235, 237, 244, 254,

Barclay, Hetty, 21, 85

257, 393, 442, 444, 452-453,

Barclay, Samuel, 85, 107n

454, 456, 463, 464, 466, 468,

[Barrett, Ben~., 67 68n,

470, 472, 474-475; opposition

-=US, 134,04]--=-!E) 16 ,

to Spiritualism, 264-265, 409­

219, 240, 376, 393, 402,

410; view of Swedenborg, 273­

452, 453, 454, 473; con­

276, 410; on Homeopathy, 410­

flict with General Conven­

411
tion, 150 ff., 154n; conflict

Ager, Rev. John C., 67, 125, 125n

with the New Era, 201-202,

Allopathy: state of orthodox medi­

213, 213n, 227, 236-237,

c"ine, 381-383; Homeopathic

264; relationship with G.

challenge to, 384, 389-391,

Bush, 244, 259; see

4ul-405
Thomas Wilks

American Medical Association, Beers, Dr. Lewis, 244

382, 391
Be1ding, Rev. Lemuel C., 365,

American Revolution, 368, 451

366, 368

Anglicanism, 15-16
Bell, John, 45, 307

Animal Magnetism, see Mesmerism

Benade, Bishop Andrew, 37n

Anthony, Susan B., 181

Benade, William, 36-37, 41­
Anti-sectarianism, see sectarian­ 42, 43, 44, 47, 51, 52,

ism 104, lOS, 107n, 114, 127­

antislavery, see slavery 142, 139n, 142-143, ISO,

Arthur, Timothy Shay, 26n, 67n, 153n, 159, 235, 236, 237­

107n, 155, 366; opposition to

238, 257, 343, 420; rela­

Mesmerism and Spiritualism,

tionship to R. DeCharms,

268-270; on "Ethical Capitalism,"

120-122; principles of,

379; on marriage, 437-441; on

129-142; on education,

temperance, 445
129-130, 136-138; conflict

,( associationism, see Fourierism

with T. Worcester, 132-142,

Atlee, Edwin, 87, 87n, 95

139n; on Swedenborg's

Bailey, Abbe, 22, 459, 462

authority, 248; on civil

Bailey, Francis, 20, 21-22, 24,

government, 453-457

29, 54, 56
Bergasse, Nicolas, 166-167

Bailey, Jane, 22
Bigelow, John, 305, 305n,

329

111

 Birney, James, 177

Cabell, N. F., 107n, 112n,

Blake, William, 17, 17n

lIS, 131, 243, 330, 338­

Boericke, Francis E., 393

343

Boericke and Tafel, 392

Calvinism, 174, 207, 285,

Brickman, Rev. A. 0., 458n

297, 335, 338

Brisbane, Albert, 352, 353, 354­ Canton, Illinois, Phalanx,

355, 365, 423

369, 375, 449

Brittan, Samuel B. ,208, 209,

Carll, Rev. Maskell M., 55,'

210, 249
73, 357

Brook Farm, 360-362

Carpenter, Henry A., 29, 32,

Brown, Solyman, 73-74, 202,

35, 35n, 43

324, 325-326, 327, 328,

Carpenter, Jacob, 24, 26, 29

329, 365, 366, 368

Carpenter, Samuel Sangston,

Brownson, Orestes, 290-293

347-349

Buc~er, Alfred, 214

Carter, Robert, 200, 323-324

Buelow, Count Henry von, 24-25,

Cary, Margaret, 58

26
Cathcart, C. G., 455

Burnham, Mary (Pancoast). 51,

Catholicism, 13, 291

116, 152
"celestlalism," 409-410

Burnham, Rev. Nathan C., 42,

Central Convention, 34, 42-43,

51, 93, 93n, 114, 115-122,

68, 70, 71, 74, 103-105,

120n, 128, 133, 134, 139n,

107n, 114, 127-128, 153,

257, 393, 402, 468

235, 251, 252, 325, 339,

--Bush, George, 78, 115, 134,

340, 364; formation of 97 ff. ,

47, 160, 188-189, 225,

117; 134; and Fourierism,

229, 240-264, 358-359,

366-367

376, 401, 426n, 446, 453,

Channing, William H., 157,

.472, 473, 475; early life of,

360

241-243; wife and family,

Chapman, Jonathan (Johnny

241-242; reception of Sweden­

Appleseed), 21

borg, 243-244, 294-298; and

Chase, Frank, 283, 289-290

Mesmerism, 245-250, 257;

Chase, Warren, 181, 182n,

relationship with A. J. Davis,

283-286, 290

247-250; on Spiritualism,
Chesterman, James, 72

250-251, 253-257; relation­

Child, Lydia Maria, 334

ship with R. DeCharms, 244,

cholera, 385, 389, 401-402,

l 251, ~264; on the ministry,

404

253,~, 257; on social

Christ: Swedenborgian view

reform, 253; on slavery, 329 ff. ;

of, 4; atonement of, 6-7;

. on Homeopathy, 397-400
resurrection of, 243

Civil War, 50-51, 161, 233-234,

Christian Science, 191

285, 285n, 338, 349, 450,

Christianity: Deistic challenge

452-458, 461-464, 467-472,

to, 1-2; Swedenborg's

474, 477
re-interpretation of, 2 ff. ;

Iv
 Swedenborgian challenge to. Corres pondence s: doctrine of.
4. 231. 243. 243n; opposition 3n. 285. 316n
to Mesmerism. 13; and spir­ Crisis. The. 222. 224. 230-232;

itualism. see Christian changed to New Church

spiritualism; Swedenborgian Independent. 219. 234

rejection of. 294 ft., 294n Damish. Frederick. 24, 26

Chrlsty. George W •• 214. 217n. ~iS. Andrew Jackson. 168.

409
169. 169n. 170 ff•• 208­
Chronothermalism, 397-399
209. 213. 218. 247-250.

Church of the New Jerusalem. see

262, 268. 270. 273. 274.

New Church
281-283. 286. 290. 423;

Cincinnati. 23. 46. 56n. 102­ early life of. 170-171; and

103. 116. 118. 123. 151-152; Mesmerism. 171-173. 247­

origins of New Church in. 55 ft.• 250; conflict with Phenom­

75. 402
enonal Spiritualists, 177­

C1app. Otis. 69. 246n, 254. 255.

180; organizations founded

362. 362n. 392. 445.454

by. 178-179; and T. L.

Clive. Andrew J.• see John A.

Harris. 208-209; compared

Little
to Swedenborg. 265-266

C1owes. John. 15-17. 159

Dana. Charles. 360

r
"--
Co1eridge. Samuel Taylor. 17

colonization. 321-322. 328. 335-:1

342 . J
Day. Willard. 455

DeCharms. ~d. 35. 42-44,

47. SS. 57. 67. 67n. 70.

cQ!Jlmu~nis_m: development 74. 74-\ 8 98n. 113. 116.
of. 352 ft.; and T. L. Hams. 117. 128. 128n, 134. 152.

210. 216-217; and Sweden­ 157-160. 251. 301-302,

borgianism. 352-380. 446. 449; 339, 341. 378. 393, 466;

communities of: Yellow Springs. early life of 78-84, 235;

Ohio. 357; Jasper Colony. 326­ pastorates. 84-96, 106;

327. 357; DUvet. Kansas. 357; later life, 106-112; prin­

Hopedale. Mass., 358-359; ciples of. 100-106. 257­

Brook Farm. 360-362; LeRays­ 264. 271; relationship with
v1l1e Phalanx. 365. 368-369. (
George Bush. 244, 251.

375. 449; Canton Phalanx. 369. 257-264; on slavery. 324 •

. 375. 449; Wisconsin Phalanx. 326-329. 330; on Spiritual­

285. 285n; Mountain Cove ism. 257-264. 274-276; on

Community. 210; Ohio Phalanx, Swedenborg, 271. 274-276;

123; Oneida Community. 414n. on Homeopathy. 394-401

422. 424
DeCharms. William. 79. 86

Condy. Jonathan. 82-83. 85. 100

Deism. 1-2.8=9. 11. 14. 40.

·conjugial heresy... 68. 69n. 73­

53. 58. 75. 163. 268. 322

74. 103-104. 136. 150. 314n; Demuth. Lawrence J.• 36-37

explanation of. 91
divorce reform. 284. 437-440;

"conjugiallove... 421 ff•• 421n.

see marriage reform

432. 434. 435. 437. 440-442.

Doherty, Hugh. 363

446

 r~ 10 -((1
cJ? ~t. CJ-.-, 1")-dI....:
I::
. - '¥ '" t "-j
Doughty. Charles J., 72-74. 96­
229, 235. 240. 244, 268,

97, 149, 366, 367-368; wife

273, 336. 362n, 364. 393,

of, 200
442, 444, 452-454, 470,

Douglas, John, 200. 201

472, 475

Eastern Convention, see General

Freneau. Phllip. 22

Convention
Fugitive Slave Law, 347-348

Eckstein, Frederick, 22, 56, 88

_-,G::.::a~l.!=Ws, 171. 270. 396

Eckstein. Johann. 22, 22n

Garrison, Wllliam Uoyd, 181.

Edmonds, Judge John Worth. 176.

329, 329n, 337n

178
General Church of Pennsylvania,

education, see New Church. on

see Academy

education
General Convention. 34, 47,

Ehrenfried, Joseph, 26-28, 26n,

48, 49. 53, 69, 70, 84. 90,

27n, 30, 36, 38-39, 43, 347

96, 97. 98, 102, 114, 124,

Elder, Cyrus, 347

126, 202. 240, 244, 251,

Ellis, John. 392, 393, 423-424.

252. 254, 266,325. 340.

425, 445
364, 409. 433, 456, 473­

Emerson, Ralph Waldo, 64-65,

477; conflict with the

(
245
Academy, 138-139, 141;

England, 1, 14-18, 71, 72, 207,

conflict with B. F. Barrett,

214-215. 220
150 ff•• 473; and Henry

- "Ethical Capitalism, .. 377-380 J

Weller on Spiritualism. 221­

Fryberger. Catharine. 415-418

228; "Wilks Case." 2:6­
Falk Lewis, 50
237; M~setts Associa­

Farrlngton, Elijah, 283~ 286­

tion of, 266-267. 469;

287, 290
Pennsylvania Association of,

Feniald. Wood bury, 209-210,

49, 128. 128n. 132. 138,

217:-219, 232, 233, 234, 249,

238. 456; Rules of Order.

454, 472
1838, 34, 91, 97, 97n. 150;

[Field, George, 77, 220-221, 264,

on the Civil War. 461-471

365
Germany, 9-10. 25, 26, 36.

Fisher, Miers, 20, 20n

38-39, 44; rise of Homeop­

Fourier, Charles, 167, 352, 354­

athy in. 384-385

355. 363. 365, 366, 367, 371,

Giles. Chauncey. 124, 125,

372, 376. 423

160, 332-333, 464-468

FouTierism. 123, 174, 182n, 285,

Girling, William, 30, 32

314n, 352-356, 353n. 362­

Glen, James, 19, 21, 23, 57,

377, 381, 392, 428. 447

323

Fox, Kate, 169

Goddard. Warren, 59, 61-62.

Fax, Margaret; 169, 175

266

Franklin College, 24, 25, 309

Goyder, Rev •. Thomas, 323

C -free-love," 229, 284, 414n,

422-425, 426, 433-434

-Free Spirits," 114-115, 134,

Gram. Hans, 388-389. 390,

392. 393

Gray, John F., 388, 393

146-157, I58n. 160-161,

Greely. Horace. 181, 356. 397

vi

 Hahnemann Medka1 College. 388

Ho1combe. William. 393. 399.
Hahnemann. Samuel. 384. 387.
401. 467; and slavery. 343­
389. 390. 396. 411. 412
345. 405-406. 407; con­

Hand. General Edward. 25-26

version to Homeopathy. 401­

Hardinge. Emma, 289

405; and Spiritualism. 405,

Hare. Robert. 288. 288n. 316n

407-410

Hargrove. John. 53. 84. 85

Holley. Nathanie1. 72-73

Harmonia1 philosophy: of A. J.
Homeopathic College of Penn­

Davis. 171-173; of LaRoy

sylvania. 388

Sunderland. 193-194; of
Homeopathy. 106. 118, 371;

r-- Charles Fourier. 354-356

early development of, 384­

JH~is,-~~k~ .... 115. 207­

392; and Swedenborgianism.

219. 228. 432. 436n; and 381. 392:"412. 446; chal­

Spiritualism. 208-209. 211. lenge to orthodox medicine.
~14. 216. 408; relationship 384. 389-391. 401-405

with A. J. Davis. 208-209. Hopedale Community. 358­

249; and communitarian!sm. 359

210. 216-217. 358; on interior Hough. Sabin. 268. 453-454.

respiration. 211-212. 214. 472

216. 217n; New Church oppo­

Howells. William C.• 364­
sition to. 213. 214-215; New
365. 465 .

[
Celestial Church. 213-214
Howells. William Dean. 365

CHarvard Divinity School. 59. 63. Hurdus. Adam. 55. 87. 89.

148
91-92. 95

Harvard Law School. 265. 338

Iungerich. Louis C.• 30, 32.

Harvard University. 58. 59. 63

38. 128. 136-138. 237

Hayden. William. 126n. 242n.

James. Henry Sr.• 114. 360

316n. 345-346
James, John Hough. 2i~0,

Hayward. nUy B.• 59. 126. 126n

124. 458-464

Hempel. Charles Julius. 369-377.

James. Levi. 459. 459n

393. 428
Jasper Colony. 326-327. 357

Hering. Constantine. 386-388.

Jewett. John. 455. 469n

388n. 390. 392. 393. 397. 411

Johnson. Gov. Herschel. 256

Hibbard. John Randolph. 107n.

Johnston. James. 205-207.

120. 121n. 122. 131. 133. 134.

206n

139n. 141n. 226. 257. 264-265.

Jones. Silas. 200 ~Ql- 0.4

451
J05 yn. Hezeklah. 332-333

Higginson, Thomas Wentworth.

Kant. Immanue1. 3. 9

181-182
Keffer. Henry. 29-31. 32. 38

Hill. Rev. William. 23, 54. 57­ Kinmont. Alexander. 87-90,

. 58. 71"-" tl6--· jj/Q,A$- . . !--.. "'~,.'fl.

88n. 89n

Hiller. Joseph. 57-58

Kormann. Guillame. 167

Hindmar5h, Robert. 15-17. 86. rKramph. Ann E., 413, 418-421

159 \ Kramph, Frederic John, 32, 36.

Hinkley. Willard. 255. 455. 457. I 38. 43-48; family of, 46.

463

vii

 420-421; death of, 46-48; Mesmerism: development in

relationship with S. S. Rathvon, Europe, 10-14, 164, 166-
) 307-308, 421 167, 354; description of,
Kramph, Sarah (Pancoast), 46-47, 163-164; in the United:
48 5 States, 164-168, 174, 182,
Kramph Will CaseJ 47-48, 48n, 186, 188-192, 195, 245-
- 421n '250, 255, 265, 266, 278,
KrUdener, Madame de, 168 291, 292, 295, 322, 401-
Lammot, Daniel, 22, 85, 107n, 402, 403, 412; critique of,
367 268-270
Lancaster, Pennsylvania, 21, 23, Methodism, 15-16, 30, 53,
24 ft., 75, 119; New Church 170, 417
Society, 29 ft., 119, 122, Middle Convention, see Central
158n, 306 ff. Convention
Le Boys de Guays, Jacques Mind-cure, 180, 191, 410,
Francois, Etienne, r4. 16 . 410n·
LeRaysville Phalanx, 365, 368- Moravians, 36, 37, 127, 386
369, 375, 449 Mormons, 414n, 422, 423
Lewis, Taylor, 247 MouravieH, General Alexander,
Lincoln, Abraham, 460, 463, 323
'-- 467, 471 National Spiritualist Associa-
Little, John A. (Andrew J. Clive), tion of Churches: background
300;-304 of 178-179, 179n
Lovell, Oliver, 87 Naumann, C. F., 32
Lutheranism, 2, 3-4, 28, 31, 301 New Celestial Church, The,
Manchester, England, 15, 17, 23, 213-214; see T. 1. Harris
55, 57, 71, 322 New Church: education, 42-
marriage reform, 350, 413-442 43, 124-126, 129-130, 136,
Massachusetts Association of the 138, 145, 319, 350, 431,
General Convention, 266-267, 431n, 446; on baptism, 43,
469 49, 102, 149, 150-151; the
Massachusetts Medical Society. ministry, 101, 106, 145n,
391 200-203, 205, 220-221,
Martin, John, 206-207, 206n 229-230, 253, 253n; church
Mather, Rev. Ralph, 54 government, 101~102, 142-
McCabe, Richard, 365-366 145, 145n; missionary work,
medical reform, 319, 350, 381 H., 62, 135; on marriage and
403-404 . divorce, 229, 421-428, 429-
medicine, see Allopathy, Homeop- 442, 430n; impact of Civil
athy, Thomsonianism, Chrono- War upon, 450, 452-472,
thermalism 474-478; on civil govern-
mental healing, 173, 189-191, ment, 450-452 <15-3.::-.ill,
287-288 466-<!72
Mesmer, Franz An ton , 10-13, 11n New~ch, societies of:
Baltimore, 53, 84-85, 102,

viii
 106, 118~ 118n; Bedford, Fa.,
Noble, Samuel, 27, 86, lOO,

21, 85-86; Boston, 57 -7 0,

117, 159

84, 102, 244-246, 253;

Noyes, John Humphrey, 169n,

Bridgewater, Mass., 198-200;

283, 361, 361n, 424, 439

Chicago, 264; Cincinnati, 55­

Officer, Alexander, 32

57, 87-96, 97n, 98, 102-103,

"Old Church," 16n; see

116, 118, 123, 151.,.152, 357,

Chri stianity

402, 465, 466n; Danby, N. Y.,

Oliphant, laurence, 217

299; De-laware Co., Pa., 236,

Oneida Community, 414n,

238; Detroit, 32n, 221; Grand

422, 424

Rapids, 220, 222; lancaster,

Orthodox Convention Party,

Pa., 29 ff., 119,122, 158n,

114, 142-146, 158n, 159­

306 ff.; laPorte, Ind., 219,

161, 278, 362, 364, 393,

223; Natchez, Miss., 407;

442, 444, 454, 456, 466,

!'Jew Orleans, 211; New York.

468, 470, 472, 474-475;

71-74, 97n, 102, 107, 118,

opposition to Mesmerism,

149, 201, 244, 260-264, 275,

245-246; opposition to

392, 465, 466n; Philadelphia,

Spiritualism, 265-268;

37, 54-55, 96, 97n, 128, 130,

view of Swedenbonj, 273­

132n, 154-155, 268, 392, 466n;

274

Pittsburg, Pa., 299, 302-303;

C§::ven, Ro~ 353, 354, 357,

Savannah, Ga., 256; St. Louis,

423

326; Steubenville, Ohio, 298;

Owen, Robert Dale, 291

Urbana, Ohio, 463; Washing­

Pancoast, David, 48-51, 93n

ton, D. C., 106; Wilmingto'l1,

Parsons, Theophilus, Jr., 59,

Del., 367
60, 61, 114, 126, 126n,

New Church in the New World,

143-144, 145, 146, 245,

The, 99n, 142, 475

458n; on Spiritualism, 245­

New Era Movement, 149, ISO,

246, 273-274

197-239, 240, 244, 250, 251,

Pennsylvania Association, of

260-261, 273-277, 315, 408;

the General Convention,

origin and development of,

49, 128, 128n, 132, 138,

198 ff.; attitude toward the clergy,

238, 456

200-203; on spirit communication,

Pennsylvania, University of,

203-204; result of, 239

288, 288n, 401; medical

New Ierusalem MagaZine, 64, 70,

school 383

84, 97, 114, 135; on Fourierism,

Perfectionism, see Oneida

362-364
Community and John

New York, 23, 75; origins of New

Humphrey Noyes

Church in, 71 ff., center of New

Philadelphia, 19, 23, 30, 37,

Era controversy, 200 ff.

42,44,47, 53, 70, 71, 73,

Newport, Thomas, 450, 450n 75, 78, 96, 236, 300, 473;

Newton, A. E., 183-185, 271

origins of New Church in,

Niles, John Barron, 225, 227, 405

55; medical training in,

383, 388

1x
 Philosophical Spiritualism. see
r-­
184-185. ~76-27~. 285. 292.
• Spiritualism. Naturalistic 293-294. 3r6-3-f9. 319n.
Phrenology. 163. 174. 189. 202. 360. 444, 474. 476. 478;

272. 292,411. 412

anti-sectarianism. 285. 292,

Popular Spiritualism. see Spirit­

293, 294. 318-319, 360

ualism, Phenomenal
~5
PoweU. Rev. David. Jr•• 123.
Shakers. 196. 216. 353. 359.
127. 128. 298-300, 393. 465
414n

Powell, Rev. David, Sr•• 298

Silver, Abiel, 255-256

Powers. Hiram. 56
Slavery. 106, 187-188. 249,

Poyen St. Sauveur. Charles. 165

461; and Swedenborgianism,
Precursor. The. 94-95
319-349. 351. 381. 405­
Presbyterians. 88. 122. 241. 249.
406. 407. 445. 467; aboli­

290. 298. 299. 302. 338-339

tion of. 323-324. 325. 328.

PuysegU'r. Marquis de. 11-12

329n. 332-335. 337n. 344,

Quakers. 20. 72. 76. 80. 180.

346-347

196. 359
Smith. Gerrit. 330. 330n. 332

Rathvon. Simon Snyder. 43. 45.

Smith. Joseph. 283. 423

47. 48-51. 158n. 306-311.

Smith. Paschal B., 176-177

464; marriage of, 308. 310.

Smith. Solomon Franklin. 56

415-418. 420; on marriage.

social reform. 161. 381. 476­
421-422; and his Spirit-Bride.
477; and spiritualism. 181­
413-414. 418-421. 432
182; see Swedenborgianism
Raguet. Condy. 54. 54n, 98n
socialism. see communitarian­
Randolph. Rev. John. 369
ism
It receiver ... of Swedenborg. 24n
Spiritual wifery. 208, 211.

Reed. Caleb, 59, 64. 70. 114.

413 fL. 414n. 432-433.

145. 245. 246n 432n

Reed. Sampson. 59. 62-65, 64n. Spiritualism. 10. 11-14. 106.

70. 114, 134, 148, 160, 230.
108. 136. 161. 162 fL.
245. 249. 339
173. 175. 176. 183. 193­
Reform Spiritualism, see Spirit­
194; and Swedenborgianism.
ualism. Naturalistic
169n. 180. 240-277. 278­
Reichenbach, Johann Christian
279. 303. 312-313. 312n.
Wllliam. 24-26. 25n. 28
314-315. 361n. 376. 405.
. "remains ... 343n
407-410. 433. 473. 476;
Ri1ey. Edward. 71. 72. 74
internal struggles. 175 ff.;
Robinson. Rev. John. 46
organizations. 178-179;
Roche. Manning B•• 30. 357
and social reform. 181-182;
Roe. Daniel. 87. 357
and Mesmerism. 164-168.
Scammon. J. Young. 153. 154n.
174. 182. 19~. 246-250,

463. 469 .
376; appeal of. 281-293.

Schlatter. William. 54. 59

311; on marriage. 414n.

sectaria.Qism. 14-17. 86. 100 ff••

422-423. 425

150. 154-157. 159. 161. 181

Spiritualism. Christian. 170. 12, 14; relationship to

180-185. 193. 194. 195. 209­ European thought, 163-164,

210. 212. 218. 278. 292

166-168; relationship to
Spiritualism. Naturalistic. 170,
Spiritualism. 169n, 180,

171-174. 185. 186. 192-194.

240-277. 278-279. 303.
195. 247-250. 278. 285-286.
312-313, 312n. 314-315.
288n. 292
361n. 376. 405. 407-410,

Spiritualism. Phenomenal, 170.

476. see New Era Movement;

175-179. 185. 193. 194. 196.

relationship to Mesmerism,

250. 278. 281. 286-287. 289­

246-250. 376; appeal of,

290
39-42. 294-313; and social

Sprague. Achsa, 283. 287-288,

reform. 313. 319-320, 350.

290
377, 381. 443-450. 474,

Stuart. James P., 114. 122-127.

476. 477; and slavery. 319­
1~9. 133. 135-137. 138. 160,
349. 467; and communitar­

251. 409-410. 458n, 463. 464,

ianism. 352-380; and

465. 466
Fourierism. 352, 362-377,

Sunderland, I.aRoy, 168, 170,

381; .-.Q.!ld capitalism, 377­

186-195; and slavery. 187­

380. see Ethical Capitalism;

188; and Mesmerism, 186.

and Homeopathy, 381. 392­

188-192. 245; on Swedenborg,

412; and marriagV~lJTl,

271-273 .
413-442; and women's rights.

Swedenborg, Emmanuel, 171, 199,

426-429. 434-435. 437-438

200. 221, 226, 227, 230, 238,

Tafel. Johann Freidrich Immanuel.

244. 245. 247, 248, 249, 250,

9~10. 14, 16, 23, 38-39

257. 261, 294. 295, 296. 303,

Tafel. Rudolph. 131, 141n

314-315, 361, 364, 372, 376,

temperance. 284, 303. 319,

393. 398, 403, 408, 412. 423.

445

465. 474; re-interpretation of

Thomsonianism, 384

Christianity. 2 ft.; concept of.

Transcendentalism, 64"'"65, 195,

truth. 8-9; authority of, 9. 14.

286. 292. 360, 412

16-17. 100-101. 129. 136.

Turner. Dr. William. 397. 399

138-142. 141n. 152, 159, 161,

Underground Railroad, 347

247-248, 263-264, 270-27i,

Unitarianism, 59, 147-148,

315, 320. 361; 410-411; on

156-157. 170. 180. 181,

spirit communication. 162, 197,

218. 291. 359

197n. 247, 253-254, 265-266;

Universalism. 169n. 170. 180,

Spiritualist views of, 270-273;

207, 208, 218, 284. 290,

on Africans and slavery. 320­

359

321, 325. 335-336

Urbana University •. 23. 56,

Swedenborgianism: in Germany,
123-126, 129-130, 340.

9-10; in France. 10-14, 322;

463. 465

1n Eng 1an<r,l4-Hr;zT4 - 21 5,
"Use, " 42n

322-323; link with Mesmerism

utopian socialism, see

and Spiritualism in Europe. 11­ communitarianism

xi

 Vallindingham, Clement, 462 ..... Worcester, Thomas, 58-59, 60,

Vickroy, Edwin, 347 SI, 62, 63, 64, 65, 66, 70,
Vickroy, Thomas, 20 73, 74, 78, 84, 85, 90, 91,
Wadstrom, Carl Bernard, 321- 98n, 114, 126, 126n, 149,
323, 356 ISO, 157, 159-161, 198,
Warren, Samuel Mills, 119n 205, 229, 233, 236, 433­
Weller, Henry, 115, 147. 219­ 434, 466; conflict with
234, 235, 239, 250, 454, (Richard DeC~ms~ 98-103'
- - - - r-~""--
458n. 472, 473, 475; and conflict with William Benade
Spiritualism 221 ft., 223n, 132- 42, 139n;~lead~~
231-232, 264; conflict with of Ort~Q2!"tY- .142-146,
General Convention, 221­ 147; on civil government,
230; on the Civil War, 233­ 456-457, 461, 461n, 468
234, 452; and marriage Worrell, Rev. Isaac, 33-34
reform, 426n, 433-437; on Wright, Fanny, 291, 353
social reform. 447-449 Wright, Henry C. , ·181
Weller, John, 219. 231, 234 Yale University, 72, 82, 83,
Wesselhoeft, William,386 85, 122, 401
Western Convention (or Associa- Young, John, 20-21
tion), 34, 90, 94, 104, 299 Young, John Henry, 30-31. 32
Whig Party, 46. 459-460, 462
Wick, W. W., 255, 335
Wilder, Alexander, 332n, 429,
432n

Wilkins, John H., 59, 126,

126n, 145, 146

Wllklnson, J. J. Garth, 362­

3 3

Wi1k!i,_ThQI@S, 131, 153, 249,

399; and Spiritualism, 235­

239, 275' conflict with B. F.

Barrett, 235"=237 2~"",,,,",=-- _

wi1Iiams, Milo G., 56, 124,

463

women's rights, 181, 284, 292,

424-425, 434-435

Woodworth. Samuel, 72, 73

..... ·Worcester, Benjamin, 143-146, 5~ '1 6h """-J

153n
'.
Worcester R~oah2 Jr., 59 rQ~~
Worcester, Samuel, 60. 198­
i4 TAo~,

200, 203, 205n

, Worcester, Samuel H., 199, 200,

205, 393, 393n

I 1..;0 (..&.., tz.. /.{~

xli
 TABLE OF CONTENTS

Page

INDEX. • • 111

BlBUOGRAPHY xv

-I

PREFACE I

Chapter
I. THE NEW CHURCH IN THE OLD WORLD 1

IL INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW CHURCH TO

AMERICA • 19

.Ill. THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE NEW CHURCH IN

THE UNITED STATES 53

---..,
IV. l RIC~~D DE9HAR~ CHIEF APOSTLE OF

76 I

SECTARIANISM • • • • • • • •

V. !!:!.LINTERNAL S~URE OF THE SWEDEN­

BORGIAN COMMUNITY 113 (
~
VI. THE SURFACING OF MODERN SPIRITUAUSM 162

VII. THE NEW ERA MOVEMENT • 197

VIII. THE INTERACT.ION OF SPIRITUAUSM AND

SWEDENBORGIANISM • 240

IX. THE APPEAL OF SPIRITUAUSM AND SWEDEN­

BORGIANISM 278

X. SWEDENBORGIANISM AND SlAVERY 314

XI. SWEDENBORGIANISM AND COMMUNITARIANISM 351

XII. SWEDENBORGIANISM AND HOMEOPATHY 381

xlii
Chapter Page

XIII. REFORM OF THE MARRIAGE REIATIONSHIP. • 413

XIV. CRISIS OF CONSCIENCE: THE CIVIL WAR. 443

>N. CONCLUSION • • • • • • • • • • 473

xlv
 SELECTED BIBUOGRAPHY

The Church of the New Jerusalem (Swedenborgian) has been

a self-conscious body since its inception. This sense of destiny plus
the belief that their destiny would be fulfilled largely t roughthe
agency of the printed word has 'resulted in the_ preservation of a rare
body of material. The extent far exceeds the normal literary output of )
a group so small in numbers, and fortunately is'housed primarily in
two libraries: The Academy llbraTy in Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, and
the library of the Swedenborg School of Religion, Newton, Massachu­
setts~ Until re'cently this archiv.al-ma~~ial was relatively unorganized,
but Mr. Eldred Klein of the Academy Archives and Mrs. Robert Kirven
of the Swedenbofg School of Religion have done a remarkab e job in
bringing order to their respecthfecollections.

I. Manuscript Sources

The three most important sets of correspondence for the

t\ history of the New Church in the East from 1840-1870 are th..!i...Bush
j I Letterbooks (19 vols., 1846-1858) at the Swedenborg School of
Religion, the William Benade Correspondence, and the J. P. ,Stuart
rrespondence-at th-~emyArchives. Together theyrepresent
,J' thousands of letJ~rs. Bush's papers contain latters from Free S irits
and readers of S~den.borg all ,over the settled....united States, with
I)
_ fewIetterSf~ any members of the Academy or Orthodox Party.
LBenad~s correspondence is chiefly with men of Academy principles,
whereas Stuart'sJpapers cross all three segments of New Church
feeling. T,be large(Stuart-B~~Correspondence isespecial Y....san­
~. as iS~S~'S correspondence with~Otis Clapp and B. F. Barre~

, Letters in both th 'Swedenborg Schoo eves. and the

,Academy Archives rare catalogued alpha etically by name except for
e 5 terbooks which are filed chronologically. The colleQ!!.9ns
of the two libraries cOrn lement §.ac:;h other so that frequently the
researcher is able to read both parts of a particular exchange of
letter's. For the period to 1.870 the Academy Archives has the largest,
most varied manuscript collection.

xv
 Other letter collections of interest for the study of New
Church history are th Theophilus Parsons. Jr.). Papers at 'the Boston
Public Library (5 vols.). of wJ11ch volume one is most directly related
to New Church subjects; th . ohn Bcrron NilEisl Papers at Indiana
University, Bloomington, Indiana; and th 0 n H. Jam~s Papers at
Miami University, Miami, Ohio. Less important but still valuable
are the folloing a ers: the Epes Sa ent Mss. Boston Public
Library; the Thomas Lake HarriS Mss. Columbia University; ~ s
of{Georglt Bush lConstantine He..!ing and Francis Bailey~ The
// P storical Society--Of Penns lvania; Edward Otis Hinkley Papers,
MarYfa~;torica Society.­

In addition to letter collections the Swedenborg School

Library and the Academy Library contain numerous sermons and mis­
cellaneous papers of many of the leading New Churchmen of the 1840­
1870' period. The most valuable of these are th "Diaries" of J. P.
Stuartl(36 vols., 1847-1881. AA) which are now being transcribed
om anOi'dShorthand form and the unpublished autobiographies of
{_Richard DeCharms !(AA),(N. C. ~urnhamjAA[ an N. F. Cabell /
(SSRA). The foremost autobiographical source outside t e Academy
Archives is the@rnon Snyder Rathvon AutooiograQh (1852-1860).
Lancaster County Historical Society, Lancaster, Pennsylvania.

IL Official Records

The official records of the (Gene~al Convention which met

annually from 1817, are printed in two orms: (1) in the July issues
of the New Jerusalem Magazine, and (2) in a separate Convention
Journal. These journals contain reports by the state 0 . regional
associations, correspondence and news as well as official actions of
the Convention itself. Both the Academy and Swedenb~g S.CQ901
Libraries have complete sets of these journals. The records of the
Central Conventio are also bound in a ConventionJ(;urnal {3 vols. ,
1841-1852). R~cords of local soci:.ties, such as Minute-B~ks,))
either are not extant or are unavailable for study. .

In. Periodicals

New Church periodicals are essential for a serious and fair

study
...........­ of New Church history. Most of them tended to ignore ~ts
and events not related to New Church doctrine and life. except t~r

xvi
 a critique of unwelcome moral ~ds. For example, until the Civil
War erupted in 1861 New Church periodicals were notably apolitical.
The exception to this self-imposed editorial censorship was George
Bush' New Church Repository which carried more coverage 0 social
re orm than all other New Church papers combined!

~ As with periodicals generally from 1840 to 1870, the

Swedenborgian periodicals were the creations of one editor who
shaped the magazine to his particular bias. Rema~kably c~ete
c~llections of ~rl)-' every New Church-pedodical printed in the .,.,
I( United States are locate In theAca emy and Swedenborg School
, libraries.
rS

A. Orthodox Party

The New Terusalem Magazine, solidly in control of Boston

editors such as Caleb and Sampson Reed from its inception in 1827,
was the mouthpiece of the[Genera~generallYand the
Boston clique in particular. The editors practiced a rigorous screening
o~erial unmatched by any other New Church magazine. While
heavily doctrinal the Magazine does contain much historical data and
..usefUl official information on New Church proceedings. An excellent
( index t~ Old Series, volumes 1-44 (1827-1872) is available. )

. The New Jerusalem Messenger, a weekly purchased by the

General Convention in the mid-1850's to complement the monthly
Magazine, began as the Free Spirit Medium in 1849. The Medium was
moved to Cincinnati where it became the New Chur~h Messenger until
moved to New York by the Convention in 1855. In New York the
Messenger was edited by William Hayden, John Jewett, James P.
Stuart, Benjamin Worcester and others from 1855 to 1870. Generally
it exercised more tolerance toward anti-Boston men than the Magazine
would ever permit.

B. Academy

Richard DeCharms began advocating"Academy principles "in

the Precursor, a journal of the late 1830' s intended to 'serve the
Western Convention out of Cinclnnati. This month 1 is vital for a
study of the early expression of principles which 'lliam Benade later
expanded ii'nd systematized. But the most important of DeCharms I
periodicals were the various manifestations of the Newchurchman from
1841-1856, namely the Newchurchman (1841-1844, 1853-1856) and

xvii
 the Newchurchman-~xtra (1843-1844, 1848). After the formal organi­
zation of the Academy the New Church Life emerged as its official
organ.

C. Free Spirits .;;. (y _

Because the Free Spirits were numerically in the minority in
the New Church, had no organization to serve as -a forum, and were
If -by nature irrepressible, they edited an un~~ilY1arge nuni'berOf
periodicals from 1840-1870. The following are the most important
F::=.. Spirl~ per!2.dicgls:

1.~
l.
Henry Weller, ed. rcrisi~ la Porte, Indiana, 1852-1865.
the Crisis became the New Church Independent.
After 1865

T. 1.. Harris, ed. Herald of Light. New York, 1857-1861.

Sabin HQugh, ed. _Herald of the New Jerusalem. New York and Phila­
delphia, 1854-1855.

E. W. Barber, ed. Medium. Detroit, 1849-1852.

Adam Haworth, ed. Mirror of Truth. Cincinnati, 1845.

Otis Cia pp, ed. New Church Gazette. Boston, 1844.

Sabin Hough, ed. New Church Herald and Monthly Repository. Phila­

delphia, 1856-1857.

Sabin Hough, ed. New Church Missionary. Philadelphia, 1857.

(- B. F. Barrett ed. New Church Monthly. Philadelphia, 1867"':1869.

George Bush, ed. New Church Repository and Monthly Review. New
York, 1848-1857.

William C. Howells, ed. Retina. Hamilton, Ohio, 1843-1844.

\.. B. F. Barre~t ed. Swedenborgian. Ne~ York, 1858-1860.

D. Miscellaneous

[]}arbinger. New York, 1_!!.4~-184~ Fourierist.

xviii
New England Spiritualist. Boston. 1855-1857. Christian Spiritualist.

Practical Christian. Mendon and Hopedale. Massachusetts. 1840­

1860. Hopedale Community. .

Spiritual Philosopher. Boston. 1850. Naturalistic Spiritualist.

IV. Primary Materials

A. Unpublished Manuscripts

D.J!C-harms. Richard. "Reasons for Resig.nation, Feb. 6. 1837."

Academy Archives. n. d.
Resignation from the Cincinna ti First Society.

McGeorge. William. "Memorial Address by Wm. McGeorge on

Chauncey Giles." Swedenborg School of Religion Archives.
n. d. (typewritten.)

~'Revelations Said to J:!ave Jleen Given to Some of the' New Era. ,,, )
Samuel Worcester File. Academy Archives, September. 1845.

Stauffer. David McNeely. "The Documentary History of the Borough

of Lancaster." Lancaster County Historical Society. n. d.

Worcester. Samuel H. "Statements Made by Samuel H. Worcester

with Regard to Himself and the New Era." Samuel Worcester
File. Academy Archives. September. 1845.

B. Articles

"Animal Magnetism in Philadelphia. 1781-1837." American Quarterly

Review. XXII (1837). 388-415.

"Free Love System." Littell's Living Age. 2nd Series. X (1855).

815-821.

Sprague. Achsa W. "Selections from Achsa W. Sprague's Diary and

Journal." Vermont Historical Proceedings. IX (1941). 131-184.

xix
 e
~~er. HeJ'll"Y__ "Forty Years of Public Religious Life." Crisis. VI
(1856), 28.
This series c.ontinued semi-monthly for approximately three
years. ending in the September 15. 1859. issue.

Westall. John. "Report on the Relation of the Christian Citizen to

- m s Country." New Jerusalem Magazine, XXXV (1863), 545-551.
-.......--
C. Pamphlets

"----:::_ {§i.rrett- F.. An. Article Written for the Philadelphia "Newchurchman,"
urRelected. New York: n. p., 1843.
Scathing criticism of Richard DeCharms •

- - - - '• '"-
(Binding and Loosing:1 Embracing the Views of T. Worcester
-- -------
and B. F. Barrett Upon This Subject. New York: n. p.• 1875.

_ _ _ _,. The Corner-Stone of the 'New Ierusalem. New York: Bartlett

and Welford. 1845.

_ _ _ _,. ~ Few Comments Upon ~ Pamphlet Qy Mr. Iohn Douglas.

n.p.: n.p•• 1844.

_ _ _ _,. Letter from Rev. ~• .t. Barrett on the Alleged "Harmony of

the New Church." n. p.: n. p., n. d. )
Reprint from an unidentifiable periodical. dated July 22. 1858.

_ _ _--'. Love Toward Enemies and the Way to Manifest 11. Phila-l
delphia: J. B. Lippincott and Co•• 1864. )

_ _ _ _,. ~ Plain Letter to Rey. Thomas Worcester, Q. Q. in Which

Ar_e Recit.ed ~ Few Facts Touching the Author's Intercourse with
the President of the General Convention. and His Connectio_n
with. and Excision from, that Body. New York: Mason Brothers,
1864. .

_ _ _--'. Rev.~. [. Barrett's Review of Rev. ~~~ Lectures

Q!l "Spiritual Philosophy." Cincinnati:
Critical of T. L Harris.

Benade. William. The Death of Abraham Lincoln; What It Re resents,\)

Pittsburgh: W. G. Johnston and Co.• 1865.

xx
 Benade, William. Sermon to the First New Ierusalem Society of
Philadelphia. Preached on Resigning His Ministerial Office in
Connection with That Society. Philadelphia: Boericke and
Tafe}. 1854.

Brotherton, Edward. Spiritualism, Swedenborg, and the New Church:

An ExaminatioIl~ims. London: W. White, 1860.
- Defense of cr. L. !iarr' \ by an English New Churchman.

Brown, Solyman, A. M. Union of Extremes: 11 Discourse on Uberty

and Slavery, as They Stand Related to th.e Iusti.ce, Prosperity,
of the United Republic of North America. New York: n. p., n. d.

Burnham. N. D. and William Benade. Cicc_uJaL to the Receivers of the

Heavenly Doctrines of the NeN Ierusalem in the United States.
Philadelphia: n. p.. 1855.

-[ Bush, .george. Gold for Brass and Silver for Iron; Q!:., !l Plea for the

" Doctrines of the New Jerusalem. New York: n. p., 1853.

A sermon comparing the Old and New Christian churches.

____,. ~ to Ralph '!:!.... Emerson on Swedenborg. New York:

J. AlIen, 1846.
_ _ _-'a Swe::bnborq on Marriage and Its Violations; Being ~
Exposition of the Seventh Commandment of the Decalogue. New
York: n. p., 1853.
Largely guotations from Swedenborg indicating that ultimate
perfectio'L.depends on true conjugial union. --

(
Cabell, N. F. The Black Race in North America: Why Was Their ]
-- introduction Permitted? n. p.: n. p., n. d.
A reprint from the Southern Literary Messenger, November.
I
1855.

Chase, Frank. The Spiritual Invention; .Q[, Autobiographic Scenes

~ Sketches. Boston: William White and Co., 1865.

(8fcular~ the-Membe-;;-a;td Fri;;nds of the Swedenborg SOCi~~Y, ,

London: Swedenborg Society, 1~.
Description of the crisi{"Harris aused in England and the
United States and a defense' of Mm by an Englishman.

xxi
 )

r Clapp, Otis A Letter to the Receivers of the Heavenly Doctrines QIl

the W~nt of Union Among Those Who Profess To Be "The FaitnTu1
"WIio Cons ffruret'he Body of the Lord." n. p.: n. p.. n~ d.

____,. Prevention As £ Means of reducing the Material. Social,

and Moral Burdens and Devastations of Intemperance. Boston:

Wrignt and Potter, 1872.

_ ____:-'. The Washingtonian Home and lli Sixteen Years' Work.

South Framingham, Massachusetts: J. C. C1ark. 1875.

Constitution and By-Laws of the New Ierusa1em Society of the City of

Lancaster. n. p.: William B. Wiley, 1857.

Includes membership list of 19 members.

DeCharms, Richa"rd. jLCourse of Five Lectures on the Fundamental

Doctrines of the New-Ierusalem Cburch. Philadelphia: Barrett,

1841.

_ _ _-'- Defence of HomeQeathy Against Her New-Church Assailants:

.QL !! Full
~ Fair View of the Case of Allopathy and Chrono-·
thermalism Ver.,us Homeopathy As Tried Qv. New Church Iudicative
Principles. Phil3de1phia: The New Jerusalem Press, 1854.
This work seems never to have been completed.

_ _ _-'- General Epistles. of Richard DeCharms for Pastoral Instruc­

tion in ~ New Ierusa1em. Philadelphia: n. p., 1860.

_ _ _-'. An Introduction to Sermons Against Pseudo-Spiritualism,

Presenting Reasons for Their Delivery in New York. Philadelphia:
New Jerusalem Press, 1853.
Includes first two sermons DeCharms delivered in New York
in his 1852 attack against Spiritualism.

_ _ _-'- Reasons and Principles for £. Middle Convention of the New

Ierusa1em in the United States. Philadelphia: Brown. Bicking,

and Guilbert, 1840.

____,. Second Appeal to the Members of the New Ierusa1em. n. p. :

n. p •• 1852.

• Some View£ of Freedom and Slavery in the tight of the New )

Ierusalem. Philadelphia: George Charles, 1851. (.
Slavery is evil but DeCharms opposes immediate abolition,
and hopes for transplantation back to Africa once blacks are
restored SPiritually.
xxii
DeCharms. Richard. The True Grounds of National Union and Pros- )
~. Philadelphia: Barrett and Jones, 1843. __

____,. Three Sermons Preached to the New York Society of the New
Jerusalem Against the Pseudo-Spiritualism of Modern Times.
Philadelphia: New Jerusalem Press, 1853. ----
DeGersdorff, B•. Conservatism in Its Relation to Homeopathy.
Cambridge, Massachusetts: John Wilson, 1868.

Documents of the Second New Ierusalem Society of Cincinnat1.

Cincinnati: Kendall and Henry, 1837.
Includes membership list of the Second Society.

Douglas, John. Statement of the Difficulties Between the First New

Jerusalem Society of!b£. City of New York and ~!r. John Douglas,
One of ~ Members. h. p.: n. p~, n. d.

Elder, William. Minority~, Or Protest Against t11e Proceedings

of the Western New Church Convention, in the Case of the
Acting Committee vs. Iohn ~ Williams. Chillicothe, Ohio:
John White, 1841.

Fernald, Wood bury M. !l New Age lor the New Church. Boston: n. p.. \
1860.
Sympathetic presentation of the views of T. 1.. Harris.
. J
____,. Review of Davis's Revelations. n. p.: n. p. , n. d.

Franklin, Benjamin, et al.~ ~Qr. Benlamin Frankli~ and Othe.r

Commissioners Char ed .l2..v.U.&.!:!.9. o~e ~U Examina­
tion of Animal Magnetism As Now Practised at Paris. London:
J. Johnson. 1785.

Giles, Chauncey. The Problem of American Nationality, and the Evils 11

Which Hinder ~ Solution. Cincinnati: n. p., 1863.

_ _ _--'. The World of Spirits: An Intermediate State. New York:

C. S. Westcott and Co., 1864.
Spirit communication is reserved for the intermediate state
after death.

Goyder, Thomas. Christianity and Colonial Sla'lery Contrasted: !l

Lecture. London: T. Goyder, n. d.

xxiii
 Gram, Hans Birch. The Characteristics of Homeopathia. New York:
D. p., 1825.
This translation of Hahnemann's The Spirit of Homeopathy
- ~ Der Homoopatischen Heil-lehre--was the first Homeo­
pathic publication in the United States.

o Hayden, William B. 8. Brief Abstract of Remarks Qy Rev. WilUam B.

Hayden at the New Ierusalem Church on the_ Funeral of the
President, Aprilli, 1855. Cincinnati, Ohio: Mallory, Power
and Co., 1865. .

_ _ _-'. The Institution of Slavery. New York: D. Appleton and

Co., 1861.
Slavery is a means to the elevating of the Negro race, and
while it must end Hayden argues that it must be abolished
slowly.

____,. Is the' Human Racp. One or Many? Boston: Otis Clapp,

1855.
~
Hi bbard , John Randolph. Necromancy; .Q[, Pseud;-o<:-'S"-;i-n'''t-u~a~l'~s-''
Viewed in the Light of the Sacred Scrip~ and the Teachings
of the New Church. Chicago: Whitmarsh, Fulton and Company,
1853.

___-'. 8. Sermon on the Causes and Uses of the Present Civil War.
n. p.: n. p., n. d. ._-

Higginson, Thomas Wentworth. The Results of Spiritualism. New

York: S. T. Munson, 1859.

Holcombe, William H. How !.Became ~ Homeopath. Chicago: C. S.

-
Halsey, 1866.

Human Progre--ss Sinc:e~st Iud9m$~t in 17S2J Cincin-

oati: NewChurch Brethren in Ohio, 1851.
j\

_ _ _-'. On!!l!:t Nature and Limitations of the HomE:. 'pathic Law.

New York: Henry Ludwig, 1858.

_ _ _-'. !he Power of Thought in the Production and Cure of Disease.

Chicago: Purdy Publishing Co., 1890.

xxiv
 Holcombe. William H. Suggestions As to the Spiritual Philosophy of )
African Slavery. Addressed to the Members and Friends of the
Church of the New Ierusalem. New York: Mason Brothers.
1861.
Southern viewpoint.

____,. What l2. Homeopathy? New Orleans: Bulletin Book and Job

Office. 1864.

Homeopathy is not the end of all medical science but a great

reform in the area of the treatment of diseases.

_ _ _-'. Why li HomeOpathy So Curative? Cincinnati: Robert

Clarke Co.• 1875.

Hough. Sabin. Remarks on the "Revelations" ?f!l. L Davis j Clair­

voyant. Columbus. Ohio: William Siebe~nr:m:---

Hough sees Davis and Swedenborg as irreconcilable on basic

principles.

____,. A Special Messenger. Philadelphia: privately printed.

1856.

Silas:) Eras of the New Ierusalem Church. New York: n. p.•

---"1:8;:;:4"8. ­

• Platform of the New Era of the New Church Called the New
Ierusa em. New orR:: J-:-P--' PraIl, 1848.
J
Sets forth the differences between New Era men and other
New Churchmen.

A Law Case Exhibiting the Most Extraordinary Developments Peculiar

to Modern Times_. Arising from an Implicit Obedience to the

Dictates of Mesmeric Clairvoyance As Related Q.y £ Mormon

Prophet. Cincinnati: Daily Atlas Office. 1848.

LeBqi'.?-_Des Gua~. M. The New Church: Swedenborg and Modem

- - - Spiritualism. Manchester. England': Cave and Sever. 1860. ]1.
Massachusetts Association of the New Jerusalem. The~honism;d
the Present Day: . The Response of the Ministers of the Massa­
chusetts Association of the New Ierusalem to £ Re~olution of
That Association Requesting Their Consideration of What li
Usually Known ~ Modern Spiritualism. Boston: George Phinney.
1858. '

xxv
 Memorial of Theophilus Parsons. Boston: Massachusetts New Church
Union Press, 1884.

Papers Relating to th~UniCationof Mrs. Caroline y. b

Stettinius fro~e- Set:tffi<.l resbyterian Church, in the City bf
Peoria. Peoria, lllinois: Nason and Hill, 1858.

Parsons, Theophilus. Slavery: 1!§. Origin, Influence, and Destiny.

Boston: William Carter and Brother, 1863.
Anti-slavery.

Plants, Hon. T. A. Speech of Hon. 1:. ~ Plants, of Ohio, on Recon­

struction;, Delivered in the House of Representatives, February
.l!. 1866. Washington, D. C.: Congressional Globe Office,
1866.

Putnam, AlIen. Mesmerism, Spiritualism, Witchcraft, and Mirac~~~

A Brief Treatise, ShOWing that Mesmerism h~ Key Which Will
Unlock Many Char.:bers of Mystery. Fifth ed. Boston: Colby
and Rich, 1884 (1858).

~eed, ~1 Address Delivered Before the Boston Society of the New

-Jerusalem, l!!!Y.i.. 1837. Boston: Otis Clapp, 1837.
1"':..­
I Reed, Sampson,l The Future of the New Church. Boston: The Massa­
chus-etrs New Church Union, 1875.

r Report and Resolutions of the General Convention in Relation

- Barrett./ New York: General Convention, 1866.
. .E.
-­

Report- of the""Committee of Investigation; Containing the _Res-ults

to~
~
Careful Inguiry into t..'1e PJlegations Aqi'li!l!;( Rev. ~._L.,- Barrett
Un. Convention Reoort) and Proving Those Allegations to be
Untrue. Philadelphia: n. p., 1867. '
)

Rev. Samuel Mills Warren. n. p.: n. p., n. d.

,-- . ., r----- ­
Stuart, J. P., et al. J Principles oi the ~ Church. t Cincinnati:
_ _~ •.r1ghtson and Co., 1859.

_ _ _-'. Reasons for Leaving the Presbyterian Ministry and Adopting

the Principles of the ~ Jerusalem Church. Cincinfiati: A.
Peabody: Hl45.~ '

xxvi
 Sturtevant. Rev. T. D. Dickson and Swedenborg on Periodicity,

~ and Cure of Disease. New York: J. S. Redfield, 1847.

Sunderland. La Roy. "Confessions of .9. Magnetizer" Exposed! Boston:

Reddirig and Co•• 1845.
r--
eller .­ He!Jry~ Marriage on Earth; Marriage in Heaven; Troubles of \
Human -rife; Three Discourses Delivered Before the New Church \
Society and Congregation of Grand Rapids, Michigan. n. p. :
Jacob Barns and Co., 1849.

Wilkins, John H. Letters on Subjects Connected with the History and

Transactions of the c;neral Convention of the' New Ierusalem in
America. Boston: Otis Clapp, 1841.
Eight letters by Wilkins on problems relating to the formation
of the Central Convention from 1838-1841.

. \ vnlkS, Thomas. Reasons Qv the Rev.~s Wilkes for Renouncing )

:- His Former Views and Embracincrt~ oc r{ne of the New Jeru­
salem Church. Manchester, England: Cave and Se:-er, n. d.

Williams, John S. Phrenological Test; QI., Five Charts of the SarJ}5!

Faculties, J2y~ Many Distinguished Professors. n. p.: n. p.,

n.d.

____,. A Synopsis of the Spiritual Manifestations of John ~

WUl1ams, Medium. New York: Partridge and Brittan, 1853.

_'--__,.[ To All_Whom It May Concern. Bangor, Maine: n. p., 1853.

Correspondence with T. W. orcester.

Worcester. Samuel H. !l~!Q. the Receivers of the Heavenly

Doctrines of the I'feW Jerusalem. Boston: Otis Clapp, 1845.

Sympathetic account of Samuel Worcester's New Era experi­

ences.

____• Remarks o~ ~everal c ~~ Concerning the Writings 11

of Emanuel Sweaenborg. Boston: John AlIen, 1832.

Worcester, Thomas. Abraham Lincoln: A Discourse. n. p.: n. p. ,

n. d.

A reprint from the New Terusalem .Magazine.

xxvii
I

D. Books

J Arthur, Timothy Shay•. Advice to Young Ladies Q!l Their Duties and
Co~duct in life: Boston: Philipps and Sampsori, 1848.

_ _ _-,. Advice to Young Men on Their Duties and Conduct in Ufe.

Boston: Philipps, Sampson and Co., 1849.

____,. Agnes; Q[, The Possessed, ~ Revelation of Mesmerism.

Philadelphia: T. B. Peterson, 1848.

_ _ _....:. The Angel and the Demon. Philadelphia: J. W. Bradley,

1861 (1858).

____,. The Three Eras of ~ Woman's life.' Philadelphia: J. W.

Bradley, 1857.
The three eras are maiden, wife, and mother.

[Atlee, Edwin A.] Essays at Poetry, or ~ Collection of Fugitive

Pieces; with the Ufe of Eugenius Laude Watts. Philadelphia;
T. S. Manning, 1828.

)<; ~rrett, Benjamin F ~ Course of Lectures on the Doctrines of the

ew Ierusa em Church. New York: n. p., 1842.
An appendix contains exerpts from Swedenborg on spirit
communication.

---....:.t S~enb~
and Ha felfinger,
and Channing~
r87~.-
Philadelphia: Claxton, Remson,

Swedenborg and His Mission. Philadelphia: J. B. lippin­

cott and Co., 1865.

Benade, William H., ed. Autobiography of thl Rev. David p~

Philadelphia: A Committee of the Darby'Society of the New
Church, 1856.
Includes eight of Powell's sermoris.

Brisbane, Albert. Social Destiny of Man; Q[, Association and Reorgani­

zation of Industry. Philadelthia: C. F. Stollmeyer, 1840.

Browns on, Orestes. The Spirit-Rapper. Boston: little and Co., 1854.

Bush, George. Mesmer and Swedenborg; Q[, The Relation of the

Developments of Mesmerism to tb~ Doctrines and Disclosures of
Swedenborg. New York: John AlIen, 1847.
xxviii
 BYsh. eo ~ New Church Miscellanies; or, Essays Ecclesiastical,
Doctrinal, and Ethical. New York: William McGeorge, 1855.
Reprints of articles from the Repository. including articles I
on slavery and Spiritualism. )

/ . [Compaginator). Priesthood and .Q.k!:gy Unknown to Chris- ) \

tfanity; .Q.[, The Church a Community of Co-Equal Brethren. JI
------- Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and Co., 1857.

_ _ _ _,. ~ to Dr. Woods' "Lectures Q.!l Swedenborgianism"

J

J
Delivered in the Theological Seminary, over, assachusetts.
New York: John AlIen, 1847. .

, ed. The Spiritual Diary of Emanuel Swederiborg, 5 vols.

New York: Lewis C. Bush, 1850.
The first edition of the Diary was published in England by r
J. H. Smithson in 1846.

State~ent of Reasons for Embracing the Doctrines and

Disclosures of Emanuel Swedenborg. Boston: Otis Clapp, 1860.
The expanded 1875 edition contains a biographical sketch of
Bush by Samuel Beswick.

Cabell, Nathaniel F. ~ to Dr. Pond's "Swedenborgianism Reviewed."

New York: John AlIen, 1848.
J
Chase, Warren. The American Crisis. Boston: Bela Marsh, 1862. \
Spiritualist interpretation of the Ci~il War. )

_ _ _-'. The Life-Line of the Lone One. Third ed. Boston: Bela
Marsh. 1865 (1857).

co.Ravis, Andrew ackson. Beyond the Valley. Boston: Colby, 1885.

Second volume of Davis' autobiography.

_ _ _-'~ Events in the Life of '!.Seer. Fourth ed. New York: A. J.

Davis and Co., 1873 (1868).
This same book was published in 1868 as Memoranda of
Persons, Places. aild Events.

_ _ _ _,. The Fountain; with Jets of New Meanings. Fourth ed.

Boston: Colby and "Rich, 1877.

_ _----:_,. The Magic Staff. Thirteenth ed. Boston: Colby, 1885

(1857).

xxix
r Davis, Andrew Jackson) Memoranda of Persons, Places, and Events. )
Embracing Authentic Facts, Visions, Impressions, Discoveries
in Magnetism, Clairvoyance, and Spiritualism, also Quotations
from the Opposition. Boston: William White and Co., 808'.

____,. The Progressive Annual for 1862. New York: A. J. Davis

and Co., 1862.

This yearbook lists hundreds of r-eformers, mediums, and

mental healers.

_ _ _-"~ The Progressive Children's Lyceum. Seventh ed. Boston:

Bela Marsh, 1867.

Ellls, John. The Avoidable Causes of Disease, Insanity and Deformity.

Eighth ed. New York: S. R. Wells and Co., 1879 (1859).

~ .• Personal Exp,eriences of ~ Physician. Philadelphia:

Hahnemann Publishing House, 1892.

_ _ _~. Free Love and Its Votaries; or,~merican Socialism un~

New York: United States Publis mg 0., f8TO:--

Farrington, Elijah. Revelations of ~ Spirit Medium. St. Pau~. Minne­

sota: Farrington and Co., 1891.

Fernald, Woodbury M Emanuel Swedenborq As ~ Man of Science.

Boston: Otis Clapp, 1854.

_ _---:-_,. God in His Providence. Third ed. Boston: Otis Clapp,

1860 (1859).

Memoirs and Reminiscences of the Late Professor George

Bush. Boston: Otis Clapp, 1860.

____,. ~ View at the Foundations; or, First Causes of Character

As Operative Before Birth from Hereditary and Spiritual Sources.

Bo~ton: Wm. V. Spencer, 1865.

Field. George. Memoirs, Incidents. and Remini.scences 2i th.e Early

History of the New Church in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and

Adjacent States; and Canada. New York: E. H. Swinney, ~9.

Giles. Chauncey. The Nature of Spirit and of Man As ~ Spiritual

Being. London: James Speirs, 1871.

xxx
 Hams, Tho.maSLakel Arcana of Christianity: An Unfolding of the
-pe estial Sense of the Divine Word. 3 vols. New York: New
Church Publishing Association, 1858.
In volume one, pages 5-45, Harris explains how his celestial
[
sense was opened and how internal respiration operates.
~--

_ _ _-'. An Epic of the ~ Heaven. Fourth ea. New York:

Partridge and Brittan, 1854.

_ _ _-'. First BOQ;k of the Christian Religion. Second ed. New York:
New Church Publishing Association, 1860.

_ _ _--C. A Lyric of the Morning Land. Glasgow, Scotland: n. p. ,

1869.

____', Th~ Millennial Age: Tvvelve Discourses on the Spiritual and JI

Social Aspects of the Times. New York: New Church Publishing J
Association, 1860.

____,. The Song of ~atan. Second ed. New York: New Church

Publishing Association, 1860.

Intended as an appendix to the Arcana of Christianity.

_ _~=" The Wisdom of Angels, Part I. New York: New Church

Publishing Association, 1857.

Hartman. Joseph. Facts and Mysteries of Spiritism. Philadelphia:

Thomas Hartley and Co., 1885.

A Pittsburgh Swedenborgian who began to investigate

Spiritualism in 1852.

Hayden, William, et al., Centenary of the New Jerusalem: Tvvelve

Addresses in Commemoration of the Last Judgment in the Spiritual
World, 1757, Delivered Before the General Convention of the
New Church at.ll2. Annual Session in Cincinnati, 1857. New
York: General Convention of the New Jerusalem Church, 1859.

Hayden, William B. On the Phenomena of Modern Spiritualism.

Boston: Otis Clapp, 1855.
Reprinted in 1870 as On The Dangers Q! Modern Spirituaiism.

C
Hempel, Charles Juliu8]. The True Organization of the New Church,.
New York: William Radde, 1848.
An exposition of the complementary relationship between
Fourierism and Swedenborgianism.

xxxi
Henck, E. C. Spirit Voices: Odes, Dictated!2Y Spirits of the Second
Sphere. Jor the Use of Hannonial Circles. Second ed. Phila­
delphia: G. D. Henck, 1854.

Hindmarsh, Robert. The Rise and Progress of the New Ierusalem

Church, In England, America, and Other Parts. London: Hodson
and Son, 1861.
Primarily a history of New Church development in England.

Historical Sketch of the New York New Church Society. New York:
John P. Prall, 1860.
Includes list of subscribers to the new House of Worship.

James, Henry. The Church of Christ nbt 2ll Ecclesiasticism: 1l )I

Letter to A Sectarian. New York: Redfield, 1854.

Johnston, James. The Everlasting Church: As Represented in the

Remarkable Manuscript Entitled Intercourse with Angels. n. p. :
n. p., 1866.

[Johnston, James]. Last Legacy and Solemn Information, Written in

the Year 1826. n. p.: n. p., 1866.

Johnston, James. A Short Account of 2. Remarkable Manuscript Written

in the Years 1817 to 1840, Entitled "Intercourse with Angels. "
n. p.: n. p., 1866. .
A condemnation of slavery, sectarianism, and England.

Jones, Sllas. Practical Phrenology. Boston: Russell, Shattuck and

Wllliams, 1836.

Kinmont, Alexander. Twelve Lectures on the Natural History of Man

and the Rise and Progress of Philosophy. Cincinnati: U. P.
James, 1839.
Includes a biographical sketch of Kinmont.

Little, John A. The Autobiography of 2. New Churchman; or, Incidents

and Observations Connected with the Life of Iohn A· Li¥I51
Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo, and Co. ,1-8-S2:-­

Martin, ·John. Diary of the Mission. Spiritual and Earthly, of the Late
lames lohnston. n. p.: n. p., 1881.

Neidhard, C. Homeopathy in Germany and England in 1849. Boston:

Otls Cia pp, 1850.

xxxii
 New Church Almanac. Chicago: Weller and MetcalL 1874.

The Nineteenth Century; or, The New Dispensation. New York.: John
AlIen, 1851.
Appendix A. pages 306-318, reviews A. J. Davis' "Revela­
tions. "
"..-"- - "\ .

Noble, Samuel. An Appeal in Behalf of the Views of thg Eternal World )

2.!L State, and the Doctrines of Faith and Life Held Qy the Body

of Christians Who Believe That .9.. New Church is Signified (ill

the Revelation, chapter ~ Qy the New Ierusalem; E:T.;;racing

Answers to All PrinciDal Objections, Particularly Those of Rev.

[G. Beaumont1 in His V,'ork Entitled "The Anti-Swedenboro. "

A dressed to the P.eflacting of All Denominations. Boston:
Adonis Ho',vard, 1830.
. An expanded version of this popular English work was printed
by Otis Clapp in 1845.

Noyes, John HumphreyJ History of American Socialisms. Dover ed. \)

- - New York.: Dover Publications, Inc., 1966 (1870).

Parsons, Theophilus. Outlines of the Religion and Philosoohy of

Swedenborg. Boston: Roberts Bros., 1876.

An effort to reconcile science and religion, defend the con­

cept of revelation, and refute Higher Criticism.

Proud, Joseph. The Liturgy of the New Church. Fourth ed. Baltimore:

Samuel and John Adams, 1792.

Reed, Sampson. Observations on the Growth of the Mind. Four.h ed.

Boston; Otis Clapp, 1841.

Reese, David Meredith. Humbuqs of New York; Being.9.. Remonstrance

Against Popular Delusion; Whether in Science, Philosophy, or

Religion. Boston; Week.s, Jordan and Co., 1838.

A few of the "humbugs" were Animal Magnetism. Ultra­

abolition, and Ultra-Sectarianism.

xxxiii
a Sketch of the History of the Boston Society of the New rerusalem.
Boston: John C. Regan, 1873.
Includes a list of members from the Society's inception in
1818.

Stebbins, Giles B. Upward Steps of Seventy Years. New York: United

States Book Company, 1890.

Sunderland, La Roy. Anti-Slavery Manual: Containing ~ Collection of

Facts and Argume:lts on American Slavery, Second ed. New
York: S. VV. Benedict. 1837:

____.• Book of Psychology: Historical, Philosophical, Practical.

New York: Steams and Co., 1857.

____..• IntereSting Memoirs and ;)ocuments Relating to American

Slavery. London: Chapman Bros., 1846.

_ _~_" Pathetism; with Practical Instructions. New York: P. P.

Good, 1843.

• The Testimony of God Against Slavery: A Collection of \ )

Passages from the Bible Which Show the Sin of Holding and
Treating the Huma.n Species.as Property. Second ed. New York:
R. G. Williams, 1836 (1835).

Published for the American Anti-Slavery Society.

____. The Trance, and Correlative Phenomena. Chicago: James

VValker, 1868 (1860).
Includes autobiographical material.

Swedenborg, Emanue1. Angelic Wisdom Concerning the Divine

Providence. Standard ed. New York: Swedenborg Foundation
Inc., 1941 (1764) •

....- .• ThEt DeHghts of Wisdom Pertaining to Marriage Love After

Which Follow the Plea sures of Insa ni ty Pertaining to Scorta tory
Love. Rotch ed. [translated by Samuel Warren]. Boston:
Massachusetts New Church Union, 1907 (1768).
VVarren substituted the word marriage for "conjugial" in the
title of this translati->n.

____,. The Four Leading Doctrines of the New Church. Boston:

Otis Clapp, 1842 (1763).

xxxiv
 Swedenborg. Emanuel. Heaven and ~ Wonders and Hell. Phila­

J
°

delphia: J. B. Lippincott ~lnd Co.• 1879 (175a).

• Iournal of Dreams and Spiritual Experiences in the Year

1744. [translated by C. T. Odhner). Bryn Athyn. PeOnnsylvania:
Academy Book Room, I!Ha.

_ _ _--'a The True Christian Religion: Containing the Universal

Theology of the New Church. Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott

and Co•• 1879 (1771).

Tafel, !H. Johann F. I:

Z!!r Geschichte der Neuen Kirchel Tubingen:
Guttenberg. 1841.
Brief references to developments in the United States, for
example B. F. Barrett's press-rousing lectures in New York in
1840. ~

I Turneil
Mrs. Louisa W. Principal Points of Difference Between the
----Old and New Christian Churc~Third ed. Boston: Ticknor
and Fields. 1856(1846).

lr-Woods. '
Leonard~Lectures on Swedenborgianism Delivered in
Andover Tneological Seminary in February. 1846. Boston:
Crocker and Brewster, 1846.

V. Secondary Materials

A. Unpublished Manuscripts

Acton. Alfred. t9arl Bernard wadstr~m.~ Academy Library, 1943.

Gladish, Richard R. "A History of the Academ of the ~Tew Church. "
°

Academy ITbrary, -9117. -(Mimeographed.)

"A History of New Church Education. " 2 vols. Academy

Library. 1968. (Mimeographed.)

"The Cincinnati Third Society. 1838;

Movement." Academy Library. 1962.

Schreck, E. J. E. S. "Notes on Mr. Stuart's Life." Academy

Archives. n. d.

xxxv
 B. Dissertations

Anderson, C. Alan. 59rati2 W. Dress~i7and!he Phlloso h_~w

Thought." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation. Boston University

Graauate School, 1963.

. ,- -------~
Delp, Robert W. "The Harmonial Philosopher:! Andrew Jackson Davis I
and the Foundation of Modern American Spiritualism." Unpub­
lished Ph. D. dissertation. George Washington University, 1965.

~, ClareAce pauI.(:;'merson;and Swede.!!l>0rg." Unpublished

Ph. D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1929.

Kirven, Robert H. "Emanuel Swedenborg and the Revolt Against

Deism." Unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Brandeis University,

)\ 1965.

C. Articles

Carlson, Eric T. "Cllarles poyen Brings Mesmerism to America. "

Journal of the History of Medicine, XV, No. 2 (1960). 121-132.

French, WarrenG. "T. S. Arthur: Pioneer Business Novelist. "

American Quarterly. X. No. 1 (1958). 55-65.

"Timothy Shay Arthur's Divorce Fiction. " University of

Texas Studies in English. XXXIII. No. 2 (1954).90-96.

Hawley, Charles A. . "A Communistic Swedenborgian Society in Iowa .."

Iowa Iournal of History and Politics, XXXIII, No. 1 (1935).
3-26.
JI
"The Historical Ba~kground of the Attitude of the Jasper
Colony Toward Slavery and the Civil War." Iowa Iournal of
History and Politics, XXXIV, No. 2 (1936), 172-197.

Hotson, Clarence Paul. ('~George Bush': Teacher and Critic of Emer-'

son." Philological Quarterly, )(, No. 4 (1931). 369-383.

~'Sampson Re~, a Teacher of Emerson." New England

Qua erly,Ir:-NC>. 2 (1929). 249-277.

Odhner, C. Th. Richard DeChann , a Sketch of His Life and Work. "
N~'N Church Life, XXII, (1902). 1-9, 129-137; XXIII (1903) 76-83,
245-250, 359-363, 595-599.
xxxvi
 --~ ~ -
ner, c-:-Th1 "Wllliam Henry Benade." New Church Ufe, '}ON
-- --
(1905). 450-461, 606-618, 721-731; XXVI (1906). 65-76.

Sm1~h.,_OphiaJ2eli1ali,. ~rdu~and the Swedenborgians in Early

Cincinnati." Ohio State Archeological and Historical Society
Quarterly, LOI, No. 2 (1944), 106-134.

"The Beginnings of the New Jerusalem Church in Ohio. "

Ohio Stut~ Archeological and Historical Quarterly, LXI, No. 3
(1952), 235,-261.
,--­
"Frederick E<::kstei..n Father of Cincinnati Art." Bulletin
of the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio, IX, No. 4
(1951). 266-282.

"The New Jerusalem Church in Missouri." Missouri

Historical Society Bulletin, XI, No. 3 (1955), 228-248.

"The New Jerusalem Church in Ohio from 1848 to 1870. "

Ohio State Archeological and Historical Quarterly, LXII, No. 1
(1953). 25-54.

"The Rise of the New Jerusalem Church in Ohio." Ohio

State Archeological and Historical Quarterly, LXI, No. 4 .
(1952), 380-409.

D. Books and Pamphlets

Ameke, William. History of Homeopathy; l!.§. Origins, Its Conflict;.;,

~ ~ Appendi_x on the Present State of University Medicine.

[translated by Alfred E. Drysdale]. London: E. Gould and Son

for the British Homeopathic Society, 1885.

Armytag~, Waiter H. Heavens Below: Utopian Experiments in \\

England, 1560-1960. London: Routledge and Kegan, 1961.

I Barrett, Gertrude A., ed. Ben amin Fiske Barrett· An Autobiography.

Philadelphia: Swedenborg Publishing Association, 1890. I

Sympathetic account by Barrett's daughter. <"'"t-o

~/

Bay1ey, Jonathan. ~ Church Worthies: or, Early but Uttle-known )

Disciples of the Lord i~ I)i~~":..Ising the Truths of the New Church.
London: James Speirs, 1884.
Mostly biographical sketches of English New Churchmen. .

xxxvii
Benz, Ernst. Emanuel Swedenborg: Naturforscher Und Seher. Munich:
Hermann Rinn. 1948.

____,. Swedenborg in Deutschland: K• .Q. Oetinqer Und Immanue1

Kants Auseinandersetzung Mit Der Person Und Lehre Emanuel
Swedenborgs. Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1947.

Bestor, Arthur. Backwoods UtopiSJ,s: The Sectarian and Owenite

Phases of Communitarian Socialism in America, 1663-1829.
J
Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1950.

Block, Marguerite Beck. Th~ New Church in the New World. New

York: Henry Holt and Co.• 1932.

~ Tb~!QI"emost secondary work on the history of the New Church.

( Now available in an Octagon Press edition with a new introduc­

!ion by Robert Kirv.en. 0­
r- --,
809g. John Stuart compiler. A Glossary • .QI the Meaning of Specific 1)
-erm-s--aria
Phrases Used !rl Swedenborg in His Theological .
Writings Given in His Own Words. London: Swedenborg Society.
1915.

Bradford. Thomas L, ed. Homeopathic Bibliography of ~ United

States, 1825-1891. Philadelphia: Boericke and Tafel. 1892.

Indispensable reference tool for study of Homeopathy.

_ _ _-'. The life and Letters of Dr. Samuel Hahnemann. Philadelphia:

Boerick and TafeL 1895~

____,. The Pioneers of Homeopathy. Philadelphia: Boericke and

Tafel. 1897.
Omits most New Church Homeopaths but contains lengthy
sketches of Constantine Hering and Hans Gram.

Brock, Peter. Radical Pacifists in Ante belIum America. Paper ed.

Princeton. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1968.

Burgher. J. C., ed. Semi-Centennial Celebration of the Introduction

of Homeopathy West of the Allegheny Mountains. Pittsburgh.
Pennsylvania: By the Society, 1888.

Cameron. Kenneth Waiter. Emerson the Essayist: An Outline of !:!.!2.

PhilosophicalDevelopment through 1836. 2 vols. Raleigh.
North Carolina: The Tnistle Pre~s. 1945.
Includes excellent material on Sampson Reed.

xxxviii
 "
Carter, Carrie, G., ed. The Ufe of Chauncey Giles Boston:

Massachusetts New Church Union, 1920.

Many valuable lett~rs of Giles are included in this sympa­

thetic compllatlon.

Clapp. Margaret A. Forgotten First Citizen: Iohn Bigelow. Boston:

L1ttle, Brown and Co.• 1947.

Biography based on the John Bigelow Papers at the New York

(
Public Ubrary with very little information on New Church history.

Cleave's Biographical Cyclopedia of Homeopathic Physicians and

Surgeons. Philadelphia: Galaxy Publishing Co., 1873.

curUs, Edith R. A Season in Utopia: The.§.!Q!y of Brook Facm~ New

York: Thomas Nelson and Sons, 1961.

Dixon, William Hepworth. Spiritual Wives, 2 vols. Second ed.

- London:· Hurst and Blackett, 1868.

Eastman, Arthur M. Ufe and Reminiscences 0 Constantine Herin

Phlladelphia: n.p., 1917.

Private reprint of an article in the Hahnemannian Monthly,

August, 1917.

Eby, S. C. The Problem of Reform. St. Louis: The New Church Book- X
Room. 1897.

Ekirch, Arthur A., Jr. The Idea of Progress in America, 1815-1860.

C New York: Columbia University Press, 1944.

Ell1s, Franklin and Samuel Evans. History of Lancaster County, 2 vols.

Philadelphia: Everetts and Peck, 1883.

Fomell, Earl Wesley. The Unhappy Medium: Spiritualism and the

L1fe of Margaret Fox. Austin, Texas: The University of Texas

Press, 1964.

Harris, Alexander. A Biographical History of Lancaster County.

Lancaster, Pennsylvania: Elias BaIT and Co., 1872.

xxxix
 Hinds. Willlam Alfred. American Communities: Brief Sketches of
~ ( Economy, Zoar, Bethel." Aurora. Amana. Icaria, The Sha kers.
. Oneida. Wallingford. and The Brotherhood of th~ New Life.
Oneida. New York: Office of the American Socialist. 1878.

~
\- Hine. Robert V. California's Utopian Colonies; San Marino.
California: The Huntington Library, 1953.
J
>0 C HOw~ .
William Dea~ Years of MY Youth.
Bros .• 1916.
New York: Harper and

----;:land. J. R. From Different Points of View: rBenjamin Fiske Barrett

~
>c A Study. Germantown, Pa.: Swedenborg Publishing Associa:
lion, 1896.
--=--
Kett, Joseph F. The F"ormation of the American Medical Profession:
The Role of Institutions, 1780-1860. New Haven and London:
Yale University Press, 1968.
Excellent interpretive chapter on Homeopathy.

Klein, Frederic Shriver. Lancaster County Since 1841. Revised ed.

Lancaster, Pa.: The Lancaster County National Bank, 1955.

Knerr, Calvin B., Charles G. Raue, et al., eds. bMemorial of

..... Constantine Hering. Philadelphia: n. p., n. d.

Kraditor, Aileen. Means and Ends in American Abolitionism: Garrison

and His Critics on Strategy and Tactics, 1834-1850. New York:
Pantheon Books, 1969.

Kramph Will Case: The Controversy in Regard to Swedenborg's Work

Q!l Conlugial Lov~. Bryn Athyn, Pa.: The Academy of the New
Church, 1910.

Kramph Will.Case: Testimony. Lancaster, Pa.: The Examiner Printing

House, 1908.
Includes extracts from the Minute-Book of the Lancaster New
Church Society, 1836-1856.

L1ttell. Franklin H. The Origins o(Sectarian Protestantism. Paper ed.

New York: The Macmillan Co., 1964 (1952).

M'Culley, Richard. The Brotherhood of the New Life and Thomas Lake
Harris. Glasgow: John Thomson, 1893.
Includes much biographical material on Harris and treats him
sympathetically.
xl
Morris, H. N. Flexman. Blake, Coleridge, and Other Men of Genius
Influenced.Qy Swedenborg. London: New Church Press, Ltd.,
1915.

Morton, Louis. Robert Carter of Nomini Hall. Williamsburg, Virginia:

Colonial Willlamsburg, Inc., 1941.

O'Dea, Thomas F. The Sociology of Religion. Englewood-Cl1ffs, New J

- Jersey: Prentice-Hall, Inc., 1966.

. Annals of the New Church, 1 1688-1850. Bryn
Odhner, Carl T.
Athyn, Pa.: Academy of the New Church, 1904.
A year-by-year factual account of the history of the N~w
Church in United States and Europe. Two typed volumes covering
the y~ars from 1850 are available for use in the Academy Library.

Outline History 'of the New Jerusalem Church of Cincinnati, 1811­

1903. Cincinnati: Church Council, 1903.
Includes membership list.

Parsons, Theophilus. Memoir of Emily Elizabeth Parsons. Boston:

Little, Brown and Co., 1880.

Pascal, Roy. Design and Truth in Autobiography. Cambridge, Massa­

chusetts: Harvard University Press, 1960.

Podmore, Frank. Mesmerism and Christian Science. London: Metheun

and Co•• 1909.

Mediums of the Nineteenth Centuty, 2 vols. New Hyde

Park, New York: University Books, Inc .• 1963.
A new edition of Modern Spiritualism.

Modern Spiritualism: !l Histoty and ~ Criticism, 2 vols.

London: Metheun and Co., 1902.

Price, Robert. Iohnny Appleseed: Man and Myth. Bloominqton:

Indiana University Press. 1954.
Price shows that Appleseed was no pauper but a merchant­
landholder, and that his role in evan eliZii1 for the ~Church
has been overstated.

Reed, Sampson. !l Biographical Sketch Q[Jho~~orcester Boston:

Massachusetts New Church Union, 1880.
A very unsatisfactory biography of this important, enigmatic
New Church leader. ~
xli
Riasanovsky, Nicholas V. The Teaching of Charles Fourier. Berkeley
and IDs Angeles: University of California Press, 1969.

Riegel, Robert E. American Feminists. Paper ed. Lawrence, Kansas:

The University of Kansas, 1968 (1963) •.

Rosenberg, Charles t. The Cholera Years: The United States in 1832,

~ and 1866. Paper ed. Chicago and IDndon: The Univer-
sity of Chicago Press, 1962.

Rupp, I. Daniel. History of Lancaster County. Lancaster, Pa.:

Gilbert Hills, 1844.

Sayre, RObert F. The Examined Self. Princeton, New Jersey: Prince-

ton University Press, 1964.

Schn~ider, HE'rbert W. and George Lawton. 8. Prophet and 9.. Pilgrim, J

Being the Incredible History of Thomas Lake Harris and Laurence
Ol1phant; Their Sexual Mysticism and Utooian Communities.
New York: Cohmbia University Press, 1942. . .
One of the few scholarly studies of a Swedenborgian by some-
one not basically in sympathy with the Swedenborgian point of
view.

Shafer,Henry Burnell. The American Medical Profession, J783-1850.

New York: Columbia University Press, 1936.

Shryock, Richard Harrison. Medicine and Society in America, 1660-

1860. Great Seal ed. Ithaca, New York: Cornell University
Press, 1962 (1960).

Sigstedt, Cyriel Odhner. The Swedenborg Epic; the Life and Works of
Emanuel Swedenborg. New York: Bookman Associates, 1952.
Biography which explores Swedenborg's intellectual develop-
ment.

Silver, Ednah C. Sketches of the New Church in America on 9.. Back-

ground of Civic and Socii:! 1 Life. Boston: The Massachusetts
New Church Union, 1920.
A very enlightening series of personality sketches, especially
valuable in shoWing the extensive intermarriage of Swedenborg-
'ians.

Simpson, Henry. The Liv~$, of Eminent Philadelphians, Now Deceased.

Philadelphia: WillialJl Brotherhead, 1859.

xlii
Smith, William E. and Ophia D. A Buckeye Titan. Cincinnati. Ohio:
Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio. 1953.
A biography of John H. James of Urbana. Ohio.

Stanton, William. The Leopard's Spots: Scientific Attitudes Towgrd

- - ii1AmerJ~
Race - 1815-1859. Phoenix ed. Chicago: University
of Chicago Press, 1960.

Thomas, John 1. The Liberator: William Lloyd Garrison. Boston:

Little, Brown and Co., 1963.

~o~3vig, Signee Emanuel Swedenborg. New Haven: Yale uniVerSity)

Press, 1948.
Critical biography.

Walmsley, Donald Munro. Anton Mesmer. London: Robert Hale, 1967.

Effort to repair Mesmer's damaged reputation.

Warren, George Co pp. The Part Qf.. the_Warrens in the Development

of Coal Tar, Petroleum Oil and Asphalt. n. p.: Warren Bros.
Co., 1928.

Whittier, John G., ed. Letters of Lydia ~ Child. Boston:

Houghton, Mifflin and Co.. 1883.
Includes a biographical sketch and a list of her published
works.

Wilk.1nson, James John Garth. The African and the True Christian
Religion: His Magna Carta. London: James Speirs, 1892.

Williams, Rudolph. The New Church and Chicago: A History. Chicago:

W. B. Conkey Company. 1906.

Much useful information poorly organized.

Wyatt-Brown, Bertram. ~ewis Tappan and the Evangelical War Against r.t"
Slavery. Cleveland: Case Western Reserve University, 1969. / ....

Young, Frederic Harold. The· Philosophy of Henry Tames, Sr. New

York: Bookman Associates, 1951.
Young brings out the fact that James was a maverick Sweden­
borgian who tried to hold on to the essence ofSWedenborg's
wri ngs while interpreting them to suit his own fancy, offending
many New Church people in the process.

Young, Kimball. Isn't One Wife Enough? New York: Henry Holt and
Co., 1954.
xliii
 PREFACE

Swedenborgianism, based on Emanuel Swedenborg's inter­

pretation of the Christian religion, was an eighteenth-century elitist

faith which attracted liberal men of talent and energy in both Europe

and the United States. These men were revolting against orthodox

Christianity, the cold rationalism of Deism, or materialism. I

By 1840 in the United States the New Church was solidly

institutionalized in strategic urban centers, and seemed to be in a

position to capitalize on the intellectual ferment of the ante bellum

years.
-
From 1840 to 1870 Swedenborgianism did attract more atten­

lion in Am,;E.ican society than at any 0t!:er:..period of time. Sweden­

borgian ideas spread far beyond the confines of the New Church to

h~beralize American religion and shape the American literary

tradition.

During these same years something went wrong. The New

Church failed to realize the lofty dreams of its adherents, or even

the full potential a more realistic appraisal might have predicted.

---
Seeds were sown which undermined the vitality of the New Church in

the years after 1870.

--- -
Our aim is to trace the institutionalization of

-------
the New Church in order to expose the internal and external pressures
- ~ ­
xliv
 -
that most decisively formed the structure and attitudes which prevailed
- - - --

before and after 1870.

From 1840 to 1870 the New Church struggled to define its

internal composition so that it could implement its universal aspira-

lions'. That struggle took place in an era of religious and social

ferment. For this reason the external factors affecting New Church

development must be considered. especially the interaction of Sweden:"

borgianism with Spiritualism and social reform. The Civil War was

the particular capstone of the trends of the previous two decades.

This' study makeS! no pretense to being comprehensive.'

Eastern developments are regarded as more decisive than those in the

West in the New Church from 1840 to 1870. Even in the East major

concentration rests on the men and societies of Boston. New York.

and Philadelphia. Many smaller. but important groups have been

ignored, and a few important individuals have been bypassed. Henry

James, Sr., is probably the most notable exception.

.;..-.---- ­
-
Tames so' effec­

lively exercised his Swedenborgian freedom that he isolated himself

from the rest of the New Church community. Even among fellow Free

Spirits there is almost no evidence of contact with James.

The study s not comprehensive in other ways, Because of

Marguerite Block's emphasis on the Gene'ral Convention, in her study

The ~ Church in the New World. emphasis has been placed on

various anti-Convention movements during the period. Serious

xlv
consideration of New Church educational and scientific developments

have been omitted.

Another important qualification of the study is_ s handling

~S~E~nborg. Rather than trying to expound Swedenborgianism

directly from Swedepl;>org's writings, the study endeavors toyresent

fairly the various interpretatio~ o.!...Swedenborg which circulated

between 1840 to 1870.

The author acknowledges the inestimable help given by two

New Church librarians: M~. Eldred Klein, ~hivist of the Academy

Archives in Bryn Athyn, Pennsylvania, and~rs. R0I:.ert ~n of the

Swedenborg School of Religion Archives, Newton, Massachusetts.

Both gave themselves unstintingly in their efforts to provide informa­

tion and research material. Special thanks is also due the staff

member!> of the Academy Library, the Rev. Mr. and Mrs. Clayton

Priestnal, and President Edwin Capon and the faculty of the Swed'en­

borg School of Religion.

Without the professional encouragement and support of Drs.

Don Yoder and Wallace E. Davies of the University of Pennsylvania,

this work could never have been completed. Financially the travel

and research were made possible by a Kent Fellowship granted by the

Danforth Foundation.

xlvi
 The following abbreviations are used frequentiy throughout

the dissertation:

AA - Academy Archives

BP - Boston Public Library

HFC - Hinkley Family Correspondence

OSAHSQ - Ohio State Archeological iind Historical

Society Quarterly

SSRA - Swedenborg School of Religion Archives

TCR - The True Christian Religion

xlvii
 CHAPTER I

THE NEW CHURCH IN THE OLD WORLD

The history of Swedenborgianism begins in Western Europe

where. Deism was a prominent religious philosophy in many intellec­

.'~
tual circles in the eighteenth century. This rational amalgamation

of progressive religious and scientific thought infected the aristo­

cratic and intellectual elites of Europe to the consternation of the

-
orthodox, whether Catholic or Protestant.
.
Even those scientific

men who did not fully embrace Deism could not escape its influence

in their thought and work.

As Dei~fOU9ht its way to a place of power its adherents

tended to abandon the earlier identification with Christianity which

had lent to Deism an air of respectability. Free-thinking men began

rejecting all revealed truth since they were convinced that no

religious truth was rationally and scientifically demonstrable.

Orthodox Catholic and Protestant leaders protested to the faithful

and their appeals did bear some results. Walls of defense were

built using creeds as building blocks, or church authority. Offensive

forays called revivals were also quite effective among the masses in
----
England.

1
 2

Not all enlightened men abandoned Christianity in the face of

DeisticJ criticism. Unable to accept orthodoxy as it existed, or Deism,

or free-thinking rationalism, a few men tried to develop a meani~ful

Christian position for themselves. Rather than allow the ship to sink

into oblivion, they effected a major revolution in their own concept of

Christianity and endeavor~to clean the barnacles of tradition from

th,!:! Church.

Emanuel Swedenborg (1688-1772). a Swedish engineer,

scientist, politician, gardener, inventor, and rationalist mystic, was

one such man. He jettisoned a brilliant political and scientific career

in order to reinterpret the Christian religion. His new world-View,

bound spirit and matter equally into an inseparable whole, ending the

spirit-matter dichotomy which plagued Deists and Christians alike.

As a scientist Swedenborg had worked through chemistry and

anatomy in an effort to uncover the link between body, mind, and soul.

As a Lutheran, even though not of the stamp of his father who was a

bishop, Swedenborg was committed to a belief in God and man's soul.

From his studies he concluded that the soul was the life-force of the

body. The mind was the soul's chief instrument. God was mirrored

in man's soul as the soul was tangibly reflected in man's body. 1

lCyrll Odhner Sigstedt, The Swedenborgian Epic: The Life

and ~ of Emanuel Swedenborg (New York: Bookman Associates,
1952), pp. 113, 118, 153.
 3

Such thinking led Swedenborg to his all-inclusive doctrine of

correspondences. 2 But most importantly, SwedenbOr'g ·had concluded

from his research that reason could take him no farther in the search

for truth. In 1743 in Amsterdam a ~reat Vision of Christ" uprooted

Swedenborg from his past and set him aside for the experience of )
divine revelation. Another vision of "Th~ FinalJudgment" in 1757 led

to a final break with organized religio.n. 3 However, the separation

was not yet apparent. for Swedenborg continued to perform his normal

political duties as a member of the Swedish Diet. His spare time was

devoted to writing and publishing anonymously a series of Latin works

elaborating his new position.

During the 1760's, as his writings circulated among the

intellectual circles of Western Europe and his name became known,

the intensity of the personal and philosophical attacks aga~!1§t

Swedenborg increased markedly. German thinkers of the stature of

Immanuel Kant challenged him from abroad, and Lutherans at home

2Doctrine of Correspondences-.-In an oversimplified sense

this concept states that nature exists in complementary pairs of
spiritual and natural components. See John Stuart 809g, A Glossary Jj j..,
2[ the Meaning of Specific Terms and Phrases Used .!2:i Swedenborg
in His Theological Writings Given in His Own Words (Lon~on:
Swedenborg Society. 1915), p. 26.

3Signe Toksvig. Emanuel Swedenborg (New Haven: Yale ")..

University Pres"s:-T948), pp. 139-141. 150. 154.
 4
4
brought charges of heresy against him. In spite of the opposition

Swedenborg continued to WTite prolifically until his death in 1772.

Quite naturally Lutherans were not eager to applaud Sweden­

borg. The fundamental tenets of the New_C!!.urch assaulted the very

heart of orthodox Protestantism and Catholicism. For example.

Swedenborg stressed the unity of God, insisting that the orthodox

doctrine of the Trinity postulated three gods. The focus of worship

for Swedenborg yv;>.s Jes~~hrist, the Lord of the New Testament and

the Jehovah of the Old Testament. 5 He recognized a trinity. but it

was a trinity of "essentials" of one deity, namely, Divine Good.

Divine Tn,lth. and the Divine Operation which emanates from the

union of the other two. 6

Swedenborg did not consciously manufacture his doctrinal

system from the accumulated raw materials of Christian tradition,

even though his view of the Trinity approximated that of third century

Monarchianism~andhis system of hermeneutics is similar to that

';\
4 igstedt. Epic. pp. 301. 343. 400-402.

SEmanuel Swedenborg. The True~Christian Religion: Con­

tai.ntng the Universal Theology of the New Church (Philadelphia: J. B.
Lippincott and Co., 1879). pp. 139-140.

6Emanuel Swedenborg, "The Lord ... The Four: Leading

Doctrines of the New Church (Boston: Otis Clapp, 1842). pp. 81-83.
Swedenborg. TCR. pp. 239, 280 if.

<itouiS Berkhof, The History of Christian Doctrines (Grand

Rapids: Wm. B. Eerdman's. 1949). pp. 81-83.
 5

of Origen, the great Alexandrian Church Father. Swedenborg had

certainly assimilated a great melange of knowledge from other

religious leaders of church history, but his worl~~is too original

to be anything other than the product of a grea t mind in search of

truth. The system is the result of a life of scholarly research and

introspective searching which owed a great debt to education and

environment, but was in essence the byproduct of Swedenborg' sown

mind.

All of his writings leaned heavily upon the Christian

Scriptures. Swedenborg claimeq to sense three levels of revelation:

the literal, the internal, and the celestial. Only the first two were

accessible to man. 8 The spiritual or internal sense, the medium of

communication between heaven and earth, conveyed life to the literal

words of Scripture ~ as the soul infuses life into th~ natural

9
body. Swedenborg concluded that this internal sense was lacking
r in the books of Job, Ecclesiastes, Ruth, Esther, Proverbs, Ezra,

Nehemiah, Chronicles, and all of the New Testament except the four

Gospels Ql1d Revelation. 10

8
Swedenborg, "The Sacred Scriptures, " Four Doctrines, pp.
8-9.

9Swedenborg, TCR, pp. 323-324.

10Swedenborg, "On the White Horse of Revelation 19. " ~our

Doctrines, p. 22.
 6

This internal sense of Scripture could not be derived

rationally according to Swedenborg, but was vouchsafed to--!!!.~n

"princ~pled in genuine truths" by the Lord alone. 11

Wherefore, if anyone wishes, from himself and not r m
the Lord. to open that sense, heaven is closed; and when
it is closed man either sees nothing of the truth, or
becomes spiritually insane. 12

While this internal sense itself was a gift from the Lord, the actual

unfolding of the spiritual sense of the Word adhered to a system of

correspondences and was not arbitrary. Thus, the Fall of man in

Genesis corresponded to the will-principle of man (represented in

Eve) being seduced by self':'love (the serpent). The sin involved

( was the desire for the fruit of self-derived intelligence. 13

Following the internal sense of Scripture. Swedenborg denied

the vicarious at0.3ement of Jesus Christ. the orthodox position which

--
was based on the literal sense of Scripture. 14 In coming to earth

the Lord had assumed a material. human aspect which embodied all

the evils any man ever faces. Christ's life was a series of "subjuga­
f
I
tions of the hells. " one of which was death. Through this process of

llIbid., p. 28.

1 Swederiborg. TCR. pp. 340-341.

'--......} 3Samuel Woodworth, ed., New Jerusalem Missionary, I

(1823), 5.

14Swedenborg. "Faith." Four Doctrines, pp. 18-19.

 7

"combats" Christ gradually restored equilibrium in the spiritual realm

and made possible man's freedom from the power of the "hells." The

last of these "combats" was the Passion. 15

The Lord's work was not to reconcile and appease the Father;

rather. he opened the door for man to achieve salvation through a

)\ process of cooperative regeneration. The initial step for man was

still faith. not blind belief but conviction based on the ra tional

choice of a man in freedom. However. Swedenborg felt that man

could only discern what sentiments to endorse "rationally" if he were

"in illumination from the Lord. ,,16

In addition to faith, charity was a prerequisite for salva tion.

Charity expressed itself as an affection for the good; good as that

which ~ useful for society as a whole.

Christian charity, with every individual, consists in his

performing_ fait!:lfully the duties of his cal ing: for thus,
if he shuns evils as sins. he daily does what is good,
and is himself his own particular use to the common body;
thus also the common goOd is provided for, and that of
each individual in particular. 17

Because of the emphasis on charity and its effect--goOd

works--Swedenborg discarded the doctrine of justifiCation by faith

15Swedenborg. "The Lord. " [Q!:![ Doctrines, pp. 23-24, 56.

16Swedenborg, "Faith," Four Doctrines, p. 5. Swedenborg,

TCR. pp. 340-341, 818. 820.

17Swedenborg, "Faith," Four Doctrine,;, p. 54.

 8

alone. Regeneration followed a life of adherence to the Lord's

commandments, not one sudden act of faith. It was the culmination

of all of life's choices. Obedience to the Lord meant more than

1I external conformity, for ~n ......~~_p.ected~will well" an~ct

-
well." One had to search his motives and repudiilte those actions
.
springing solely from his natural self-love. 18

Swedenborg clearly explained that man could not "will well"

by himself, for man's natural life was inseparably linked to the

spiritual world, either to angels or evil spirits. Both surrounded man

and desired to influence him for good or evil. If man genuinely

desired good the angels could help him in the process of regenera­
19
tion. Angels also accompanied man through death, the gateway to

true life, in order to make the transition from the material to the

spiritual easier for him.

Even though Swedenborg's doctrinal system challenged

--- --..:::="'

orthodox Christianity directly, his world-view was still distinctly

Christian. From this novel position Swedenborg also confronted

~

Deism,) but his main thrust was not at the specifics of Deism. He

boldly attacked the Deist concept of truth. Swedenborg's own

concept has been labeled~mPiri~alRevel~Jby ~ leading

18Swedenborg, "Life," Four Doctrines, p. 11. Swedenborg,

TCR, p. 485.

19Swedenborg, TCR, p. 583.

 9·

S~denbotg sch?lar, because it encompassed the -rational, scientific. )

physical side of reality as well as the mystical, spiritual side. 20

I
Swedenborg regarded ph ~cal and psychical experiences as ~ y

valid, even fully compatible, since man' himself was both spirit and

matter. 21

The idep of "Empirical Revelation" was not accepted by all

men revolting against Deism; in fact, Swedenborg's theory found

formidable opposition everywhere i~ spread. In Germany Immanuel

Kant rejected the concept. and Swedenborg's writings,_ with ~}e.

So imposing was his stature in German intellectual circles that few

Germans of note even gave Swedenborg serious consideration. 22

Johann Friedrich Immanuel Tafel emerged as Swedenborg' s c~ief

apostle there. Tafel, however, reacted to Kant's flippancy by

exalting the writings of Swedenborg to the unique, divinely-revealed

Writings. 23 His impact on the spread of Swedenborg's teachings in

20Robert Kirven, Emanuel Swedenborg and the Revolt Against

Qeism (unpublished Ph. D. dissertation, Brandeis University, 1965),
p. 16.­

21 Ibid ., p. 21.

22Sigstedt, Epic. pp. 301, 343. Kirven, Revolt, pp. 64, 95,
259, 294. Kirven's dissertation makes use of the writings of the
leading German scholar on Swedenborg, Ernst Benz. See Ernst Benz,
J Swedenborg in Deutschland: .E. .Q. Oetinger un Lehre Emanuel
Swedenborgs (Frankfurt: Vittorio Klostermann, 1947), 351 pp.
~ Emanuel Swedenborg: -Naturforscher und Seher (Munich: Hermann
Rinn, 1948), 588 pp.

23Kirven , Revolt, pp. 288, 294.

 10

the- United States, from his position in the university at T~bingen,

was to be as consequential as his influence in Germany.

/ I~::. Franii! as in G~rmany. the spread of Swedenborg's ideas

was dealt a severe check from the outset by an external factor. In

France it was the identification of Swedenborg with a psychic wav.e

which swept over the late eight~nth century in.-:he form of ~m~sm....

and Spiritualism.

Mesmerism was a scientific craze in pre-revolutionary France

named for a colorful Parisian doctor--Franz Anton Mesmer. In spite

of the rationalist emphasis in Enlightenment science, a strong

mystical strain remained unpurged. Mesmerism fitted into the vortex

where science _a~ccultis~t, and at that stage in history did not

even contradict the Enlightenment stres s on reason. 24

Mesmer was a legitimate physician. But he went beyond the

practice of medicine to develop a theory of cure based upon the

existence of a Universal Fluid. This fluid existed as a physical

force which could act magnetically upon the body to heal disease. 2S

Even though he was a trained doctor. Mesmer performed the role of

1 -- 24 Robert Darnt,pn, Mesmerism and the End of the Enlighten-

1 ment in France (Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1968). pp.
36. 39.

2SFrank Podmore, Mesmerism and Christian Science

(London: Methuen and Company. 1909), pp. 40-42.
 11

a charlatan also. for he became enamored with the popularity

accorded to him by fashionable, aristocratic Parisians. 26

For some of his followers at least. Mesmerism developed

into more than fad; it became a faith designed to cure men and

society of disease and disharmony. 27 Mesmerism also offered an

alternative to the cold, scientific materialism of Deism. Since in

this latter respect Mesmerism had something in common with Sweden­

borg~anism. the intertwining of the two movements in France was

quite natural. But in France Mesmerism found itself captured by a

( spiritualistic movement)which helped discredit the new 'faith and

cause numerous splits in its ranks. 28 By 1789 this .

• . • eclectic, spiritualist form of mesmerism, the

form thilt was to be revived in the nineteenth century,
had spread throughout Europe. Mesmer's ideas had
escaped his control and had run wildly through super­
natural regions where he believed they had no ­
business. 29

The Marquis'de Puysegur, one of Mesmer's students. diverted

~
his master's physically-oriented theory into psychical channels.

Essentially Puysegur held that there was a force by which one's soul

26Ibid .• p. 63. For an effort to restore Mesmer's reputation

see Donald M. Walmsley. Anton Mesmer (London: Robert Hale. 1967),
192 pp.

27Darnton, Enli htenment. pp. 4, 61, 165.

28Ibid., pp. 70. 72. 135. 141.

29 Ibid .• p. 71.
 12

El could direct the body, as Mesmer had taught, but he refused to

accept his mentor's conclusion that the force was physical. Puysegur

believed man COuld control his own body by an exercise of will, and

a magnetizer could exercise his will to affect the vital life-principle

or soul of another person. 30 While such recognition of spiritual

reality is not spiritualistic, Puysegur's theory did provide the

foundation upon which others could build.

Not all French Mesmerists were inclined toward Spiritualism

and not all French disciples of Swedenborg were Mesmerists or

Spiritualists. 3l But all three of these movements shared a c~~on

belief in spiritual reality, and consequently were strongly anti­

materialistic. They usually shared anti-Deistic' sentiment as well.

And all three suffered because the simplistic arguments of their

opponents identified Mesmerism, Spiritualism, and Swedenborgianism

as being equally worthy of contempt. None was worthy of serious

scientific or religious consideration.

As early as 1784 a French governmental commission reported

negatively on Mesmerism. The report ruined Mesmer's reputation in

established medical circles although it hardly affected his popularity

30Podmore, Mesmerism, p. 77.

31A notable non-Spiritualist New Churchman was M. Le

Boys de Guays. See his The New Church: Swedenborg aJJdMOdern )
Spiritualism (Manchester, En91and: Cave and Sever, 1860), 22 pp.
 13

with the upper ~lass in Paris. 32 Even more serious than the personal
"

damage to Mesmer's reputation was the repercussion the commission's

findings had in s-.uppressing any valuable insights Mesmerism might

have cQntributed to science.

The deliberate negligence of the scientific world left

the whole field to be cultivated by the visionary and _
the charlatan. The abundant crop of false beliefs and
extravagant systems which flourish at the present time
[1909] is the direct result of the apathy or obstinate
incredulity shown by the physicians of generations ago.
The positive loss to psychology and to medical science
itself in all the intervening years is probably gre-ater
still. 33

While Swedenborg's teachings were not the subject of a

( commission's scrutiny, the ~nch government and the Catholic

I Church did cooperate to prevent the fusion of scattered bands of

readers of Swedenborg. As a result, local circles tended to be

t "theosophical societies rather than churches" • • . • "a series of

isolated and non-cumulative developments ... 34 Due to the open

hostility and the reluctance of learned men to expose themselves to

ridicule. one towering figure emerged to dominate New Church

developments in France as in Germany.

32Podmore. Mesmerism, .p. 70. For the report see Benjamin

Franklin. et aI., Report of Dr. Benjamin Franklin and ~
Commissioners Charged .QY. the Ktng of France with the Examination
of Animal Magnetism as Now Practiced at Paris (London: J. Johnson,
1785). 108 pp.
33Podmore. Mesmerism. p. 154.
341· rven • Revolt. pp: 240-241, 253.
 14

Jacques Francios Etienne re a;;y; de Guays. civil official,

had founded a Swedenborgian society 1n St. Amand in 1837. From

there he issued a journal. the Nouvelle rerusalem. Revue religious

et scientifigue, translated the works.of Immanuel Tafel ~ e

~an_into French. and published his own original treatises. Uke

Tafel. Le Boys de Guays unhesitatingly endorsed the concept of

Swedenborg's infallibility. 35 He also set the precedent for coping

with the erosion of the New Church by Spiritualism. The recognition

- --
of the divine and final nature of Swedenborg's revelations was the

only way to deal effectively with the Spiritualistic threat.· 36

The story of the spread of Swedenborg's teachings in E~nd

is similar to that of Germany and France in that Mesmerism and

Swedenborgianism intermingled in the struggle against Deism. Deist.ic

science, and orthodoxy. And once again a virulent sectarian position

emerged in regard to Swedenborg's authority. Ne·vertheless. the

English scene produced something different from Continental New

Church experience. In England's relatively greater political freedom,

and her latitudinarian religious context, Swedenborg's ideas gained a

far wider hearing than in any other European country. No one person

35 Ibid., p. 242. Le Boys de Guays. The New Church. pp.

4, 11.

(~~Le Boys de Guays, The New Church. pp. 4, 11.

 IS

was ever able to dominate New Church development; instead, two

major Interp~e~s of Swedenborg rose to prominence.

The first was the eminenr.~n Clow~'(M. A. Trinity College,

Cambridge), rector of St. John's Parish, Manchester, for fifty-seven

years. Clowes organized the first Swedenborgian society in England

in 1778 within his own ~h, and proceeded to openly preach

Swedenborg's ideas from his pulpit. His aim was to use Swedenborg's

. insights to infuse new life into the Old Church. 37

.Shortly after Clowes' step, a printer-in London who was the

son of a Methodist itinerant preacher also received the doctrines of

Swedenborg and formed a reading group. His name was Obert

2.- Hindmarsh; the year was 1782. Hindmarsh' s circle soon evolved

into a Theosophical Society of Continental stamp, eventually serving

as the nucleus for the first separate New Church society in England.

Seventeen members left their former religious affiliations to join the

new venture. 38

The reasons for the opposite responses of Clowes and

Hindmarsh are several in number. First, Clowes was an established

Anglican clergyman, better able to command respect for his heter-dox

stand within the Old Church than Hindmarsh. Second, given

37 Ki r-ven, Revolt, pp. 127, 129-130.

38 Ibid., pp. 131, 136-138.
 16

Anglican laxity on doctrine, Clowes had reason to hope for reform of

the Old Church through gradual means. Hindmarsh, fresh from a

fervent Methodist background, saw no compatibility between

Methodism and Swedenborg, and no hope of future reconciliation.

Third and last, Hindmarsh was a sectarian before and after his

acceptance of Swedenborg. His conversion was an abrupt break with

past religious experience, but it did not really alter Hindmarsh's

vie.ws of the nature of the chl;lrch or religious truth. In his mind

there was no question that Swedenborg was an infallible revelator

and to carry his views to the world a pure vehicle needed to be

created.

John Clowes was naturally disturbed by the secession in

London. At first he argued that Hindmarsh had not given reform a

chance. Later he directly challenged Hindmarsh' s theory of Sweden­

borg's authority by claiming that nothing in the Swede's life or

writing~ warranted a complete break with the" Old Church. ,,39 In

doing so he was rejecting Swedenborg as a unique, divine agent.

Philosophically HlE.9-l11Msh belonged to the same school of

thought as T~l and Lej3oy~~ Guays; all three had a similar view

of Swedenborg. The major difference between them lay in the

39Ibid ., pp. 133-134. The term "Old Churcl1" is an all

inclusive designation for the three branches of Christianity predating
Swedenborg. although it usually refers specificall to Protestantism
rather than Ca thol1~r Eastei'-n-c5rthcxiox~ . ~-
 17

institutionalization of this position in their respective countries.

Only in England did the New Church emerge as an ecclesiastical

organism capable of determining New Church development else­

where. 40 And even though the English New Church had no one voice,

Hindmarsh's point of view did tend to predominate by virtue of his

location in London, his skill in publishing, and his coherent world­

view which appealed to men not yet accustomed to thinking in the

more relativistic frame of reference of John Clowes.

M~chester remained the heart of non-separatist Swedenborg-

i~m. In addition to these two New Church positions of Clowes

and Hindmarsh, England had room for an amorphous group of "free

3 spirits" who held to Swedenborg's teachings with varying degrees of

intensity. William ~ and Samuel Taylor Coleridge were two of

the most outstanding representatives of this influential circle. 41 No

doubt one could uncover more than these. three refinements in the New

Church stance with some effort, for the followers of Swedenborg were

40Kirven, ~, pp. 188, 191, 193.

41 H. N. Morris, Flaxman, Blake_, Coleridge, S!l.9. Other Men \

of Genius Influenced .Qy Swedenborg (London: New Church Press,
Ltd., 1915). For a study of Swedenborg's influence on Blake see the
following articles: (1) H. Stanley Redgrove, "Blake and Swedenborg: I
A Study in Comparative Mys lClsm, " Occult Review, XXXVIII (1923).
288-296; (2) Mark Schorer, "Swedenborg and Blake, " Modern
Philology, XXX'1rtr938); 157-178; (3) David Erdman, "Blake's Early
Swedenborgianism: . A Twentieth Century Legend, " Comparative
Literature, V (1953). 247-257.
 18

an independent and articulate lot. This attitude guaranteed that the

New Church in England and elsewhere would develop in a context

of reasoned debate and bitter acrimony.

 CHAPTER II

INTRODUCTION OF THE NEW CHURCH TO AMERICA

Bell's Book Store. in Third Street near St. Paul's Church in

Philadelphia. Pennsylvania, was the scene of America's first

exposure to the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg. The date was

June S. 1784. ~ Gl.:n. an English planter in what~ now Guyana.

South America. and a former member of Robert Hindmarsh's Theo­

sophical Society. did the preaching on that memorable occasion. 1

Glen had become interested in Swedenborg by reading, his Heaven

,!nd Hell on the trip to London. On the way back to South America he

-- --:::::::-- --­
had decided to conduct a brief preaching tour in Boston and Phila­

delphia. 2
~

The visits to these two major United States ports probably

did not appear so momentous for James Glen. for attendance and

interest were skimpy. ~i~delphia at least four people

respon~d favorably t~ Glen's presentation or to th~books he had

, .mrl T. Odhner. Annals .Q!; the New Church. 1688-1850

(Bryn Athyn. Pa.: Academy of the New Church, 1904). p. 121.
tUJonathan Bayley, New Church Worthies (London: James
Speirs. 188.4), p. 110.

19
 20

sent to Bell's Book Store after his departure. The four were iers

• Fisher, Francis Bailey. Thomas Vickroy, and John Young. 3 Uttle is

known of Fisher from a New Church standpoint, for this prominent

Quaker lawyer and politician evidently never severed his Quaker

connections. 4 The other three men had an impact similar to that of

the ever-widening circles resulting from an object tossed into a

placid pond.

£.- 'l!tQ.~~_vick~lsettled nea~ Pittsburgh and achieved fa_me'

as the surveyor of that city. His wealthy and -'pr.?min~mily

became active supporters of New Church developments in Western

2.: Pennsylvania. John_Younglalso moved into that part of Pennsylvania

where he made his career as a lawye~~dge in Greensburg.

Young's zeal for the New Church was contagious and many of the

small societies and circles of readers which sprouted in Ohio and

Western Pennsylvania were partly due to his missionary fervor. For

example, Young is credited with winning J~than (Johnny ApRleseed)

3 Odhner, Annals, p. 121.

4 Miec isher (1748-1819) was a Quaker lawyer who served

-----
as a Philadelphia City Councilman and as a member of the Pennsyl­
vania legislature in addition to his business activities. He actively
pursued legislation favoring schools, roads. hospitals, and the
gradual emancipation of slaves. See Henry Simpson, The Uves of
E'minent Philadelphians Now Deceased (Philadelphia: William
Brotherhead, 1859), pp. 359-361.
 21

Chap~n for the New Church. Chapman became one of the New

Church's most famous itinerant missionaries. 5

Judge Young also maintained contact with the East through

an extensive corres.pondence. In addition, he had a connection to

the fourth man to respond to Glen's influence in Philadelphia, namely,

-3 - Francis !}alley. Young married a niece of Miss Hetty Barclay, an

old friend of the Bailey family. Hetty had lived for a time with the

Baileys in Philadelphia, but about 1789 she moved to Bedford,

Pennsylvania, where she and her brother Hugh helped establish a

i .
\ small but important New Church society. 6 But it was her benefactor,

Bailey, who was to be one of the foremost pioneers of the New Church

in America •.

Francis Bailey (1735-1815) was born and reared in Lancaster

famous Ephrata Cloister press.

~ ---
County, Pennsylvania, where he learned the printing trade at the

Later he served as State Printer

while living in Philadelphia. He also utilized his skills for the New
f
Church, for he printed the first American editions of several N~w

Church works. 7 As important as his printing work was, however, it

3Robert Price, Tohnny Appleseed: Man and Myth (Blooming­

ton, Indiana: Indiana University Press, 1954). pp. 121-4.

,--_6R1chard DeCharms, "Samuel M. Barclay, " Newchurchman,

m (1853-1856). 231-242.

7 Odhner, Annals, pp. 122, 146.

------~---
 22
took second place to Bailey's personal impact. Through his family

and friends Bailey operated as a one-man training school for the New

Church.

Among the friends who gathered at the Bailey home in

Philadelphia to read and discuss th~provocative ideas of Swedenb?rg

were such people as the poet Philip Freneau, the merchant Daniel

Thuun, JohannBand Frederick E. Eckstein,.9 and Daniel Lall1mot. 10

Many of the members of this group migrated throughout the United

States carrying their new faith with them. Just as impressive as the

impact of this reading group was the record left by Bailey's own

family. One daughter, Jane, wed Frederick E. Eckstein, the

Ii remarkable German artist and sculptor of her father's reading group.

A second daughter, Abbe, married John Hough ames, 1.1 a young Ohio

~Johann Eckstei@was a court painter and sculptor for J)

Frederick the Great 0 Prussia before emigrating to the United States. .

9See Ophia Smith, "Frederick Eckstein, Father of Cincinnati

Art," Bulletin of the Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio,
IX, No. 4 (1951), 266-282.

10Ednah C. Silver, Sketches of the New Church in America

on .2. Background of Ct\Lic and So_cia 1 Life (Boston: The Massachu­
setts New Church Union, 1920), pp. 14, 33, 182-183, 218. Lammot
and his family were bulwarks of the Wilmington New Church.
. ~

llWilliam E. and Ophia Smith, ~ Buckeye Titan (Cincinnati:

Historical and Philosophical Society of Ohio, 1953), 558 pp., for a

-----
biography of J. H. James.
 23

lawyer who later became the leadin benefactor 'of Urbana University,

the first New Church college in the United States.

The spread of Swedenborg's ideas from London via James

Glen, then outward from PhHadel hia, illustrates the general pattern

of cultural transmission in the new United States. This transmission

usually flowed from London, to the three or four major Eastern ports

of the United States, then inland along established transportation

routes to the.key commercial centers of the interior. Understandably,

New Church societies sprouted in coastal cities such as Boston,

New York, Baltimore, and Charleston, South Carolina; in commercial

centers in the West such as Pittsburgh, Cincinnati, Chicago, and

St. Louis; and in small towns along w.ajor transportation routes such

as Lancast~r and ~edford in Pennsylvania, Steubenville in Ohio,

and LaPorte in Indiana.

While he radiation from London may have been the general

pattern of cultural transmission in the late eighteenth century, it was

not the only one. The history of the New Church in Boston, New

York, and Philadelphia reveals that a ~ William Hill of Man­

----
chester, EJ)gland, greatly influenced tbe eady growth of the New
-
Church in those cities.
-
Gerl1!an settlements, as in Lancaster,

Baltimore, .and St. Louis, were especially vulnerable to New Church

( currents of thought flowing directly from Germany, especially to the

writings of Imm~afel.
 24

Lancaster. Pennsylvania provides a noteworthy case study

of New Church growth in the United States, for the origins of the New

Church society in that town were completely German at first, although

they ceased to be so when Francis Bailey retired to his fami! estate

~aster COlill1y abou~OO.

-----
Lancaster County was a haven for

Germans of every description--Lutherans, Reformed, Moravians,

{
Mennonites. Amish, Dunkards, Seventh-nay Baptists, and others.

The. first known New Churchman in the area was a Prussian army

,\0 officer named Count(Henry v~n Buelo~ During his brief stay in

Lancaster von Buelow had the opportunity to read and discuss Sweden­

borg with many leading German citizens. At least three "receivers" 12

resulted from those contacts: William Reiche~ach, Jacob car enter.

and Frederick ~h.

]ohann Christian William[Reichenba~emigratedto Lancaster

about 1785, where he secured a position as professor of mathematics

and German literature at Franklin College (now Franklin and Marshall

College). His friendship with von Buelow resulted !.n Reichenbach's

a~eptance of Swedenborg's~ings. Reichenbach later translated

l2The term "receiver" is the standard term New Churchmen

of this period used to describe their religious shift to the doctrines
of Swedenborg. The word avoids the instantaneous aspect of "con­
version, " and positively stresses the role of rationality and free
choice involved in one's commi al to-Swe en orgianism. 'i:"fie
difference between a "reader" of Swede"'i1'bO'r and a ''re .y~" is that
the "receiver" has read the writings OfSwedenborg"affirmatively. "
"'--:----- -­
 2S
-.l!l

one of von Buelow's New Church treatises from La tin into German and
\.
had It published. 13 But by this time von Buelow had returned to

Germany.

Little else is known of Reichenbach's New Church activities

in Lancaster, for except for the books he donated to Franklin College's

initial-library, and some poetry, his personal manuscripts seem to

have been destroyed. 14 However, Reichenbach's pioneering work

for the New Church in Lancaster was considerable. As a college

professor married into Lancaster's social elite 15 Reichenbach demon­

strated to Lancas~er that a receiver of Swedenborg was not a community

liability. For example, he work.e~ ~loselY3ith~neral Edward Hand

.in formulating a proposal that La1l9astet:....!?~ the_national capital ~f

13Alexander Harris, Biographical History of Lancaster

County (Lancaster, Pa.: Elias Barr and Co., 1872). p. 476. The

authorship of Agathon is disputed. S. S. Rathvon of Lancaster felt

that Agathon (Lancaster, Pa.: Joseph Ehrenfried, 1812) was really

(
. Reichenbach'§....'&'ork. (S. S. Rathvon to N. C. Burnham, Nov. 16.

1868,- SSRA). Copies of Agathon can be found in the Academy Library,

Bryn Athyn and in the Franklin and Marshall College Rare Book

Collection.

14Reichenbach served as the first librarian for Franklin

College and donated some fift vol mes to start its collection which

are still in the possession of the present Franklin and Marshall

C College. The papers that were not destroyed were sent to Urbana
University, Ohio, by S. S. Rathvon, except for some poetry inserted
in Rathvon's unpublished autobiography in the Lancaster County
Historical Society. -- .

lSHarris, Lancaster County, p. 475.

 26

the United States. His survey map of Lancaster accompanied Hand's

letter to Philadelphia when the request was finally made. 16

Reichenbach did help prepare the. people of Lancaster for a

Swedenborgian in their midst. and he was

_n'. probably the single __
most

--important
-
man in.Lancaster New Church history in terms of his stature

in the community. Bat the other men who had taken von Buelow

seriously were socially ~!lt a~l. '-O. --.:'--_-J

of the elite Carpenter family that provided Lancaster with the able

political leadership it had during the mid- and late eighteenth century.

mish taught music in Lancaster and is also remembered as the man

who introduced printer Jose h Ehrenfried to Swedenborg. 17

[J:hrenfried. later affectionately called "Father" by Lancaster

--
New Church people, was one of the "most intelligent" receivers in

----
Lancaster from his reception of the Doctrines in 1816 until his death
--
-
in 1862. 18 He had been born in Germany in 1783. but had emigrated

16David McNeelY Stauffer, "The Documentary History of the

Borough" (Lancaster, Pa.: Unpublished copy of original borough
minutes, Lancaster County Historical Society), p. 95. This work is
an abstract of borough minutes from 1742 to 1818 which shows that
Rei~henbach and !;9'!:!ard Hand also served tag.ether as burgess..es QI1
the town council.

C!.VDocuments for New Church History, " Newchurchman, II

(1843), 42.

18S. S. Rathvon to W. H. Benade, May 10, 1887, AA. Ehrenfried

was highly respected throughout the New Church. He attended numerous
Conventions, subscribed to the leading New Church Q.lil-ga']lnes, ana
kepfh touch oE.iciall~ with key N;w Church leade!.s. In 1871 T. -So
 27

to the United States about 1802 where he took up printing. William

H~on. editor of the Lancaster Iournal. and a protege of B~la.!TIin

Bache in Philadelphia. was the one who invited Ehrenfried to Lancaster.

He wanted Enrenfried to edit a German Federalist paper. Der

Volksfreund. 19

Even though Hamilton and his projects fell on hard times,

Ehrenfried was able to establish himself in Lancaster. Then he

served as State Printer during the administration of Governor Joseph

Ritner (1835-1839). and as ~lli.!ter of the state administration

newspaper on into the 1840's. About 1845 he returned permanently

to Lancaster where he received the post of Deputy Register of Wills. 20

By 1850 Ehrenfried was retired from publ~hing, except for the New

Church projects of his own such as, his translation into German of

Samuel Noble's Lectures. 21

Arthur used Ehrenfried's name for the main character of his Talks with
~ Philosopher on the Ways of God to Man (Philadelphia: J. B.
Lippincott, 1871).

19Franklin Ellis and Samuel Evans, History ~f Lancaster

County (Philadelphia: Everetts and Peck, 1883), p. 500.

20Harris •. Lancaster County, pp. 186-7.

21 In 1850 Ehrenfried issued a prospectus on a translation )

into German of some of Samuel Noble's lectures which he desired to
p'u6i1sh l5y suoscrtption (T. Ehrenfried to S. S. Carpenter, June 29,
Oct. 24. 1850. Feb. 11. 1851, AA). The work never was printed.
 28

Ehrenfried and Relchenbach were alike in many respects.

Both had to plow the stubborn, conservat1v~il of Lancaster Cou~ty

-
social aFit\loes as New Church pioneers, and both

admirably in reaching an elite position.

succ~d

In both cases
-
marriage~o

w...19Pws helped. Ehrenfried married Mrs. Ann Smith. the former Ann

Hubley of the prestigious, Lutheran Hubleys, whereas Reichenbach

I had married Mrs. Elizabeth Gra~ff. Both men were thus able to break

~~ s~~e o.f the hostility to the New Church with their intelligence.
1
1 utbanity. and civic loyalty. And both were able to serve the greater

New Church with their printing and translating endeavors.

In spite of their eminence. Reichenbach' sand Ehrenfried's

'religious views were never accorded the same recognition as were

the men themselves. The Lancas!er elite was solidly Episcopalian,

Lutheran, and Presbyterian by th~ late eighteenth century, and a few)'

holes in the dike were not going to cause that aristocratic wall to

crumble. There are no Reichenbachs or Ehrenfrieds in later New

Church history. Anl'l..Hubley Ehrenfried refused to even attend ervices

wittLher husband once a New Church temple was erected. The two

would walk to church together but Ann would enter the German Lutheran

Church on Duke Street (Trinity), and he~and would continue on

to the small temple on East Vine S~reet. 22 Contrast this scene with

~~,~athvon to Benade, May 10. 1887, AA.

 29

the impact Francis and Eleanor Bailey had on New Church growth

because they had built a New Church home which oould operate as a

missionary center and a training ground for their children.

Another example of the effect of family life on New Church

development can be found in the Henry A. Carpe~er family of

S~.£g and Para9ise, Pennsylvania. He~ was a descendent of

----- -
Jacob Carpenter, and a large landholder in eastern Lancaster County.
- -- -- -
He also married well, but his wife's family--the Burrowes --g~

<:Tenl regarded Heiuy as an "impractical v(sionary." Mrs. Carpenter

attended New Church services very irregularly, as did her children. 23

As with many other Lancaster New Churchmen. HeQ!Y did

not let famil 0 position or apathy deter him. He organized a

reading group in the Strasburg area, and when the Lancaster Society

formally organized in 1836 he eagerly supported the effort. 24 He was

not present though on February 14, 1836. when the small Lancaster

-
circle met at the home of Henry Keffer to draw up the .following three

broad articles of faith:

L That God is One in essence and in person, and that

He is the Lord God, the Saviour Jesus Christ.
IL That the Word or Sacred Scripture is essential truth;
that it is written according to the correspondence of
natural things with celestial arid spiritual; and that it

23Ibid.
(2;"l . ­
Minutes of the Lancaster Society, " The Kramph Will case:
Testimony (Lancaster, Pa.: The Examiner Printing House, 1908). pp.
140. 142.
 30

thus contains three distinct senses--the Celestial,

Spiritual, and the natural; which are adapted to all
the various states of Angels and Men.
IlL That man is to be regenerated and saved by the
life of charity, which is a life according to the
precepts of the decalogue, in the full belief and
acknowledgment that the power to will and to do, is
of the Lord alone. 25

One week later the fledgiing society incorporated the

writings of Swedenborg into the order of worship. 26 Two months after

that, on April 17, 1836, the Rev. Mannin

~
B. Roche of Philadelphia
-
read the articles of faith and decl~the group a regularly-constituted

New Church soc.iety. ~that time th e were only si re ular

-
members but completely unaid~d
- by outside help they purchased a
--- ---
--_.
lot and be an to
-build
- a small temple for worship.
- 27 The structure
was completed in 1837.

The original membership included Eh~ied, William Girling,

a former Methodist minister who served as the society's first leader,

==-==::o....e...·"""ch (or Jungerich), and probably JO,hn .He~ry

Y~g. Of these Keffe~the wealthiest and most promin~nt at

that time. He operated a successful confectionery and bakery on

East King Street near the Court House, and was one of Lancaster's

leading Masons. In ~ he_was Master of the local lodge during_t~

25 Ibid ., p. 14Q.

26Ibid.

27 Ibid ., p. 142. Ehrenfried to Richard DeCharms, Mar. 31,

1842, AA.
 31
. 28
Anti-Masonic scare of the early 1830's. An indication of his

standing in the community is the fact that he was a subject for a

Jacob Eicholtz portrait. Also, Just before his death in October, 1841,

Keffer was busy on a grandiose scheme to attract government at ten­

tion to Lancaster as the site for a National Foundry. 29

Keffer was another of the Lancaster New Churchmen whose

family looked unsympatheti'cally at the religious activities of the

head of the house. liis .i[e Annwas~said. to have heen.belligerently

"hostile. ,,30 However, the supreme example of a wife frustrating

the efforts of worthy New Churchmen ir. r.:-.ncaster was the widow of

ohn Henr):'...¥oung. Young, a native of Germany and a former Lutheran,

died about the time the Lancaster Society organized. He lef!..a

1egac to the Society to aid in the er~n_~f ~ine temple, with

p~vision t~he property re~ain in the hands of his wife until her

- -
death. 31 Young's widow proceeded doggedly to outlive the entire
. - ­
(~(;eorge Welchans and Andrew Hershey, History of Lodge
No. 43.E. f!! A. M. of Lancaster, Pa. (Lancaster, Pa.: The Lodge,
1936), p. 341.

29Frederick Shriver Klein, Lancaster County Since 18_41,

(rev. ed.; Lancaster, Pa.: The Lancaster County National Bank,
1955), p. 9.

30Rathvon to Benade, May 10, 1887, AA.

--'

31"Documents, " Newchurchman, II (1843), 45. Kramph

Will Case, p. 145.
 32

or19in~ society I The fine new temple never was built, and the Vine

Street chapel certainly was not suitable for attracting new people of

distinction. .

In the 1830's the small temple was quite adequate and it

remained so into the 1840's. for the society's growth was slow. By

1840. when Lancaster had a population of 8.417. the New Church

Society had ~ru~·n;.:.;e"-".,="",-,, ers. Some of the new

additions were Henry A. Carpenter. C. F. Naumann and wife,

--:------ ~ -----
Frederick J. Kramph. and probably John Robinson and Alexander
" - -
Officer. 32 Of these and the original membership. Keffer, Girling.

and Young were dead by the end of 1841. and Iungerich, Naumann.

and Officer were soon to move away.

~d migration were two of the c~shing contingencies

w~plagued small New Church societies all over the United States.

fO[' the loss of a few ke men could easil¥ cripple a society ~m­

posed of a handful of families. 33 The men who moved from Lancaster

32Kramph Will Case. p. 144.

33In Rochester, New York. the twin forces of death and

migration thwarteathe formal organization of a New Church Society by
removing six key men within a six months span. (See S. Reynolds to
George Bush, nee:-
30, 1854. XV. Bush Letterbooks [1854] SSRA). The
Detroit Society was organized in 183-g un er reasonably favorable cir­
cumstances. but by 1842 it was virtually nonexistent. Between 1840
and 1842 the leader of the group returned to New York state and four
other families moved to other parts of Michigan and to Wisconsin'-'
6liTy five or six women remained to carry the load. Then in 1843 the
situation began to im'prove with a new eastern influx. See George
 o

---
left a serious gap there for a time, but they proved to be assets
- -- .~. -
elsewhere. 34 Generc:.lly New Churchmen planned their migrations
..-----.
carefully, not us to maximize their economic o~rtunity but to

insure religious fellowship. In fact, the two were not unrelated. In

n.l.neteenth century Amedca economic prosperity and religious con­

formity often show a high degree of correlation and a ~ct

"Swedenborgian" could anticipate OP.~Sition in a community where

his rather obscure faith was not known.

These years, 1839-1841, were crucial ones in every way fOl:

the Lancaster Society. In addition to deaths and migration it faced

two more perennial problems of small New Church societies. The

first was the need for pastoral services coupled with the inability to

support a minister full time. In 1839 the men in Lancaster offered

the Rev. Isaac Worrell of Frankford, Pennsylvania, a rent-free home

plus a sum of money to establish him in a small business. They

hgped Worrell woulo be able to support himself after the first year. 3S

Field, Memoirs, Incidents, and Reminiscences of the Early History of

the New Church in Michigan, Indiana, Illinois, and Adjacent States;
and Canada (New York: E. H. Swinney, 1879), pp. 100-101. These
two examples help illustrate the great mobility of 19th century
Americans, both horizontally and vertically.

34Naumann, Iungerich, and Officer figured prominently in

the history of the St. Louis, Philadelphia, and Chicago societies
respectively.

3SKramph Will Case, p. 144.

 ...( ·34 J
Isaac Worrell lasted five months in Lancaster. He and his
-~-
family returned to Frankford on April I, 1840,and n5Lex lana..ll9..n was

ente~d into the records of the Lancaster Society. From a knowledge

of events transpiring in the larger New Church, and subsequent

actions of the Lancaster Society, on~ c~_n ascer:tain that m<?re than

personal animosity or finances was involved. Worrell must have

brought to a head the second major issue wh~h confronted the

stru5Jgling society, namely,~ffiliationwith an association of !:!ew

Church societies.

Only one such organization existed in 1839 and this 6 a l

I) '" Convention which dated back to 1817, had monopolized the field

since its inception.

-­
But a new set of rules of order adopted in 1838
-
precipitated opposition movements within the New Chl!!'ch whic~d

to the formation of afC;ntraIOr

......-.-.--­ - Middle C~nvention
- in 1841, and the

3 split of ~Western Association (from the General Convention.

-­ --­ - - -
Lancaster's decision to ~draw from th General Convent~was

related to these Rules, for the reason given for the bolt was ~k

of "freedom" permitted under the Convention's jurisdiction. 36 After

severing its ties with the General Convention and Isaac Worrel, who

supported the Convention, the Lancaster Society expressed its

---­
willingness in June, 1841, to join the newly-organized Central

36 Ibid ., pp. 145-146.

 35

, Convention. The final step did not occur until May, 1845. but again
---......-.

no interpretation of the delay is offered in the minutes of the

La ncaster 'S ociety. 37

The gap between intention and fulfillment may have been

due to deference paid to one individual, probably Henry Carpenter.

If his affiliation after 1849 is any indication, Henry probably was

always loyal to the General Convention. 38 Whatever the case,

Carpenter does not seem to have played a major role in the subse­

quent history of the Lancaster New Church.

The bulk of the membership must have been of a different

persuasion because their solution to~ ministerial pro~~ clearly

indicates support for the stand of the Central Convention. In the

early 1840's the Lancaster group secured the quarterly se~f

the Rev. Richard DeCharms of Philadelphia, a man who was one of

the architects of the Central Convention. 39 Under DeCharms

37Ibid .• p. 156.
38 .
In 1856 Henry A. Carpenter was listed as a member of the
three-man Ecclesiastical Committee of the Lancaster Society under
its new Constitution. See Constitution and By-Laws of the New
Jerusalem Society of the City Q.f Lancaster (William B. Wiley, 1857)
l
in th~ pamphlet c~iQ.!l.of the Swedenbo.r:g . c 001 of Religion,
Newton. Massachusetts. However. it is not known whether this is
father or son. After the Civil War the only H. A. Carpenter in General
Convention records is one living in Iowa.

39Kramph Will ~ase. pp. 146-147.

 36

inspiration, and with the able leadership of ~ r s ,

most notably Frederick J. KramQh, the Lancaster New Church stabilized

itself in ~e early 1840' s. The future looked bright.

~e'p~nfried made the following assessment of the state

of the Society in June, 1844.

Holding the even tenor of our way, the public seems

to regard us with favor, as unobt[J,.lsing members of

the community, who are ~rom that sectarian

11bitterness and religious party spirit which unhappily

. exist in the old church. . . .

May we ever keep clear of this unchristian s irit, and

( look upon all OUr fellow-men with·'love and forbearance,

II trusting to the Lord's ow time, when there will be but

one Christian Church--peace on earth and good will

among men. 40

Ehrenfried's confident air owed a great deal to the interest

of ~ew readers of Swedenborg. Both were oraviansl and men of

---,
t~lent and reputation. These two. Lawrence J. D~ and William

--
B~de. followed through on their reading and joined the Lancaster

Society on April 15. 1845. 41

Demuth had been educated in Germany and was truly up

class in manners and taste. His family had started and maintained \

~ -- to be the olde~t tobacco shop in the United States. J

- is rej?uted .

In the eyes of at least one of Lancaster's leading New Churchmen

40"Lancaster fl.eport. , Central Convention Journal of

Proceedings, VI (1844), Appendix-rrr..ro. VIII, 32.

"""--'--­
41 Kramph Will Case, p. 153.
 "
37

Demuth was of such an aristocratic bearing that his adherence

~ ---
cre!'t.eg a "social gulf" between himself and the "mass <;>f the

members. ,,42

The second of the new members wa s the son of.a Moravian

bishop, 43 a young man trained in Moravian schools and steeped In

Moravian tradition. At the time he became a receiver he was engaged

in teaching in Lancaster. Naturally, w-.ith the 2a.u8;Y oLministers

ilL1he New Church and the inability of Lancaster to support a man

. full-time, the addition 0' Benad . was seen as a special gift of Divine

Providence. Almost immediately he became the leader of the worship

(
service.

Nor could such an obvious grant of Providence go unnoticed

elsewhere in the New Church. The Philadelphia New Church tendered

~~e an_offer to become their resident pastor and the a~s

-----
young man accepted in 1846.

the Lancaster New Church.

That decision marks the high tide of

Such bright rays as Benade would rarely

again pierce the dark clouds which began to hover over the Lancaster

Society after 1846.

42::tathvon to Benade. May 10. 1887. AA.

43Bishop Andrew Benade served as the general pastor of the

Lititz, ,Pa. Moravian Church from 1813 to 1822; as a bishop in Sa1em,
North Carolina, 1822-1826; bishop in Lititz, 1826-1836; and from
1836 to 1849 in Bethlehem a; the governing bisho of the entire
' (~hU!~~. He retired in 1849 and died in 1859 (~) a receiver of
Swedenborg. C. T. 0 ner, "William Henry Benade, " ~ Church
( \ Life. XXV (1905), pp. 450-451.
 38

The history of the Lancaster New Church up to 1846 had

been basically dogged determination to establish a stable base for

t ELpro.pagation of Swedenbol"g~ 'deas. While this did not exclude

-!p;:r..:;o..:;s...;:e""...=:z:.;i;.:;n;.;>--2!: a moderate, individually-oriented t e, the Lancaster

men were careful not to force themselves on anyone. Such aggressive­

ness would perhaps have destroyed what good will they had been

building up in the community ever since the turn of the century, and

also, force was repugnant to one who believed conviction was based

on reason rather than emotion. The one missionary project that the

Lancaster group did actively uphold from the time of its incorporation

)\ ~~port f~r the WOLk of Imm~nuel T<:lfel in Germany.

i!! those earl}/' years the onl memb~QCthe Lancas~er

)r~oclety who co, Id a{fo'd to i mport T~' wO'k' and di'crib"e them
( among German-speaking people was Henry Keffer. The results were

less than spectacular, largely due to the fact that they were t~

scholarly and too controversial in light of the many "strictures" they

~ =:ned about the Old Church. At least th~W~S the opinion of

Joseph Ehrenfried. 44 He felt that Tafel' 5 works should be used to

- -
"enlighten Germany on the subject of Eman'l. Swedenborg's mission \

• • • " After Keffer's death most of the Society must have been of

Ehrenfried's persuasion, for Kramph and Iungerich personally paid for

-=- ­
44Ehrenfried to S. S. carpenter, June 29, 1850, AA.
 39
~

-
sets of Tafel's own works and his translations of Swedenborg to be

11 sent to the l~aries of the Universit1e~of Heidelberg an..~U~~rlin

I r~vely. In addition, Ehrenfried informed Richard DeCharms in

1842 that the Lancaster Society wanted their contributions to Tafel to

-----
be used exclusively for the distribu.tign of his works in Germany. 45

Apart from supporting Tafel. with ,....hom some of the Lancaster

men were personally acquainted through visits to Germany and direct

correspondence, the Lancaster New Church did not systematically

- --
contribute to any other missionary endeavor. Its members were an

. ( elite group of self-assured men, with marked good humor and kind

tolerance for those who disagreed with them. Evangelistic feryor

was simply not part of their make-up or thei worl~ew.

The same was generally true elsewhere. First generation

receivers throughout the United States were of he same calibre as

those in Lancaster and they also avoided much of the s~~an

~~ss which was so common in nineteenth century American

religion. One of the reasons for the extraordinary quality of those

first receivers lay in the nature of Swedenborg's writings. flSweden­

borg himself had been an intellectual giant, and his Latin works could

not be read, let alone understood, except in select circles f Not until
the first generation had digested those works in order to translate

45Ehrenfried to DeCharms, March 31, 1842. AA.

 o
40

them verbally or orally could Swedenborg become widely known. Even

,after'that process had taken place the doctrines were novel and !I
complex ..:.nough that their appeal was restricted to a class of lOde­

pendent and liberal minds.

In addition to the class of men attracted by the content of

Swedenborg's teachings and influenced b the conte~ through which

these ideas were transmitted, men of high calibre were drawn toward

the New Church by men of like quality. This does not imply tha t

men were insincere in their adherence, nor tha t they were primarily

seeking comradery. Men associate with those people wh0n;..!..hey

J r~t. and with those who are capable of conferring self-esteem

[
upon th~m. New Churchmen spoke constantly of use, and in a small
- - - ---::::==­
fellowship like the New Church any man of ability could quickly find
-- --, ­
a niche of use.

The whole proc~~ ~tper~asion was made so much easier

(1 by the fact that Swedenborg presented the seeker _with a compreh..en­

jI ~Orld~W~~n opportune time)in intellectual history. Both

Deism and orthodoxy were failing to explain the rapid changes which

seemed to be leading religion and science to a momentous, head-on

clash. An intellectual vacuum developed in the sense that no one

( . - - -- ­
( world-view held man's allegiance. A phantasmagoria of ideas were
.;' - - ­
tossed into it to crash and tumble like di in a cup, issuing forth in
"--"
 41

new combinations. Swedenborgianism wa~ one of the more attractive )

of these combinations.

First generatIOn-! receivers of Swedenborg, reared in another

world-view, found the change exhilanlting and compelling. The

-
fqunding of a new mO:\Lement and new institutions inspired energetic

exploits, and ~ving activity called thei,..r full potential into opera­

tion. The challenge provided deep-seated satisfaction ahd purpose

~ _ ~ stalwarts immortalized themselves in thei! new creation.

All sorts of problems arose with the second generation, for in many

cases it lacked the same kind of vigor and Vision.

The~ond gen~n relied more on or ~ation than

charisma, tending to freeze the accomplishments of the "Founding

Fathers." Change became not only more difficult but more dangerous

since reformers were placed in the delicate position of appearing to

Jo 11 contradict the ideals of the heroes of the movement. Eve~

involved the risk of inaugurating internal strife ~nd creating two
(
movements instead of altering the one. To complicate matters, the
.--- ­
- -
second generation attracted men of like quality, just as the first

generation had done, and the whole movement seemed to decline in J

intellectual vigorand become narrower in outlook. I
-- - - -----. -~

williamlBenadeJof Lancaster was one of the most o~tstanding

( ( of the second generation men, and he illustrates the point that these

I men lacked the tolerant liberal spirit of the first generation. However.
 42

Benade was a convert from another faith

~ .
and in this connection he had
.

the same fulfilling commitment to a new cause that had sparked the

drive of the first generation. Betrayed by the f~lsities of the Old

-
Church Benade was not aboutto-e;ercise any tolerance toward it
~ ­
nor

toward the misguided New ChurchmeJL~h_9_wantedJ:1i£:om2romisethe

-
unique ;;rId-view on'5wedenborg")
- ~ - ~
Benade certainly did not lack

vigor or vision.

After moving to Philadelphia Benade had openly identified

-
himself with the Central Convention and the ideas of Richard DeCharms.
...-.-;

When the iOn~ntion officially died in 1852 Benade never gave up the

hope of a new organiza tion more solidly rooted. In December 1855

( he and the Rev. N. C. Bu~am issued a circular to New Church

societies <;:alling for a general assembly of deleg_ates in Philadelphia

in June, 1856. Except for a strong emphasis on education as a vital

New Church "use,,46 the circular contained little that was unfamiliar

to those who had been associated with the old Central Convention. 47

46The term "use" infers that each New Church organization

or individual has at least one divinely appointed function which it
or e can fulfill more adequately than anyone else. Many New
Churchmen in the early nineteenth century interpreted "use" specifi­
cally so that it frequently became a synonym for occu atlon. ore

C
( generally "use" means the overall impact a man has In his relation­
ships with other men. B09g, Glossary, p. 173.

4 7 Na than C. Burnham and William Benade. «~ircular.to the

[1 Receivers of the Heavenly Doctrines of the New lllrusalem in the
nited States (Philadelphia: n. p.• 1855). 8 pp.
 Since the Lancaster Society had supported the earlier move­

ment, and sL.;e~was their regular quarterly minister, as well

as a personal friend, the warm approval ofotheo~_ntur~y

(Ehre~and~w~~.(~h as "most happy" that

- -
an organ1z~n was being built upon "principles which I consider

strictly in accordance with the Writings." He also ardeOntly endorsed

the particular Elom.J?,hasis on New Church education and baptism. 48

- - , - 0

Ehrenfried was just as strong in his commendation. 49

When the summer assembly met that June, Kram s. S.

Rathvon/(Kramph's close friend and foreman of..!!!~ tailor~ng esta~ish-

=­
~t), and{He~y Car ente were present from Lancaster to watch the

l birth ~~e~w~rg~z~ion, only to find the baby st~-~rn. The

meeting drew ~ slight r~Ronse and was ~rshadowed by a meeting

( across the street where Republicans were nominating John C. Fremont

as their initial standard-bearer. As the New Church group was

settling down to serious deliberation the key personality in the old

Central Convention appeared.

Rev.L£Richard] DeCharms entered the meeting room with

a pocket full of documents which he submitted to the
meeting, occupying it~ whole time and literally absorbing
I
1 it, so that I?othing was seen or done except what he did
-> 1 ~ f in apostolically dividing the geographical world,

4 Frederic J. Kram h to Benade, April 29, 1856, AA.

-.::...;~===='''''=::::::'~~._--

4 EhrenfrieQ)to ~ade, April 3D, 1856, AA.

 · . 44

and appointing a great cO~Qn ~ndonin 1859

and 1860. 50 ' .

[EathvOl!Jand co-=:.=h:.J'· oth~re'ssed disgust over'-- ~

- -
imprudent behavior, Rathvon privately in his diary, 51 and Kram h in
--- .

a lette; to Benade concerning the new Cherry S~e~~~hool Benade

had opened in Phila.delphia. Each in his own way questioned the

state offDeCharmsJ m~d. Kramph opined that

, -
eCharm;;)failure to

support the school might be one of its greatest assets.

I ..
· IMr.

r
:-no
D. chl Use as a Minister is come to an End, &
church matters will prosper where he has any
thing to do with them, the last evidence of which is
OUr last June Convention, . . • 52

Later in the same letter he added, "De Charms is to be pitied for hell
seems o.f late to be in want of common Sence & sound judgment. ,,53

importance for future lilncaster action, for in the years since 1846

he had beco~e one of the most respected men in the small society.

Born near Heidelberg, Germany, in 1811, and reared in an orphan

5°Kramph Will Case, p. 171. ~m~e.l.§nYder Rathvo_n

"Autobiography" (unpublished Ms., lilncaster County Historical
55>Ciety, 1852-1860), p. 375. In this manuscript Rathvon states that
DeCharms' proposed London Convention was to be convened in 1857.

51Rathvon, "Autobiography," p. 375.

~lkramPh Will Case, p. 220.

(E'fbid.
 45

asylum before becoming a tallo~~~tice, Kramph certainly did

.
not have a very auspicious beginning in life. 54 In 1§1.2 he arrived

penniless in America and made his way oll..!£ot from Baltimore to Y.QLk

(rI where John B~l, : Mari:ta~

~
tailor fr::arietta, : : d him. W;:;: in
n --- ­
which was 1n Lan~ounty, Kramph met 'Sim~n SnyderRafiWOn]

who was one of John Bell's apprentices. 55

Kramph moved on to New Cumberland, Pennsylvania. in l~}

where he became a naturalized citizen and a receiver of Swedenborg.

His intention up to that point had been to move West. but New

Churchmen in Lancaster persuaded him to move there instead. He

I( did so in 1840, establishing a merqhant tailoring business which

!\ prospered. 56 This change in plans proved to be crucial for Kramph's

",

-
former friend Rathvon, for Kramph brought him to Lancaster as his
~

-
foreman and introduced him to Swedenborg's teachings. 57 Rathvon

served as lay leader on the Lancaster New Church from 1856 to his

death in 1891.

54Harris, Lancaster County, p. 347. F. . Kram h'

biography is found in Harris, Lancaster Count~!, pp. 34..8"54, and
in Rathvon's "Autobiography," pp. 602-609. Both are by RathvQn,
but the former gives more detail on Kra;;ph's public life whereas the
( latter is more specific about his personal and religiqilli life.

JJ

55Rathvon. "Autobiography," pp. 602, 606.

56 Harris • Lancaster County, pp. 349, 351-2.

~
<.2?Rathvon, "Autobiography," p. 603.
 46

In addition to the contributions he made personally, and the

i~dire~e~fect he had through others he brought into the New Church,

Kramph was one of the few Lancaster men able to establish a New

Church home. His first wife, Ann. Robinson, was the daught~ oLan
( English New Church minister serving in Darby. Pennsylvania. They

were married in 1841 and ha two sons and two daughters before Ann

died in June, 1847, following one each of her sons and daughters

into-death. 58 Kramph wasted little time in remarrying, this time

<t choosing another of the Rev. John Robinson's daughters. Mary died

in childbirth November 9. 1849, and her baby girl died sorr.~ months

later. 59

!1!ch?rd De-Charms) had performed the marriages and it was

J the sam_~esou!:.ceful man who introduced Kramph to~ third wife.

_Sarah Pancoast~of Cincinnati. 60 'ThiS time death claimed Frederic

\. -- - --­
~ph. The date was A ril 18. 1858, another day in the history of

the Lancaster New Church comparable to the day Benade left to take

his Philadelphia pastorate. The entire community felt the loss

(
J . because Kram~had been an active Whig. a former member of City
.-- --- --- - - -'...--

58 Ibid •• p. 717.

59Ibid .• p. 718. Harris, Lancaster County, p. 353.

60Rathvon, "Autobiography," pp. 602. 692.

 o
47

~1, a bullding_con tra.ctor , an honest businessman, and at the

time ~f his death a membE'P of the Lancaster School Board. 61

--- --
Two factors apart from the loss of means and leadership
- ~

made Kramph's demise especially memorable for the Lancaster

Society: his will and the opportunity his death afforded his father-in- //-:;:.. 4...~

(f --
l~w to asse~imself in La'ncaster New Church affairs. The will. 6 2 q,~

1 Kramph's
-
made in 185.4 and specifying Rathv0!l as executor, left the bulk of

estate to a future New Church school to be located near

1. Philadelphia. However, by the time Mrs. Kramph died the New

. I f Church had split into two distinct branc~, Rathvon was dead, and

the composition of the estate's board of trustees had been altered by

the appointments of Mrs. Kramph.

)
The two groups that subsequently bat!.!edJs>r the t~usa~ds

of dollars involved were the General Conventioni and the General

:;~ ---'

Church of Pennsylvania or-the Academy.! Tnere is no_questio~at

.Kramph's.-3ympathies lay with the principles upheld by the Academy,

for while it did not exist as a separate organization in 1854, the

g~£.undwork was already being laid for such a move by DeCharms,

Benade, and others. The problem was that ~ new trustees appointed

61Harris, Lancaster County, p. 354.

62Rathvon, "Autobiography," p. 60S.

 48

by Mrs. Kramph were ~ly all loyal General Convention ~n. The

scandal involved lef: a deep scar on the re::tation of the local

I\
society as well as the entire New Church.

The second 'problem resulting from Kramph's death was

apparent much more quickly than the one raised by the legacy. Many

years later S. S. ~th~on reminisced bitterly about Kramph's father­

~

in-law"pavid Pa!icQa-.?t.)

The advent of Mr. P. in Lancaster, was one of quite

I unnecessary, and often bil.'ter contention, and I have

never been able to see that it ever did the Society any
good. 64

Pancoast was a perfect example of the principle stated earlier that in

_ small society death and migration could prove to be disastrous.

. ­
[)avid Pancoast's influence was augmented by the fact that

( he was ~amPhl s ~e~ve :~y virtue ~his past experience i~w

I
Church affairs in Cincinnati. But even more decisive was the

principle of unanimity by which the small Lancaster Society ruled

It itself in order to preve!!t disharmony alld dissolution. A stubborn

I man~ cl~~rganizational machinery quickly in such a ~r~m

and Pancoast was just such a man.

63A complete set of the legal documents pertaining to the

IKramPh-casEl in the Lancaster Orphan's Court, April Term, .!1Q3, and

tfie ..spyeal to th~ Pennsylvan~a..Su.P!~~urt, Eastern District,

January term, 1909, can be found in the Academy Library, Bryn Athyn,

Pa. See also ~ Kramph Will Case: The-Controversy in Regard to

l Swedenborg's Work on Conjugial Love (Bryn Athyn, Pa.: Academy of the

New Church, 1910), 530 pp.
64Rathvon to Benade, May 10, 1887, AA.
 49

t Rathvon and PancOQst clashed frequentlyj .With Ehrenfried .

becoming more feeble each year these two men vied uncontested for
- - ---
!!!e leadership of the Lancaster Society. For example, Pancoast

wanted to drop baptism as a membership requirement whereas Rathvon

. \ felt it was necessary,. and ~c.oast persistently blocked the Society's

- --
desire to join the Pennsylvania Association of the General Convention,
--
L to Rathvon's dismay. 65 The other members of the society acquiesced

with Pancoast to keep harmony, but in 1865 after his death the

Lancaster New Church joined the Penn~ylvania Association.

~thv2n)~evedthe~ty~~an II2:.eRa.!"able inJury

r
d_u~ng the]ears 1858-1865 whicn he labeled the "bitter course of
anguish. " . '

. • • I had never met with such treatment from . . .

outsiders" as I had met from ~one who assumed to be//a

11 member of t~' s New Ch~rch. .A~et, I do not
think, nor did I ever think. that r. P. "'was at heart a
bad man; but he suffered himself - e ruled for the time
b,eing, by obstinate and contentious spirits. He h~a
[
'strong love of rule; and . ~ . seemed to think that
f others_(es~5i~)ly t.Qjlyri~aod) were under the influence
of a similar love, ana-that it was his missi~n t9 thw~rt
j
l them. Endowed with official functions, and left to
exercise them in his own way,' he was as interesting and
warmheaited a man as one may wish to meet at anytime. 66

65Ibid. Rathvon, "Autobiography," p. 674. Rathvon to

Benade, December, 1858 and January 5, 1860, AA.

66Rathvon to Benade, January 25, 1861, AA.

 .'

50

Disagreement between the two men was not confined to New

Church matters alone. although the struggle there between the two

was more pronounced because it was ~ne-to-one situation. Their

~aightforwardE0!:er struggle~over who should have ihe deci~e

'/ 6
authority in calling q n~~!!!.~.ter was a case in point. 7 But the

two protagonists also happened to stand on opposite si~es of the

(POlitiCal fence. ~~~ was a Buchanan Democrat,who supported

---~
..... ~ .
Breckenridge in 1860. 68 Pancoast, a rabid anti-slavery Republican,

( minced no words in his c~ndemnation of the political view~ of his

I arch-rival Rathvon and a new receiver named Lewis Falk IVho

-=­
sympathized with Rathvon.

• • • Fau1k [sic]1 went to Georgia to make clothes for

f their soldiers, and upon his return I took him to task for
doing so. w~n Rathv<;>n ~~o Justify him,3nd
I encouraged him, so far, that he went about the streets
advocating the ri9i1t"S 'of the South, until! he came near
getting Lynched . . . If Rathvon would acknowledge he
has made use of improper words, and advocated a bad
cause. I could forgive. but until! then he will never read
another Sermon to me. I"""Cann;t tolerate or fellowship
\ with a traitor to his country . . .

• . • If I had'the power and had a Brother in or out of the

---
Church wtWS'hould prove a traitor I would hang-him.
----,
ss-­

67 Ibid. Rathvon to Benade, January 5 and February 20, 1860,

March 2, 1861. Rathvon. "Autobiography," p. 674.

68Rathvon to Benade, March 2. 1861, AA. Rathvon,

"Autobiography. " pp. 378-380.

-- ----- -
6 I David_Pancoast to Benade, May 5, 1861, AA.
 51

This strong language emerged from a man who was more than

a hearth side patriot. Although

._.~ -_. --
he was too old to serve in the military,
­

the time he wrote the letter castigating Rathvon and Falk he was

waiting for ~ reply to his offer. 70 If Rathvon ever had a desire to

f hand Pancoast he kept it a secret, but he was not sorry to see

agitation cease and harmony return with his gadfly's death in l8?5. 71

Pe'3ce was restored in the Lancaster Society even though

Pancoast's family remained and in fact was added to with the coming

of the Rev.b~,- C. Bur~n9a~ his wifet{Mary Pancoast))in 1865.

Rathvon described Pancoast's Wife, Eliza, as "the very opposite of

her husband" since she was "sweet" and" kind." lSa!2.h ~st

Kramph/ on the other hand, was a "chip off the old block" in that

she coul<;\ be as adamant as her father. Fortunately, she and her

'D",",o( ~-
fathervhad often been on the opposite sides of an issue. 72

Even relative internal peace was not enough to instill new

-
life into the Lancaster Society and after the Civil War the Society
- ----- --
slowly declined. (Willia;;Benade,\ after a visit to Lancaster in 1865,
----
had predicted as much.since it was evident to any observer that no

70 Ibid •

71

Rathvon to Benade, March 2, 1861, AA.

72Rathvon to Benade, May 10, 1887, AA.

 52
young members were being brought into the group. 73 There is

absolutely no evidence extant to suggest that the Lancaster New

Church ever again approached the potential which it appeared to be

ready to fulfill in the years 1846 and 1856.

In retrospect, the single most important contributio, of

Lancaster to the whole New Church was ,W!.!!!:am Benade•• Benade

was to actively promote the strain of New Church thought which he

embraced in Lancaster in 1845, and which that Society adhered to

throughout the whole period from 1840 to 1870. The principle~of

this_particular viewpoint, which will later be explained asLthe .

----.
- --.
"Academy" position, had their inception outside Lancaster.
---­ Lan­

caster's history makes an interesting case study of the external and

internal forces operative on New Churchmen from the introduction of

(
Swedenborg's ideas into t~e United Sta..!e.:' until 1870, but other

societies had a more decisive impact on the whole New Church than

powerless Lancaster.

"

73Be~ge to James P. Stuart, August 22, 1865, AA. Mter a

visit to the Lancaster Society in the summer of 1865 Benad_lLgloomlly
-----.-
forecaJ;l a dim future for the New Church in Lancaster.
­
 CHAPTER III

THE EARLY HISTORY OF THE NEW CHURCH

IN THE UNITED STATES

. f'P'hiladelphi functioned as the first mi~I0!1ary center of the

Church of the New Jerusalem in America, but Balti!Ilpre was the f~t

institutional center of New Church activity in the United States. The

firstlofficial,society organized there in~ 1 Other Ba1t~:~.:~}irsts

3 include the first New Church ordination (John Har rove, an ex-

Methodist minister), printing of the fir~t ..!:Jew Church Lit~rgy in 1792

(a reprint of Joseph Proud's English edition), publication of the ~t

N~ Churc!:!-.~riodical (John Hargrove' s Temple .Qf ~ \designed to

counteract a Deist paper), and erection of the first temple (dedicated

January 2, G. 2

In spite of Hargrove's central role as the first ordaining

minister in America, and his influence as the first president of the!

§f;ral Conve@§lof New Jerusalem s:i:tieS- org~nized in 1812:, J

Baltimore as a society did not long retain its leadership in the New

1 Silver, Sketches, p. 39.

2 Ibid., p. 40 ff.

S3
 54

Church as a whole. Philadelphia, Cincinnati. ~on. and New York

all proved to be more crucial than Baltimore in determining the course

of the New Church in the nineteenth century.

Philadelphia did not witness the full institutionalization of

a New Church Society until after the War of 1812. bu t~ading group/
. ----­
met for discussion regularly through 1804 under the leadership of

l Francis Baile~ 'the Rev.LRalph Math0 and the Rev.l williamli'W]

respectively.3 After Hill's death in 1804 there is no record of

activity until 1809 when the receivers of Philadelphia began to gather

foe worship in the schoolroom of/Johnston TaYlo~ a fellow New

Churchman. 4

With the accession of~some wealthy and influential memberS?

in the years 18~9 t~ especially ondy Raguet{andlWillial!!.

Schlatter the Philadelphia Society found the means to build a temple

of their own for worship. At the time some fifty people were gathering

regularly for the services. 5 By 1826, however, the temple at 12th

and George Streets had been sold, and the Philadelphia New Church­

men were back in a schoolroom. Under the able directJon of~e

3"Documents for New Church History. " Newchurchman. '1

(1841). 162-167. Tnis letter by Condy Raguet is one of the few
detailed sources of information about the early history of the Phila­
delphia Society.

4!!lli!.
( 5Od~ Annals. pp. 256-257.
 ss
teacher, Mas~. Carll.J the society reorganized and recovered
- 6
substantially until C~ left for a Massachusetts pastorate in 1834.

Once again the Philadelphia New Church faded, as it had done in

-
1804, and 1826, until new vigorous leadership was enlisted.
. The

spark in the early 1840' s was the Rev.@chard DeChar~s, a

Philadelphia native who arrived fresh from a controversial pastorate

in Cincinnati, Ohio.

The Cincinnati New Church had been founded by{Adam

~) a merchant from Manchester, England, who migrated to

Cincinnati about 1807. Since he had traveled through Philadelphia

on his way from England to the American West, Hurdus naturally made

contact with other receivers in thLCity _of ~rotherly ~." In

Cincinnati he adopted the Philadelphia practice of gathering interested

( r!!..a_ders of Swedenborg in his ~e. By 1818 the group was large
~ /

enough to constitute a society and incorporate. Hurdus became the

first minister. 7

In addition to Hurdus and the usual composition of merchants

~rtisans in any New Church group of this period, Cincinnati

could boast several exceptional e~tors as well as some men of

6Elizabeth Broomell, "History of the New Church iOn Phila­

Delphia" (unpublished Ms., Library of the Philadelphia Church of the
New Jerusalem), p. 3.

7Oph1a D. Smith, "Adam Hurdus and the Swedenborgians in

Early Cincinnati, .. Ohio State Archeological and Historical Society
Quarterly, illI, No. 2 (April-June, 1944), 106 H.
 56

notable artistic distinction. &no --c;:- Wi1l1ams-, educator.

assiduously pressed for teacher training schools and technical

institutes in the Cincinnati area. When the New Church opened its

.­
first college in the United States in 1850 Williams was tapped as
.
little Urbana University's first president. 8

~derick-!.c~.J son of a famous painter and son-in-law

of! Fr~ncis Bailey.) moved west from Philadelphia to Cincinnati where

he was instrumental in launchin HiramPow~r€J career as a sculptor.

Eckstein also tried to found a Cincinnati Acadepy of Fine Arts in

9
1827. Another prominent New Church artist of the period was

[flomon Fr~~k1in ~h, but Smith was a mu~cian allcLQr~atist

rather than a painter or sculptor. He functioned as the manager of

Cincinnati's Globe Theater for a time and served the Cincinnati New

Church as organist and choirmaster. 10

-. - ---
These few examples show that the first generation of New

Churchmen was as remarkable in Cincinnati as in Philadelphia or

Lancaster. But exceptional men with strong wills and independent

minds in a frontier tow~battling for its e~~mi.£..l!:!ell were

80phia D. Smith. "The New Jerusalem Church in Ohio from

1848 to 1870." OSAHSQ. LXII. No. 1 (January. 1953). 28. 30.

9Smith • "AdamHurdus." OSAHSQ. 121.

10Ibid•• pp. 118-119.

11 .chard C. Wade, The Urba_n Frontier (Phoenix ed.: Chicago:

University of Chicago Press. 1964 [1959]). 360 pp. Wade's study of
 57
probably not the most malleable .£ndi!!duals from which to cast a

harmonious society. Cincinnatl was seriously hit ~ith controversy

early in its history. T!yee societies in 1838 superseded the "one

that existed in 1834. DeCharms' cesponsibility for these difficulties

in Cincinnati will be discussed at length later.

-
In Cinc1nnati New Churchmen were quick to institutionalize
-
and quick to fragment; in Boston New Churchmen moved more slowly
- -----'­
but with more unity. ames-Glen[had preached in Boston in 1784 but

the response was not as gratifying as in Philadelphia. Only a

bookseller named~mes Roby,immediately received the new doctrines,

but a couple from Salem, Massachusetts, later came to an under­

standing of New Church truth through a book whic~len had left \

behind. Swedenborg's Heaven and Hell prompted

a Revolutionary War officer and then a collector of revenue in Salem,

to open his mind to the new w~rld-view. 12

In Boston proper no one fanned the spark which Glen had

ignited until the 1790's when the(Rev. Wi}liam Hill;of Manchester,

England, toured the Boston area on a preaching tour. Hill was a

non-separating Swedenborgian who preached almost exclusively in

- '"=--­

the rivalry of early Western commercial centers, including Cincinnati,

f reveals valuable insights into the tensions of business life in the
I I West~p~ 1830.
12Sllver, Sketches, p. 52.
 " 13
the Episcopal churches of the Boston vicinity. While the response

was greater than in 1784,@illjnaturally did not encourage the

organization of a New Church society. Not until after the War of

- -
1812 was there any impetus for a separate New Church group other
--- - -~ ­
_~~==-=,""ani~ion \came from a coterie of

young Harvard men.

--
At first interested "receivers met in 1817 for
~

social meetings with no real ~t of pushing further due to hostility

to the teachings of Swedenborg in Boston. 14 But the young m~n

organized the Boston New Jerusalem Society in August, ~8, ~

s.ei~. of the protests of several older members.

The idea of coming out 0 enl and boldly before the world,
and declaring a belief in doctrines so noveL and, in the
opinion of the world, absurd, and also of having them
If publicly preached, was, by some, though to be of too
I green magnitude and iff0rtance to be~ndert9ken b ~h
small numbers . • .
/'
Twelve people took the initial daring step.
- --' Among them were

!Dr~ James ~, a former

- Deis~; Mrs. Margaret Hil1:-er Pres~ott,

-
daughter of Sal~ Major 1!!.!!..er;I,James Roby; Margaret Car1::; and

the Harvard contingent of worces~slaniReeds. Thoma~ Wor~~

13Bl oc k, New Church, p. lOO.

l~samuel Worcester to 'Co..nd Raguetj May 27, 1817, AA.

r IS~
~~ - Boston Society-
Sketch Qf the HistOry of the
Ierusalem (Boston; John C. Regan, 1873), p. 7.
of-the
-- ­
New

V,) ~5"
 S9

of the aryard Divini!r. Scho~was chosen the first leader; in 1821

he was selected as the Boston Society's first pastor. 16 OtherQiirvill',d)

men who would help provide leadership for the Society in its

-
developing years werelCaleblandlsami>son Re;ct. JOhn H. Wilkins.

- --- .

(Tiny B. Hayward,) 'warren Goddard., ;William ParsonsJ and fTheophilus

-
Parso~...J!J The remarkable fact is that~m~worce.Ee;pastored
the society for more than f,,,,"i-...~..a::;:.r;.;s and most of the men named above

rem~.)n their leadership positions throughout that long pastorate.

The youthfulness of the H~rvard coterie ~1 did more than cause

resentment in older men like W..!.lliam Schla;ter of Philadelphia; 17 it

gave the Boston Society a continuity of leadership unmatched by any

of the other major New Church societies in the United States.

Without question the dominant individual in nineteenth

century Boston New Church history was Thomas Wor~ter son of

the Rev•. Noah Worcester. Jr.l. who was himself a noted Unitarian

clergyman and peace advocate. 18 Out of the large family which Noah

16Ibid.•. p. 9.

17"Documents of New Church History. " Kew Church Life.

XXIX. No. 3 (March. 1909). 157-162. This printed correspondence

of WUliam S~e to Judge ohn Yo~g] reveals Schlatter's bitterness )J
toward the 'Worcesterites" or "Boston Boys. "

18peter Brock. Radical Pacifists in Antebellum America

(Princeton. New Jersey: Princeton University Press, 1968), pp. 22­

37. Henry Ware and Samuel Worcester, eds.• Memoirs of the Rev.

Noah Worcester. D. D. (Boston: James Munroe and Co., 1844),

144 pp.

 60

produced. tj:l.re.e of the boys became important New Church ministers:

--- ------
Thomas. Samuel, and He
~
A.I Henry's sphere of operation was
Maine so for our study he is of minimal importance. but Samuel is

more significant due to his later association with a spiritualistic

movement and because of his earl disagre~e~ts with his brother

----
Thomas.
,--- ­
i~~est_eci (1793-1844) was an integral part of the

Bos~on New Church social group from its outset in 1817. but in 1822

he and his young brother separated as Samuel moved to Gloucester to

take a teaching position. The differences between them were partly

personal 19 and partly theological in the sense tha t they differed on

the destiny of the Boston Society. In a letter to Theophilus Parsons

Jr. on January 8. 1823. only days after Samuel had moved to

Gloucester. Thomas stressed the fact that Samuel did not agree with

I suppose that I agree with you fully in thinking that .Jo

~h~ B. S. H. . is the center of the H. J. upon earth so
far as we know; . • .

I understand the question between us to be not

abstractly whether it be proper for us to communicate
11light, for in this we are agreed; but whether it is
I righ.!Jor us to do itfrom missionary life,'" or f.!.2!!L!..he

-----
life of our peculiar uses. or what will end in the

19Samuel Worcester to l~pMus P'!t$...Oj1s Jr.• November

26. December 4. December-li, 1822. and January 4, 1823. Theophilus
Parsons. Jr. P~ I. B?~n fu..b:4c Library.
 same thing--from the life of those uses in which
Providence "has placed" us. 0 --

Months later in another letter to ~ns(. who in 1823 was

living in Taunton, Massachusetts, ryvorces!!':t, mentioned that he was

about ready to publish a book of sermons which he expected to excite

~ world to the teachings of Swedenborg.

- -
Great times "were about to

burst upon man and Worcester clearly expressed his hope that Parsons

would eventually give up the Taunton Free Press in order to devote

full time to New Church affairs. .

When you have tarried at Jerusalem until you receive

the Holy Spirit, I hope to see all your powers elevated
strictly to the Church. I think the world" neai"ly or
quite prepared for it--indeed I believe it so fully that
rI it makes me almost crazy. 21

Those early years in Boston must have been traumatic ones

as the brilliant "Harvard Boys" strug~l~n~ t~e_~~~IJ!..se )

from ~hich they could best..promote the coming of a New Jerusalem.

For example, early correspondence reveals that neither/Warren

Goddard or Theophilus Pars__~>ns, Jr,. was fully satisfied with law in

those anxious days;22 they seemed to feel with M'orcesterJthe

'r::­
20Thomas Worcester to Parsons, Janu~ry 8, 1823, Parsons
Papers, I, BP. ­

21Thomas Worcester to Parsons October 23, 1823, Parsons

Pape~s,~p. -----­

2 arren Goddard to Parsons, August 11, 1823, Parsons

Papers, I. BP.
 62

. superiority of a ~us use over a s~ar one. And Goddard's

probing question of whether one should be a servant to the~se~

( make the use one' s serv~nt, reverberated throug':9ut the New Chur~h

~om':!!.unity in the ear~y nineteen.th century as new eceivers strug led

--
to define their relationship to a hostile world.
-- ~

Exactly when Worcester and the Boston Society came to the

realization that they were not going to be permitted to usher in the

New, Jerusalem is not known, but certainly the idea did not die

easily.
. - --
However, the Boston leadership eVidently evolved a sub­
-~ ~

stltute dictum to replace that hope: the belief tha t Boston' s task

would be to preserve New Church truth from error so that a pure

remilant might be ready for the glori~y when the~orl<:!.would be

---
ready to appreciate and receive Swedenborg's teachings.
- - If this

idea is not expressed explicitly in the writings emanating from Boston,

it does seem fairly obvious from the actions of Boston New Churchmen.

Perhaps a more proper rendering would be to say the "inaction" of

Boston men, for Boston d~not encourage missionary activity to the

satisfaction of many receivers elsewhere. Boston acquired a reputa­

tlon for talking rather than acting, and Worce~ was always trying

to dampen the zeal of those enthusiasts who believed the time was

nowl

Even back in the 1820' s not all of the Boston men agreed with
r­
Worcester's- initial optimism; Sampson Ree had his doubts. In fact,
 63

in 1822 Sampson even threatened to resign from the Boston New Church

because he felt the efforts of some to reach the public evangelisti­

--
caIly violated his particular use and threatened the theological purity

of the New Church. Reed was especially concerned over a possible

./

violation of the conJugial relation between pastor and people should

Worcester preach to the public. 23

Next to Thomas W<xcester, Sampson Reed was probably the

most amazing of a remarkable lot of New Churchmen in Boston. ~n

in 18~0.!o a clerical fa~ily. Reed seemed h~ded for the ~y

himself as he matriculated at Harvard. Even after he embraced the

doctrines of Swedenborg he continued on to ~e Divinity Schpol.

along with his roommate who happened to be Thomas_ Worce~r. By

this tirr.e Reed had also introduced his friend to Swedenborg. 24

Reed decided to leave theological school and enter the ~g

business because he felt there would be no opportunities ~preach

Swedenborg in a hostile ~urch. 25 Worcester finished his course

of study. In spite of differences the two men remained life-long

friends.--..m~in92isters~nd settling near each other on B~on's

23Sam~el Worcester to Parsons. November 26. 1822.

Parsons Papers. I, BP.

24\ enneth W. Cameron, Emerson the Essayist: AA Outline

of His Philosophical Development through 1836, I (Ra1eigh, North
Carolina: The Thistle Press. 1945), pp. 219-220.

25 Ibid .• p. 220.
 64

Louisburg Square. 26 Sampson also acted as one of Worcester's chief

lieutenants in contact with the larger New Church, serving as editor

~
of, the New Ierusalem Magazine for a time and contributing much to

its monthly output while his brother Caleb was editor. 27

Outside the New Church Reed is recognized as one of the

chief early influences on Ralph Waldo Emerson. 28 He was personally

acquainted with Emerson and there is adequate evidence that Emerson

( read him, both in the pag.es of the N~w Jerusalem Magazine and i~
Re'ed's separate essays. The most notable of Reed's writings wa s

Observations Q!l the Growth of the Mind published in 1826, This work

provoked Emerson to cite Sampson Reed as one of the ~st

American representatives of Transcendentalism. 29 However, by the

-
early 1830' s the intellectual rapport between the two men began to

wear thin as Emerson in his speeches and essays became increasingly

26Silver Sketches, p. 84. Both men married daughters of

Captai I' John Clark Worcester married Alice and Sampson Reed
married Cam
,.­ ine Clark.
27Reed I dited The New Church Magazine for Children, a
Boston monthly, from its inception in 1844 until 1864. For a list of
Reed's articles in the New Ierusalem Magazine see Cameron, Emerson,
I p. 285-287. The same information can be found inthe Index to
the--Magazin~ but that index is extreme,~e. The Academy Lr'i:irarYIJ
has a copy, as does the Rev. Clayton Pl!~stnal of New York City.
Ci8~larence Paul HotsO:~ Emerson and Swedenborg (unpub­
lished Ph-:-D. dissertation, Harvard University, 1929); pp. 671-672.
Camerson, Emerson, pp. 13-l'4.'228. --==
29Cameron, Emerson, p. 252 .
.­
 65

less appealing to Reed. Obviously those who leaned to~d

Transcendentalism were not specific el}ough in doctrine to suit a

Swedenborg.ian. The opposite was also true. Emerson was not

tempted to allow his mind to slip into traditional channels of religious

dogmatism. 30

Snatches from the lives of Thomas Worcester and Sampson

Reed can only begin to portray the fullness of Boston New Church

history. The Boston Society was the largest and most prestigious

New Church group in the United States in the early nineteenth

century. From its inception in 1818 to 1873, the Boston New Church

I
\ -
had enrolled 1,025 members, only fifteen of whom had either with­

drawn formally or been dismissed from membership. But over 150

did move from Boston to other areas of the country where they carried

the Boston influence. 31

One of the reasons for the extraordinary weigh~ which the

Boston Society exercised in New Church affairs was the con~ty

of its le~dership which exerted a stabilizing influence on the home

situation. Boston had its share of internal problems but no effective

--
challenge to the authority olthe Harvard clique'ever manifested
----
30Ibid.• pp. 229, 294. Clarence Paul !,I~_~n, "Sampson
Reed, A Teacher of Emerson, " The New England Quarterly, II (1929),
276-277.
 66

itself. Unli e other major New Church s cieties Boston's harm<?ny

---'­
was not marred by schism and the resulting bitterness.

---
On the other

hand, Boston did exude a rather stultifying air of conformity which

irritated many New Churchmen who seemed unable to breathe any air

----
not saturated with controversy.

To say that Boston contained its own di_sp~tes is not to say

that the Society never rippled the surface of New Church life. Its

prestige was such that~0!!.9 Boston pos)tion on any question

forced issues elsewhere that frequently split societies right down

the middle in ~ttitude if n~t physically. I) Boston's innovation of

~ying tithes to support_th_eir minister is a case in point. 32/( While

the custom of tithing never became an established principle in the

New Church, probably because it violated the individual liberty New

Churchmen guarded so jealously, the introduction of the concept

touched off a debate on the merits of ministerial salaries.

1'---__
Thomas Worceste was probably the first New Church

-
minister to lnsist that he be paid a salary so that he might devote
-
-
himself exclusively to\he preaching use: 33 In the 1840' s some
.~

compensation seems to have become a regular practice but few

societies could afford to support a minister completely, so

3~lOCk, New Church, p. 106 fL

33 Ibid., p. 106.

 67

supplementary emplo~nt was common. By the 1860' s t.'le belief

that minist~ s~o~d be full supported was ~olidly established.

Nevertheless, the gap betwee{1 wish and fulfillment was frequently

a massive fissure, 34 andili;"salary matte[}was evidently a touchy

\ item at least through 1870. In 1866 the Rev.) John C. Age.!lpolled

some New Church ministers on the subject and got candid replies.

One man flatly affirmed that he was never again going to ascribe to

the ':starvation theory" of ministerial support. 35

The effects of the New Church's cha~itud~rd

past.2I"'~ salari~lcannot be measured precisely, but to men who

It
'"
regarded the preaching office"',as
. the Lord's highest use and desired
to d~vote themselves to it full-time, the psychological impact was

considerable. Rev. @C"hard DeCharms as torn by this frustration

and never found a workable solution. 36 The Rev. [B. F. Barre!l]

34 J.. C. Herrick to J. C. Ager, June 2, 1866, SSRA. J. H.

Ragatz to·J. C. Ager, May 22, 1866, SSRA. Timothy Shay Arthur,
"Paying the Minister, " Lessons in Life (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippin­
cott, 1858[1851]), pp. 153-155. This is only one of more than half a
dozen preacher tales Arthur wrote concerning the salary question and
other ministerial problems.

~h.~~iciJtO)J. C. Ag~r) June 2, 1866, SSRA. Richar~

DeCharms to the Baltimore Society of the New Jerusalem, November
23. 1847, SSRA.

. 36 From 1850 to his death: in 1864~struggle~o

maintain his position as a minister of the New Church via publishing.
He was reluctant to
take full-time emplQyment tha t would inder the
performance ofUSe for the C~ 'This religious conviction, plus
a stomach disorder, plus his lac ofpreparation for a secuIarcareer,
 68

s~lldered all pastoral duties, entered business, and saved enough

'1\ m~ey to .!'lake him financially independent in order to ~i~ the

I freedom to speak his con~cience where and when he chose. 37
Certainly in the years 1840-1870 there seems to be no reason to

conclude that the lack of ministerial support aided New Church

growth. The vitality of the New Church in these years was due to

other factors and sustained itself ~ite of{tFiesalary problem-:]

/The salary quest~~did not physically split New Church

societies, but being one of the first controversies in early New

Church history it did begin the process of polarization which was

C exacerbated by the Boston "conjugial heresy." That emotion-charged

~

concept wl!!.~made the pastoral relation analagous to true marriage,

in turn became the issue which arouse£ anti:!l0~ton and anti-Con- J

J
vention sentiment in the late 1830' s and early 1840' s. The result

was a series of physical splits, for example in New York and Phila-

telPhia, and thE[ ~ation...2L2 riyal..£s>nve~n,~ Central ~

Middle Convention) Other principles were involved in the emergence
~

and his advanced age, all combined to keep him and his large family
fr bordering on starvation and poverty throughout these years. -

37 In 1854 a rumor was circulating in the New Church

community that~]was extremely wealthy; whether or not it was
true even Barrett does not say definitely, although he hints that
mO,.OOO was an exaggerated estimate.. B. F. Barrett. 12 Plain Letter
to Rev. Tho's Worcester, D. D. (New York: Mason Brothers. 1864),
p. 30.~e-SUSh 0 RlChara DeCnarms· July 7, 1854, AA.
 69

of that organization. but it is hard to imagine such a sizeable split

-.....---.
at that time (1841) without the conjugial question to arouse men's

feelings against the General Convention and Boston. 38

Both~salary issu_e nd /the conjugial heresi1~ould have

had less repercussion throughout the New Church had they sprouted

from any other society than Bos ton. They were substantive matters.

and New Church people took doctrine seriously and did-!!:y to live

the implications of the propositional content of their faith. but at

the same time they were symbols. They were symbolic of Boston's

dominant position in the New Church. By the late 1830's Boston had

reached this position of power. to the almost universal dismay '!..f

\ New Churchmen outsi<!.e the Northeast. By their words and actions

-- - ----
i they seemed to prefer regional bodies (Western, Eastern, and Central
- --.­
) Conventions), orkomplete~iJ(those-wh2-refused ~o join~ny

organizat~ larger than a society). For them the General ConventiOn

was a Boston plaything and they did not like the game.

Substance was added to the charge of Boston's_tyranny by

the fact that most New Church literature in the 1830' s was being

Few people realized that Clapp

38The belief that the conjugial heresy was the root cause
of all New Church problems was a consistent belief of many Sweden­
borgians from the 1820's into the 1840's. "Documents of New Church
History," New Church Life, XXIX, No. 3 (1909), 289-299. See also
Daniel Lammot to S. Seymore, November 8. 1843, SSRA.
 70

himself was not happy' about many' of the events transpiring in Boston.

. - ­
communication New Churchmen had- the periodical. In 1827 Thomas

Worcester had established the first long-run New Church periodical

i~ United States the New Jerusalem Magiiifne:l Its edito(s,

/~b39 and Sampson Reed during most of the early nineteenth century,
---.
did regulate the contents in a way favorable to the General Convention,
---
(f .

so th~
- -
paper was not a forum for open discussion.

about 1840, when resentment against Boston was

Consequently,

accelerating~e

technological a.1vances in printing IT!.ade periodicals econo~cal1y

< feasible, a ~ of anti-Convention journals appeared.

Philadelphia was the center of anti-Convention activity from

the time Richard DeCharms moved there from Cincinnati in 1839 to the

~tion of~he General Church"andlthe GenerafConVenti~i~. ~

----
Resentment there was partly due to Philadelphia's failure to retain
.­
the leading influe3.ce which she had exercised in the formative years

of New Church history in the United States. 40 Whatever else it may

have been, the @entral Conventio~can be inter~d poli~y as

( an effort to wrest power from Boston or

_.
through the creation of a countervailing
balanc~ P<2.w~ regio.~lly

~c:r.,

39Theophilus Parsons, "Obituary 0 r Caleb Reed, " ~

Jerusalem Magazine, XXII, No. 5 (1854). 259-260. ­

.~Block, New Church, pp. 189-191.

 71

New York became the prime hope for the establishment of a

viable Middle Convention. Together New York and Philadelphia could

hope to accomplish what would have been impossible alone. But New

YOrk was not easily won. From the late 1830's to the late 1850's

New York became a New Church battleground on a variety of issues

~ ----
... ~ - - -. ~ ­
and New Churchmen there must have felt at times as if they had been

sucked into a giant whirlpool from which there was no escape and to

which there was no bottom.

'------­ The history of Swedenborgianism in New York begins in 1792

or 1793 with the formation of a reading circle b I Dr. Joseph R~

of England. His group was a victim of the yellow fever epidemic of

1796; those who escaped the fever returned to England. 41 Prior to

the dissolution of this small circle, the Rev. §.lliam Hil1)of

Manchester, England, had conducted a preaching tour in the Episcopal

churches of the New York area similar to the one in Boston and had

aroused some interest in Sw:egenborg in the Old Church. 42 The formal

organization of a society had to await the arrival of a third Englishman.

(§w~RileyJmigratedfrom England to New York in 1805, and

shortly thereafter assembled a r~ading group in his home. In1.§.!..? the
tiny band ventured into the open, announcing the first public New

41 fuid ., p. 93.

42Ibid .• pp. 93-94.

 72

Church meetings in New York history. 43 The timing was not exactly

masterful given the nature of the group. The year 1812 hardly seems

auspicious in retrospect for a solidly English circle to begin dis­

tributing books and literature printed in England and to invite

Americans to worship according to an English liturgy. Nevertheless

~en did become receivers during those trying war years.

The first was ~muelWOodwo!!~ a well-known New York

literary figure; 44 the second wasf~mes ~esterma~ a gentleman

who would later ~ath the New York Society the East Side lots ~.n

which the present temple was erected in 1857. These two men,

LRiley {N;thc:..n3
i l Holleyj and Charles Doughty elped organize a
. 45
permanent society in 1816 with twent -SIX male members. From

the outset the real leader of the group was a yo~wyer named

Charles J. Doughty.

Doughty entered life in 1784, born of Quaker parents in

Brook1yn, New York. After studying classics with Nathaniel Holley,

he graduated from Yale in 1806. 46 Before becoming a reader of

43Histori~al Sketch of the New York New Church Society

(New York: John P. Prall, 1860), pp. 5. 7.

44 lock. New Church, pp. 95-96 .

.~
~Sketch of New York. p. 7.

-
46Richard DeCharms, "Biographical Sketch of the Rev.
Charles J. 6o~ghtY:-"""Newc-hurchma , II (1843-1844) 651-652.
.
 73

r
Swedenborg under the direction of his old tutor. Holley.j and then in

1815 a receiver ~ Doughty had established himself as a lawyer. 47

Even though he had an absorbing career Doughty sou~ht ordination

so that he might preach. The procedure was perfonned by the Rev.

[ Maskelrr:x.-Caril)0f Philadelphia. ,Woodworth jand ISolymon Brown.

a dentist. ministered as lay preachers at week-night services, but

~ght was the chief minister. In 1833 he was formally elected

pastQr and given a regula~ary. 48

IT faithful preaching on Sunday had been all the New York

Society needed, Doughty would have been superb. But the New York

flock need~onstant care, and Doughty was too busy and lived too

far away from most of the members to provide the necessary

--
shepherding. 4/9 In fact, his personality was too mild for the trials
~

the New York Society would face in his years of leadership. Both

Boston and Philadelphia vied for his loyalty.! Doughty veered from

one side to the other, losing many of his people with each sharp turn.

--- --
First he embraced Thomas Worcester's conjugial theory.

When he applied it to the New York Society the end result was a

47 .
Ibid•• pp. 659. 664.

48Sketch of New York, pp. 9. 11-12.

49DeCharms. "Doughty." p. 681.

 o
74

direct slap in the face for both ;Woodworth an Brown I 50 From 1823
---'

to 1838 the Society recurrently faced the numerous complications

arising from Doughty's original manuever. Finally, in 1838 he was

pressured to resign as pastor. 51 His departure was hardly the simple

- -
answer his opponents desired, for Dought held meetings in his

Brooklyn home which eventually led to a ~~ond N~~ Church society

in New York.

An additional complexity was added bYITh~Worcest'=.1

who gave support to Edward Riley' s struggle to reorganize and

strengthen the old First Society. 52 Doughty probably never agreed

with Worcester on much more than the conjugial principle, even

though he had married into the Worcester fa~ly. 53 But whatever the

relations between them to 1838, in that year Doughty was solidly

anti-Worcester, anti-Boston, anti-General Convention, and anti­

conjugial heresy! 54 He and Richard DeCharms were the two leading

figures behind the inauguration of the Central Convention. Doughty's

Second Society supported it faithfully until both the Convention and

the Second Society died out in the 1850' s.

50 Ibid ., p. 682.

51 Ibid ., Pp. 687, 691-693. Letters and documents on the

controversy surrounding Doughty's resignation are printed on pp.
690-705.
52
Block, New Church, p. 98.

53Samuel Worcester's daughter, Sarah, was Doughty's wife.

54DeCharms, -Doughty," pp. 712-713.

 75

Conclusion

For the New Church in the United States the years before

1840 were ones of subtle persecution externally, and alternating fits

of creative arid destructive vitality internally. New Church societies.

without exception led by an excepti~l first genera.Eion, were planted

.­
solidly in three types of American towns. ~ter represented the

small town located on a major transp~rtation route; C~ti the

interior commercial center; and Ph~lphia, ~n. and New York

~e key cultJ:!.ral.....£~nter~the country. All three types of locations

were crucial to the success of the Swedenborgian challenge to Deism

and orthodoxy.

By 1840 the New Church was strategically situated in an

extremely advantageous position. Even though small in terms of

numbers, with 26 societies andl8S0 memberg the New Church had

proved itself_capable of attracting a class of skilled lead.ers--m~n

of~ perseverance, and means. The only danger signal seemed

to be the PloPSl_nsity of New Churchmen fs>r intense and frequent

co~rsy, but even that did not seem in 1840 to be a fatal flaw.

In fact, an unfettered co~ce seemed to be one c:! the greatest

assets i~idual Swedenborgians possessed.
 CHAPTER IV

RICHARD DECHARMS: CHIEF APOSTLE

OF SECTARIANISM

The intensity of the strife within the New Church in America

was partly due to the nature of the Swedenborgian community in the

nineteenth century. Even though the societies were widely scattered

and individual rec~vers were spril!k}ed across~untry, the New

Church was a community, especially after 1840 with improved means

of transportation and communication. Periodicals. profuse letter

~g, intermarriage, convention or association m etings, and the

prodigious trav~ ministers all contributed to the coherence of

New Church !ellowship. Like the Quaker community New Church ties

extended to Europe also.

-----
Given such intimacy and the alertness of New Churchmen to
- ----
d~nal or pers(;>nal deviancy, a local dispu~e could hardly be con­

~d to its point of o~gin. Consequently. the same types of probl~s

~arly ~y New Chu~society.

--.-.,.-­
This communication of debat­

able issues would have occurred even if the societies had remained

stable in membership. but as has been noted. New Church people

frequently moved to better themselves. They took news, new ideas,

--- - ---- ~

76
 77

and even grudges with them from one -place to another. Ministers

were no exception, for they were a traveling brotherhood. Since they

were always in relatively short supply, societies at times replaced

one pastor with another whose views were incompatible with those
(
opinions held by his predecessor.

However, the nature of the New Church community does not

fully explain the intensity of strife it experienced. New Church

( teaching ~ implications within itself which prOVided oQti um con­

<!.~tions for controversy. The creedal Protestant denominations in the

first half of the nineteenth century were still basically orthodox and

saw homogeneity of belief as a desirable characteristic. In these

denominations heresy trials were held occasionally and more frequently

members were disciplined for deviancy, as a number of Sweden­

• I borgians learned firsthand. But the New Church condemned ~eds

-- ----
J) as restrictive and exalted man' s relig;O~S liberty.
-
New Churchmen not

0.E1y tolerated disa~ement; some encourag~d-l! with the idea th<:~

truth needed to ~riu_mph"was a rational a~g ~ the public forum. With

r- ­

theological debates with orthodox clergymen, and others

--
this attitude men like George Field entered enthusiastically into
,.---.
~ Ri~hard

DeChar~sJtackled fellow receivers.

In the confrc:>nt~tions with orthodoxy, New Churchmen

staunchly defended the superiority of their own world-vi~w, but did

so with mOJ:e_grace p d to~rallce than mo~their opponents. In

 78

internal disputes candor always triumphed over politeness, but this

----=- --- . _. - - ­

rough handling was generally charac~ristiC of both sides and did not

usually undermine respect.

--
In the correspondence between New
---
.

Churchmen there is remarkably little "back-stabbing." Serious

------- - -
trouble did arise when any_ o~!!@n forcefully insisted on the correct­

ness of his views for all New Churchmen. Thomas ·Worcester

___ .-l was

guilty of this, as
-- wa~ Richard DeCharms.
-:'" . ­
DeCharms' methods,

how~ver, were..E!.~o~iousthan the quiet, subtle tactics of

Worcester.

L~c~ard DeCharmsJwas without question the single most

controversial figure in early nineteenth century New Church history,

although after 1845 New York's)George B~s~yegan to challenge his

supremacy. DeCharms....w as the supreme example of the New Church

unfettered....£Q!!science. His life began in tragic circumstances and

ended the same way. Some would probably interpret his entire life

in between as a tragedy for the New Church, while others regard him

as the founder in principle of the Ac~d.emy movement which g~e

birth to the General Church. I

DeCharms was the ~ of a Fre!!.s.l:LB.!!gueno..Lp.h sician who

had migra ted from London to Philadelphia in 1793. His notable work

IOrrnond de ·Charms Odhner, "The Cincinnati Third Society,

1838; Genesis of the Academy Movement"· (unpublished M3., 1962,
AA), 20 pp.
 79

-
In the Yellow Fever epidemic of that year earned him a place in the
--
medical circles of that city, and in 1795 he brought his wife and three

children to Philadelphia. 2 The family reunion was short-lived. In

----"
the Yellow Fever scourge of 1796 Dr. DeChanns contracted the disease
- ­
while caring fo~ Morri and di=.d. 3

In 1857JRichard accounted for his father's untimely death by

suggesting that his father ha,! been "predisposed to disease by

uncolJlmon anxiety to save his patient, . . ." 4 Such a theory could

not have been based on personal observation, for DeCharms was not

-
born until six months after his father's demise, on October 17. 1795.

He was christened in his parents' church by its rector, Bishop Wi!liam

-_ 5
White.
---..
With four children, and no close relatives to help, "Mrs.

DeCharms was jolted back upon her own resources. For a time she

--- -
ran a prestige boarding house for political men, attracting such
~- ---
cli~ts as IJohn Quincy Adams. The eldest son Will~ put in

a merchant's emp!£y where he eventually found the means to return to

a1uchard DeCharms, "Autobiography" (unpublished Ms., AA),)

pp. 9, 11.
3 Ibid., pp. 12-13.

4
Ibid.. p. 122.

Slbid., p. 13.

6 Ibid., pp. 16-17, 19.

 80

london and establish a business of his own. The two da~ghters

--
taught in female academies as soon as they could secure positions. 7
.. ~.- -- -- - --:-­

In....?rder· that his mot.!ler might carry on the heavy responsibilities of

the boarding house, Rich~'was placed into the care of a Quaker

nurse when he was one. He remained there four years, ret~ned

home until he was seven, and then was sent to an academy in Perth

Amboy, New Jersey. 8

Migration evidently was part of the family inheritance. In

1809. with hotels cutting into the ~arsling ho~e and the
,
national politicians gone, ~rs. DeCharms decided to pay a visit to

her daughter Sarah in Kentucky and then return to London. The

unsettled conditions of those pre-war years, and then the war itself,

delayed family plans to embark for England. The DeCharms family

---
did not even return to Philadelphia until 1816. 9

ForlRichard the delay in Kentucky appeared disastrous

because he had reached the age of preparation for college or a trade.

In Frankfort, where his--ITlother had of necessity opened a boaJding

house for politicians, he_entered a printing esta~nt. The step

7 Ibid . , pp. 123-124.

8 Ibid . , pp. 124-125.

9 Ibid • , pp. 26, 127-128.

 "
81

was taken for want of a better opporn:nity. 10 The consequences

were monumental in significance compared to the casual first step,

for DeCharms was to spend a major portion of his active life writi,ng

and publishing New Church literature.

A.fier the War of 1812 the DeCharms family moved back to

Philadelphia with high hopes. but they found the boarding house

situation even tighter than when they had left. Mrs. DeCharms

desperately resorted to selling family jewelry and silver until the

three women could organize a female academy. 11 Richard worked

long hours as a journeyman rinter. The work. plus his ~of

his health.
--
frustration in not being able to care for his family financially. broke

Nevertheless he labeled that period "the happiest year

of my life. ,,12 At least he had been able to make some contribution

toward the home his mother and sisters were laboring to maintain.

To regain his health DeCharms took a jo~ Philadelphia

books~ler at a rate of five dollars per week plus expenses. After

a season of traveling through New England selling subscriptions,

DeCharms returned home with a resolve to enter college. 13 Classical

10 Ibid .• pp. 27. 29.

llIbid. , p. 33.

lZ Ibid •• p. 142.

13 Ibid .• p. 34.

 82

study commenced immediately under the sponsership of a prominent

Philadelphia lawyer, Jonathan C011dyj He crammed the work into less

than two years and entered Y~~e's s~ehomore class in 1824. 14 By

now DeCharms was twenty-eight and in a hurry to compensate for the

, ""-..
wasted years'of his life.

The academic and economic pressures of college life nearly

bowled over DeCharms, but they were no more exacting than the

psychological strain of losing his mother before he could arrive at

an independent status where he might have cared for her. 15 In order

to continue at Yale DeCharms ~f9~d !Q b9rrow approximately one

thousand dollars from a - rs. EarL] an elderly woman in Philad~phia.l6

Finally in .ill6 the fr~Yale graduate emerged, fiercely independent

and sensitive to time, but still with no career.

His first move was to pay old debts. With his mother deSid,

his_ two sis!-~_rs_.!!1arried, and only a slight sum due his bl~~ther,

DeCharms had only one compelling obligation to his family. He felt

he should enter medicine, the _career of his father and the one to

-
which his brother had been pointed before financial exigencies pre­

, vented its fulfillment.

---
But the large debt to his female benefactor had

14_1_.,
Ib 'd PP. 39. 41-42, 149.

15 Ibid • , pp. 42 ff. , 151.

16Ibid. , pp. 52-53.

 83

to be cleared away first. (Mrs. Earl/diverted the potential medical

student by_offering to cancel the entire debt o~ one condition.

The stipulation of Mrs. Earl meant permanently for~king

medical study in favor of preparation for the New Church ministry.

DeCharms hardly hesitated. He could not afford the time needed to

earn the sum necessary to repay her. Inwardly DeCharms was so

chained by his ~ast th~3e needed to pe_rform a major redemptive act

quickly. not so much because of any great evils he had committed.

but due to what he had not done. To repair his damaged self-image

DeCharms also had to function as an agent of redemption for others.

All of this was !!Qt apparent to anyone in 1826, even

DeCharms. Probably all he realized was that Mrs. Ear!:; offer was

attractive. if not financially In the long run since a minister's

salary was not comparable to a phys~n' s. at least it was appealing

Interms of usefulness and personal satisfaction. The decision was

probably not as sudden as it might appear to be from DeCharms'

"Autobiography." He must have been acquainted with New Church

.teaching while studying with Condy. for the Philadelphia lawyer was

one of the New Church I s most lucid minds. Perhaps Condy or Mrs.

Earl~ad made the suggestion to enter the ministry even J:,efore

DeCharms entered Yale.

Whatever
_. ----­
the origin of the ministe.rial s

time needed to make th~ecision. once DeCharms made up his mind

 84

he leaped into action. Even though he had been introduced to New

Church truth in Philadelphia during the early stages of the struggle

with Boston for hegemony. DeCharms in 1827 determinec! to study under

. --
Thomas Worcester 'in order to obtain the best
/
the~l.99ical~ining!!3.e

American New Church offered. Arrangements had been made for him to

begin and edit a ~w peri~al being contemplate? by a number of

Boston New Churchmen while he studied under Worcester. 17 The

. ----
story of DeCharms' life is wrapped up in the irony that he would spend

the rest of his life reacting against the Worcester he had admired and

the New Ierusalem Magazine he had helped to create.

The honeymoon in Boston was short-lived and DeCharms

moved on to another apparent ideal situation in Baltimore. He would

study under the New Church's patriarch.; John Har JQY.e.) at ~ e

time a~ting as Hargrove's assistant with the possibility of taking the

aging minister's place when he retired. 18 Once again the ideal

situation deteriorated rapidly as DeCharms proved to be a more

popular lect~er than his mentor. His potential was recognized by

the General Convention which elected him Sec:~ary of the Convention

in IB27. He and Hargrove probably had substantial theological

differences as well. for DeCharms himself admitted that the ostensible

17 Ibid .• p. 60.

1BIbid •• p. 63.

 85

reason for leaving Baltimore, Mrs. Earl's death,yas not the real

reason. 19

No record exists to document the differences between

~Charm~, ~orceste and IHargrove:.. But if we assume that DeCharms'

only systematic New Church teaching up through 1826 had been the

tutelage of J<;athan Con<:iV we can safely assume that the problems

were more. than personal. At the time DeCharms w~ studying with

Condy in ~hiladelphia, and during his years at Yale, the cOnjugial

heresy plagued the New Church. Si~ce there ~n~ell-educated

~~inisters willing to refute the Harvard-trainesLWorcester,

his opponents on the conjugial question were primarily laymen.

J Jonathan Condy nd Daniel Lammot were two of the most formidable

of these. 20

After leaving Baltimore DeCharms jumped at a_n opy'~nity

to go we.!;t. He became 'the first and only full-time pastor of the

Bedford, Pennsylvania S_ociety. Samuel Barclay, nephew of Hetty

Barclay, had issued the invitation and of necessity acted as

DeCjlarms' chief financial ~ker. 21 ~ The energetic young minister"

19Richard DeCharms, "Ourselv~s and Our Works, " N~w­

churchman, III (1853-1856). 165.

20Carl T. Odhner, 'Ri~bard DeCtia~m..§>, A Sketch of His

Life and Work," New Church Life, XXIII, No. 2.(February, 1903),

76-77.

21Richard DeCharms, "Samuel M. Barclay," Newchurchman,

ill (1853-1856), 243.
 86

ranged)nto surrounding areas preaching the doctrines of Swedenborg,

and he even had spare time for courting Miss Mary Graham, the

daughter of Major George Graham of Stoystown, Somerset County,

Pennsylvania. He and Mary were married in April, 1833. 22

In spite of the actj.vity DeCharms remained restless. His

three separate practical experiences had sharpened his rhetorical

and literary skills and forced him to deal with the mundane proq.!ems

o! New Church life, but DeCharms had not succeeded in ~ing

the precious time for study that he wanted from the pressures of

I routine. In 1830, at age 34, Richard DeCharms h~~d off to ~n

to live with his brother William and ~o engage in study unde~he

notable[SamJ,!.el Noble. Noble was England's foremost New Church

') theologian, and the heir ~hls leadership of English

l sectarianism in the New Church.

At first the old hindrance of fi~cial~ec~ityintruded to

distract hilT. from study once more, for DeCharms was ~ced ~ k

for a New Church publisher to support himself. Then an unexpected

inheritance from English relatives brought refreshing relief economi­

cally. For a brief time DeCharms basked in intellectuaUnlfishine

without ~rruption. 23 In 1833 he left England rested and co!!!.ident,

22DeCharms, "Autobiography," p. 66.

23
Ibid•• p. 67.
 87

'!!th a d~tennination to shape New Ch~rch developlll.ent ~m~a.

His new pastorate in Cincinnati presented a reasonable challenge.

He had no inkling of the difficulties that lay ahead, and certainly no

)) suspicton that the one Cincinnati society.-J....ould divide into ~e

separate g!ouJ:.s by the time he would leave the city. To fully under­

stand DeCharms it is necessary to look closely at what transpired in

those hectic years.

A .controversy ove I the nature of the ministry roke into the

(
oj)en shortly
.r-
af~~har::e~m-e-t-heCincinnati First Society's --­

full-time ~er. Up until his arrival in 1834 the society had

depended on numerou:. lax. preac~s to lead the worship services.

----
ODaniel Ro~, Adam--
Hurdus Oliver Lbvell, Edwin Atlee

Kinmon, were the most important of those who led the Cincinnati
andlAlexander
~.

Society. 24 Atlee is interesting because he' repre~the ~g

­
Quaker influence within the New Church, 25 but apart from Hurdus,
,

who as a "founding father" had secured a category of status all his

240utline History of the New Terusalem Church of Cincinnati,

1811-1903 (Cincinnati: Church Council, 1903), p. 10.

2 Edwin Atl~e was the son of Judge illiam Au_ ustus Atlee-'O .
The chief sources for Edwin Atlee's biographical data are a funeral
discourse printed in the Newchurchman, VIII (1853-1856). 22-35,
and a rare autobiograph in verse, Essays at Poetry (Philadelphia:
T. S. Manning, T82B). 152 pp. One of Atlee's sisters, Saral!.,

married into the Vickroy family. In the Vickroy Papers, Academy

Archives-:-sarah's son, Edwin A. Vickrcy, nas left an undated

( hls!orical sketch of his mother' s ~ily.

 o
88

own, the most significant of the Cincinnati preachers w'!s 'Alexari'de'r

Kinmorrt/

~nt had entered the University of Edinburgh in his native

(
Scotland to prepare for the Presbyterian mi~stry, but he had emerged

a skeptic. In 1823 he came to America with little mor~th~ ~en

mind and a head full of doubts about reli2ion. He headed west.

making a stop in Bedford, Pennsylvania. to teach in an academy

there. 26 Kinmont's search for a coherent world-view ended as he

--~ . ----­
ran head-on into the ideas of Swedenborg as represented by the small

group of Swedenborgians in the Bedford vi~inity. As he adopted a

new faith he was in t~adopted into the Frederick Eckst~mily,

for he married/~Xary Edstein.· 7

On his arrival in Cincinnati Kinmont established an academy

~ ~

on reformist principles and immersed himself in teaching and in New

Church activities. Of all the part-time ministers who were ~up~-

seded by "pe~harms, Alexander Kinmont was the most ~ e to

/\ 26Alexander Kinmont, Twelve Lectures on the Natural

History of Man and the Rise and Prglress of Philosophy (Cincinnati:
U. P. James, 1839), pp. 6-8. T is po~hllmous hilosoQhical work
includes a sixteen page biographical ~~count of Ki;m~nt. An origi.@l
drama by Kinmont, used by his Bedford Academy students in 1826,
entitl~ '~ma of the Silver Age, " can be found in the Swedenborg
School of R;ligion Archives. ­

270phia D. Smith, "Frederick Eckstein. The Father of

Cincinnati Art. " Bulletin of the Historical and Philosophical Society
of Ohio, IX, No. 4 (1951). 281.
 89

retirement at that particular time. A second society formed in 1834

( ar,:d extended a~1tat1on to Kinmont to be their regular pastor. He

not only accepted but I)_e opened his schoolroom for weekly se~s,

explaining his· acceptance of the offer as a desire to continue a "use"

(preaching) which had been bestowed upon him by the Lord. I Kinmont

acted in this ministerial capacity for the Second Society until his

death in 1838 when~dam Hurdus ook over for him. 28

The birth of the Second Cincinnati New Church Society was

not the work of an anti-intellectual, anti-clerical laity, fo~ Kinm

w~Rhilo 0 hi..c.al urn of mi!!.d, 29 and he was'an officially

'/
licensed preacher, having been ordained by Adam Hurdus. But he

e~idently was one of many in Cincinnati who could not tolerate

11 Richard DeCharms personally or the system of church order which

J , he espoused, or both. He ~DeCharms seem to have grgted 9~

each other from the outset of DeCharms' past~te. 30

28Alexander Kinmont, Circular, November 5. 1834. Both

the original handwritten circular and a printed copy are in SSRA. Out­
line History 2i Cincinnati, p. 11.

29Kinmont. Natural History, pp. 14-15. Kinmont was an

educational reformer, but he defended the use of the classics against
those reformers who were trying to eliminate their study just for the
purpose of "Americanizing" education. He was also one of the many
men in the 1830' s promoting the idea that progress is the natural,
desirable fate of mankind. See Arthur A. Ekirch~., The _ea of
Progress in America, l1n5-1860 (New York: Columbia Uni~ty Press,
1944), p. 255, for further details.

c@bPhia D. Smith, "The Rise of the New Church in Ohio, "

OSAHSg, LXI, No. 4 (October, 1952), 382~383.
 At first the soc.J.e.!J created by Kinmont probably serv~ ~a

-
safety valve for discontent under DeCharms and siphoned off those
-~ ~ -
who would have otherwise aroused opposition within the Cincinnati

First Society. But before long DeCharms came to view Kinmont's

group as a directlthreat to this authority and an independent base for

. ---.-~

si~ion occurred which swept away both Kinmont and DeCharms in

the flow of the aftermath.

The first deep rumble re.§.1,!lted fro!!!."!ynmont's application

for further ordination (the New Church then pra;:ticed an ordin~~f

thr~ degrees) to the Western Association. an organization in which

. ~Charms exercised enough power to bl~ck the ::quest. 31 Eventually

the whole situation was brought to the attention of the General Con­

vention and Boston pastor Thomas Worces~r who personally" cond~ed

an investigation. 32 At this point ~orceste~ refused to help Ki3mont

so any reversal of the action of DeCharms was impossible. I~n

health~ spirits Ki!!..!!!..ont retreated to the sanctuary of the Jo!!!!.....H.

James home in Urbana in 1838. He died that same ye~r.

Others in Cincinnati took the offensive for the badgered

- ~

Kinmont. In a clever maneuver they linked DeCharms and Worcester

31Ibid•• 384-385.

32Ibid.• 387.

as partners in the plOllmllXt,ion of the conjuglal heresy in the New

------ -
Church. In essence this theory was an effort to elevate the relation

which ideally should exist between man and his God from an individ­

ual to a group level_ I.APp~ed to the

" pastoral ""relation the conjugia'l
l
concept suggested that a pastor's connection to his people was

analagous to the relationship between man and wife on the natural

plane, and man and God on the spiritual level. To have '!!!9ther

-----
minister preach or officiate while the pastoral relation was intact

was tantamount to group adultery!

~ /
l?~haI!'1s'lreaction to the invasion of his p,:!.J:>it by Adam
33
Hurdus in 1838 ~ongjy ~uggested hi~ endorsement of the "con

jugial heresy, " so the accusation was effective in discrediting

DeCharms in Cincinnati.
~
iBut the subsequent actions of I.!?e~
-)
disclosed the fundamental antipathy between him and 'll'homas
~

Worcester. ~e new Rules of Order which were passed by the

- ----- --
General Convention In 1838, and which seemed to prepare the way
-- - -
f~...more authoritarian, episcopal form of churc:.J:!.J'.2lity under

Worcester's leadership, gave DeCharms the issue he needed to free

himself from the stigma of association with the Boston leader. He

had reSigned his position as pastor of the Cincinnati Firs~ty

33Richard DeCharms, "Reasons for Resignation. February 6.

1837" (unpublished Ms., AA), pp. 53-54, 56.
 92

1n July, 1837, over the Hurdus matter.

34 But the resentment which

the new Rules aroused enabled DeCharms to form a new ~ty

completely loyal to his leader~hip and to the principles he had been

advocating for several years.

..
The Constitution of this new society was a legal and

r theological marvel that could only have been harvested from the

\ fertile brain of Richard DeCharms.

t ~ ~Society on the basis of a comparison with t~~n

I organism. Since body organs and members obviously did not rotate

or switch functions with one another, and ~nce the bod

o~d, DeCharms' intent was clear. 35 The whole piece bears

only has

the unmistakable stamQ of DeCharm_s' complex mind,'" and like so

many of his ideas appeared to be a gem in thes>ry but proved to be

~e under the bright light of practical reality.

The_Cincinnati Third ~ty, inaugurated in personal

controversy and handicapped with an unworkable const~o~never

surmounted its initial difficulties. The membership was always

34Ormond deCharms Odhner, "The Cincinnati Third Society,

1838; Genesis of the A~ademy Movement" (unpublished Ms., AA,1962),
p. 8. Odhner interprets DeCharms' resignation as a' protest of
-,--
Thomas Worcester's e isco al plan for the government of theGeneral
Convention.
-­
35_1_.,
Ib 'd pp. 18, 19.
 (-0

small 36 and when DeCharms departed for Philadelphia after fifteen

months with his brainchild the group began to disintegrate. A new

-
full-time minister was called but this protege of DeCharms, one
- ~

l'Nathan C. Bum1)am,) was quickly confronted with charges' of heresy'

by one of the Third Society~e':9ing~mbers. 37 In the early 1840' s

most of the members of the Third Society returned to the First Society

- --
and in 1845 the property of the former was sold. 38

DeCharms ad~itted that his strong, plain preachi~g'had

r provoked(the schism,! but he had no apologies because he believed

- ~-- --~- ­
I ~t in the early years of New Church history such struggles were
(
essential for spiritual growth. The New Church needed purging and

tes ting in order to prepare it for the onslaughts of Hell which would
--- - - : .. ­ ~

inevitably precede the New Church's triumph over the Old Church.
~
/.-­
The unpleasant but necessa;s dlsor~r/would gradually be replaced by
. ) the Lord's perfect state of~rder. 39 .

"
This view of the role of controversy, plus DeCharms' con­

- - - ----
fidence that the order of things he was preaching coincided with the

36Smith, "Rise in Ohio, " OSAHSQ, 387. ~ncQa~t

was one of the original members of the Third Society.

3 MHo G. Williams to Richard DeCharms, June 17, 1841, AA.

Ironically, the lilallW 0 made the charges against Bu!J}h.g.rn tee
became his father-in-law. Nathan urnha!!) married /.M.ar.}l ancoas.

-
daughter of the man who was~gmesis1in Cincinnati and the
~rge/of . '. 'Ra hVOil in Lan~ many years later.
- -
380utline History of Cincinnati, p. 13.

39Richard DeCharms, "Reasons for Resignation," pp. 4, 6.

 94
,
Lord's intentions for the N~w Church, made Richard DeCharms a

crusader. H1s teach1ng hit C1nc1nnatians from the pulpit and other

western New Churchmen 1n the pages 0 • the Precursor The

Precursor was a Western Association or Convention ournal, but

{~Char~was its editor and ~ost of its orig1nal material came from

his well-1nked pen. In this magazine DeCharms eXQLessed in rint

~ the first time the distinctive set of princiI1les which had_b:en

formulating in his mind for years.

For example, in an article entitled "Disorders.......Must Needs

Attend the New Church in Its Beginnings, " DeCharms compared the

church to man's physical growth and development. As man passes

through infancy and childhood to maturity, so must the New Church

slough off its hereditary evils from the Old Church and advance to

maturity.40 In the mature church, which would endure forever,

variety of form would still exist but on principles the New Church

would be "one harmonious whole" bound in unity by "the'golden

girdle of charity. ,,41

On the basis of ~eQIY of New Church development,-

DeCharms did not interpret the issues in C1ncinnaU as signifying a

local squabble. Instead the heart of the matter was whether the

40Richard DeCharms, "Disorders Must Needs Attend the

New Church 1n Its Beginnings," Precursor, I, No. 22 (1839). 361-362.
~-

41 Ib1d ., p. 363.
 G
9S

Cincinnati Society and the whole New Church were to be permitted to

relapse from ~ state of relative order to anarchy.

~ ---.-
42 Specifically

( !?y ministers.
----
DeCharms had in mind the efforts to restore the old pattern of three
~
This move presupposed the ~eunion of the First and

l Second societies with Richard DeC~s being the price of the union. 43

And this is the reason why, here, in Cincinnati, on the

.
very spot where I have been opposed and traduced in,
as my heart tells me,~ the faithful discharge of
-
my
ministerial duties, '1 plant my foot, and still wave the
banner of those principles of order for which, from my
very first breath in the church, I have contended, and,
with the divine will, sha 11 till my death contend. 44

In order to contend, DeCharms resigned from the First Society,

\ helped create the Third Society, and stirred up a c_Ioud of controversy

)
that did not settle until there were two distinct New Church bodies in

the United States. A Cincinnati New Churchman summed up the

- ~

We have had a "blow up" in our first society. We have

----
dispute in the following manner to former lay preacher Edwin Atlee.

no preacher. Mr. DeCharms has resigned, and is editing

The Precursor. The cause of his resignation is simply
this: He was appointed delegate to the Eastern Conven­
r tion. ~ g his ~s~nce the first society invited the

l s~cond to partake with them of the Lord's Supper in the

. temple--Mr. Hurdus administering--which was done in

,
-
an affectionate social manner ming led Witi1 feelings-;f .
brotherly love. . . • as soon as"the pastor of the flock //
hadhear~at had been done, his heart ,;as troubled to

f2DeCharms, "Reasons for Resignation," p. 19.

43 Ibid .• pp. 14, 17, 21, 42-44.

44 Ibid ., p. 18.

 96

th~ ~ and he lame,!!ed that the!e had be~n adultery

committed with his wife during his absence. He
applied for a divorce. which was with as little hesita­
tion granted. 45

DeCharms dismissed the letter as the produ~of ~ "~,

pitiful mind. ,,46 but as late as 1849, in the Newchurchman Extrq he

was still vindicating himself by publishing letters from 1837 and

subsequent years that related to his resignation. 47 And in spite of

the importance which he attached to the formation of the Cincinnati

Third Society DeCharms did not remain with it long. Events tran­

spiring in the East presaged more decisive influence for himself and

his principles there. ~39 he returned to his_ho,me to\Y..n, Phila­

~a, as th~_~tor of!he first Soci~y of that city.

The Philadelphia pos..!tion offered a ba$e from'which DeCharms

could marshall an offensive against BQ.sJQn and_ the General Conven­

.------ -­
tion. the antithesis of his own concept of church order In thiS

operation his chief ally waslChat:!es J. - ~gh'!y of New York. 48

45 Ibid., pp. 53-54. This quotation is a quotation within a

letter from Edwin Atlee to Richard DeCharms. DeCJlilrms deni. d ever
claiming.' "adultery" hadbeen-committed when Hurdus preached for
him. "Documents for New Church History. " Newchurchman Extra,
I-III (1843-1844), 137.

46DeCharms, "Reasons for Resignation. " p. 56.

47Richard DeCharms, "Some Transactions in the First New

Jerusalem SOCiety of Cincinnati. " Newchurchman Extra, II (1849),

Appendix to "A Report on the Trine. " pp. xxxii-xli.

48DeCharms. "Autobiography," pp. 74-75. See the New­

:1 churchman.I (I841), ~I for thecorresponde':.c~etweenC. J.
!29ughty and QeCharms.
 97

T~ether they mapped out strategy for the organization of a rival

convention.
--
Their[gentra1 or Middle Conventionrformally organized

1n 1840 with Doughty as President and the bulk of the members

residents of New York, Pennsyl~ania and Maryland. 49 DeCha,rms

also founded a new periodical to represent the views of the Central

~---
Convention and counteract the New Jerusalem Magazine-lThe Ne';;­

churchman}

The actual printed caU for a Middle Convention was a

~~ty,:!W0 page treatise issued by Richard DeCharms from Phila­

delphia. The immediate provocation for the Call was a change of

direction by the General Convention as evidenced in the ~s

of Order of 1838. SO DeCharms traced the roots of the problem back

-
to 1828 and BostonS 1 but the choice of that date over any other in

49A fulllist of early members of the Central Conventi'on can

be found on page 17 of the Central Convention Journal of Proceedings.
t. The names of the first Acting Committee can be found in the New­
churchman. I (1841). 24.
, :J
.SORichard DeCharms. Reasons and Principles for S!. Middle
Convention of the New Jerusalem in the United States (Philadelphia:
Brown, Bicking, and Guilbert. 1840). p. 7. The New York Second
and the Cincinnati Third Society were formed in 1838, but the new
Rules of Order of that year were not the only reason for ~ding.

_ 5l Ibid . One of the most prominent New Church historians.

C. T. Odhner, placed the root of the disintegration of relations
betv1eentJ1e Convention and Pliiladefphiaat 182 , when the Phila­
delphia Society suffered financial disaster and-1!oston was able to
moveinio the gap. See Odhner. "DeCharms," New Church Life,
XXIII. No. 2 (February. 1903). 77.
 the 1820' s seems rather arbitrary. Probably it represents the time

-----
whenrDeCharms jully realized how incompatible his developing
,
concepts were with those 0' Thomas Worce~te.EY Certainly he would

not have gone to Boston in 1826-1827 had he be~n aware of the

-
impassable gulf that existed between them.

If DeCharms did sincerely believe that 1828 was a crucial

year for New Church deve'lopment he did not allow it to immediately

,­
sever all communication with ~ster Qr the.Genera~ Conventi0r::J

HONever, in the year 1838 when he helped found the Cincinnati Third

Society he must have resolved that to fi hLWo~ and the Con­

vention any longer from within was useless. In the rolls of Conven­

tion Proceedings there is no record of DeCharms sitting as a delegate

to the annual meetings after 1837, and in the voluminous corres­

pondence of New Church people there is no evidence that DeCharms

ever wrote tb Thomas Worcester after 1838. In fact, Worcester

\ claims that since 1839 DeCharms had not written to him even once. 52

52Thomas Worcester to Richard DeCharms, July 26, 1854,

AA. This letter is particularly interesting because of DeCharills'­
editorial comments in the margins. He debated with himself on
whether or not to answer Worcester. His decision nott'O'f'e ly was
based on the conviction that the letter was more ofVi1O"iCester"'s
craftiness: and to respond would be to place oneself back under his
~neful'sphere ~ in~nce. See also T: Worcester to(Condy Ragli;0
November 20, 1841, AA. In thi 9urteen-p<rg'e i-etter WorceSle-­
defends himself agains DeCharms' attacks and argues that ,DeCharms
has made no seriOl:i"Seffort to understand what the Conventio~ds
for.
 The formation of the Convention by DeCharms and Doughty

was not simply a personal po~r play, or a ~gional struggle f<:r

p~r, although those elemen~s were pres_ent because the persons

and societies involved saw the predominance of their rivals as

-- ~

dangerous to New C~rch growth. 53 The whole controversy must be

placed within a larger religious context to gain an accurate under~

standing of it.

Consciously DeCh':.!:.ms, Worcest~r;9 the men loyal to

r -- -
, each of them believed they were la boring for divinel -illlEointed ends,
'.-- -­ /
<;lOO each group was able to enlist New Church tradition on their side.

Ever since the teachings 'of Swedenborg had begun to spread through­

out the world in the late eighteenth century two se~ate alignments

--
of principles had been slowly forming.
.
Thus both groups could appeal

to Swedenborg and to other "Founding Fathers" for support. Sub­

consciously the same psychological factors (self esteem, status,

power) were operating on these New Churchmen as well as all other

elite groups of the period.

53 Block , New Church, pp. 189, 200. Block fails to seri­

ously, consider in her analysis a cultural fact of some importance;
namely, anti-Yankee sentiment. While thiS animosity was charac­
teristic of people inside the New Church and outSide, New Churchmen
gave the feeling an unusual twist. Yankee "remains" were respon­
sible for some of the-p-ecTil1ar doctrines and attitudes of New England
Swedenborgians.
-_._-~
--­
 The system of principles for which DeCharms contended

grew out of his high view of Swedenborg as a unique agent of the

Lord's special revelation to man. From this authoritative set of

writings DeCharms gleaned the following: the trinal or threefold

order of the New Church priesthood; the necessity of external~rder

-----
as regulated by that~priesthood; and the distinctiveness of the New
. -----'
Church as compared to the Old, which involved re-baptism and the

refusal to recognize as truly Christian any religious body but the

New Church. 54

This system was not original with DeCharms in its entirety,

r:- - ' ­
fort Jona1h~dy: nd §amuel Nobl~certainlygave DeCharms many

of the ideas which he expoul)ded. But DeCharms was the first

-- - --
American to espouse these principles as an exclusive system of
~

-----
doctrine and attempt to implement them in New Church life.

system can be labeled sectarian (the term is not meant to convey a

The

value judgment) b~cause of i~s concept of special revelation, its

definition of the Church, and its attitude toward the world.

Without qu"estion the key to ~eological framework was

the authority of Swedenborg's writings. These inerrant and infallible

writings were to be the guide to interpreting the Scriptures, and

54Odhner, "Third Society, " p. 6. In a reply to a request

William Benade outlined these and othe~ differences betweent~
JI Convention and the Academy in 1886. William Benade to Chauncey
Giles, January 28, 1886, SSRA. ~ '­
 101

consequently the standard for the life of the New Church. In Boston

Swedenborg was regarded as an agent of the Lord to reinterpret the

Scriptures, not to provide a new revelation to supersede them. His

writings were reliable and worthy of serious study, but they were not

infallible. In short, they were for instruction, not authority. 55

A second theological issue which separated Worcester and

""
DeCharms related to the external(order of the New Church as an
--------
organization, in short, its polity. Both men accepted to some degree

the trinal order of the ministry with the divisions of pastor, priest

or minister, and ordainingC-l'Tlinis~.

- ,/ Each category assumed more
......

spiritual maturity and consequently involved more authority than the

previous degree. The ordaining~~comprised the authoritative

elite of the New Church. 56 But £e~s, at least in the 1830's and
..-­
1840's, was not ready to follow W~er in the logical outgrowth of

"55Richard DeCharms, "Is SweQenborg What He Says He Is?"

Precursor, I, No. 4 (January, 1837), 58-63. Richard DeCharms,
"Authority of Swedenborg," Precursor, I, No. 21 (1839), 348-352.
For the Convention view of Swedenborg see Joseph "Pettee, "Credibility
and Authority of Swedenborg's Writings, " ~ Ierusalem Magazine,
:lOQ(VI, No. 11 (1864), 523-529. For DeCharms' interpretation of the
trouble with Boston over Swedenborg's authority and the conjugial
heresy see, "Documents for New Church History, " Newchurch_man
Extra, I-Ill, No. 1 (1843-1844), 156 pp. Much valuable correspond­
ence is reprinted in these pages, most of it in full.
56 " - .
DeCharms, Precursor, I, pp. 45, 121. For~!J!l.s·.

)\ ~(L!J:!!!!ling on the ministry see "A Report on the Trine," New­

churchman Extra, II (1849), ~9.
L
ry IN' ~
A ~ ~ip.11h I; 2/--"~-r rn
l.
",.~~~/~:
'= I"

htA<; ft-,.
~
S-dJ.
.:>
~~
v... , t:. "" Ur.
J·d4,.I
.V .
.I'
'V ~
. _ 102
<..>i!-}f •

such a hierarchical ministry. He refused to endorse an episcopal

form of church government for the whole New Church. 57 While no

~emocratic)radical.lik~some of the anti-clerical New Chur~n

who shared his antiP.Slthy to the General Convention and Boston.

DeCharms did continue to argue for the complete autonomy of the

local society. 58

Another cluster of differences between DeCharms and

Worcester involved certain New Church distinctives designed to set

receivers of Swedenborg apart from a corrupt Old Church. Baptism

was one of the most important of these because it symbolized one's

New Church purity. Boston and New York had rejected0ap~

as a requirement for membership early in their histories; Phila-

delphia had made it optional; and Baltimore was one of the few to

make it obligatory. 59 But as new societies formed in the years

after 1830. and added converts to Swedenborg from the Old Church,

a new emphasis OnEbap tiS!!1 emerged.

.-
Both the Cincinnati Third

Society and the New York Second Society reqUired~e-baPtis.&of

their new members, as a test of one's attitude toward the .Old Church

and one's loyalty to the New Church.

57DeCharms. Middle Convention, p. 8.

58DeCharms. Precursor, I, 316, 332, 343. 361. 378. 390.

Block. N~w Church. p. 190.

59 Block • New Church, p. 186,

 As vital as all these theological issues wer.etothe dispute

between Worcester and DeCharms. none of them became the obvious

and constant irritant that th~nJ~ial heresy became. Even though

Thomas Worcester had ostensibly dropped tha~ bombshell of a theory

by 1827. and had finally been ordained by the General Convention. 60

-;::::::"

the excitement of ~7 and 1838 in Cincinnati revealed that no one

had forgotten it. As has been noted. Charms\ ~a~~~e

me~'s fears and suspicions about the conjugial question to his own

advanta~e in forming the Cincinnati Third Society and the Central

Convention. He tended to blame the conjugial error.for most New

Church problems and of course was wary of Worcester's silence on

the matter. 61 Who could tell whether or not Worcester still held to

it; perhaps his s~lence wa ~actic to gain ordina~~and a p0illi2I!

fro~o_unciermine he New~h.

Whether DeCharms' suspicions were well....fQ.und~otin

1840, he was not alone in having them and opposition to the conjugial
~

heresy within the New Church served as mortar to cement together

the members of the Central Convention. When those same members

became convinced that the conjugial heresy had been completely

destroyed/their loyalty to the yo_ung convention ~egan to wane. As

60 Ibid., pp. 190. 192-193.

61Thomas Worcester to R. DeCharms, July 26. 1854. AA.

 104

early as 1845, when DeCharms left Philadelphia for Baltimore, signs

of dlsintegration were appearing and ~JJ34.9, with no traces of

conJugialism in the General Convention~62 most Central Convention

men seemed willing for a reconciliation.

From 1849 on the

-
Ce~al Convention was moribund,

although its formal death did not come until 1852. DeCharms had

let himself be wooed since obviously

--- ~
weapon capable of evoking the
--
e no longer wielded a symbolic

suppor~_~~a~operpetuate the

Central Convention. The reconciliation was never complete,

DeCharms never rejoined the General Convention in spirit and Con­

vention Proceedings show that he never again attended the annual

meeting as a delegate. Also, serious issues remained unresolved,

left to bubble beneath the surface like the contents of a hot pie

beneath the crust. When the heat intensified later chances were good

that an eruption even greater than the first one would occur. In 1850.

however, peace reigned supreme. Even in the West the Western

Convention had sought and gained rea mission into the Genera..L.92n­

vention
----.
after maintaining its separate existence since 1838.

- --
An interpretation of the role of the Central Convention in
-
Ne~ ~hurch affairs was_.~C)nv~yed by(.wl:iliam Benade to-tames ~St~arV .

62" Report of the {Co"'ffi'ittee on the RtJes oCQr.d r " New

Ierusalem Magazine. XVI. No. 11 (1843), 428. ~nj~F~t,
Address from the General Convention . To the General Conference-l
• " New Jerusalem Ma_gaZ-in~ XIX, No. 11 (1846), 443-447.
 os
in June. 1850. Benade believed the Central Convention had done a

great service in fre~g t~N~~hurch from the stain of conJugialism.

but he. expressedCdistaste for the way the body had been run.
- - ---
Meetings had been marked by us~less bickering--..9Y~sill~grandiose

schemes.

If Mr. an.:. had been willin a member of the

C.:-9.• instead of desirin to be . s ru er. it might have
continued to exist--but as this was not the case, it had
to perish. 63

For this reason •. Benade ~d, he could not support the Central

Convention. nor was it a suitable instrument for his own purposes. 64

in 1850 many New Churchmen seemed to have lost their

zest for controversy. or at least for ecclesiastical dispu~n.J Even

DeCharms. "the great controversialist among us at present, ,,65 tried to

disengage himself from controversy, although with meagre success. 66

Perhaps his financial troubles, after 1850 mad~ore conscious of

his need of support from the whole New Church and acted as a
----- ----.
deterrent. or perhaps he felt that if he could n t g t h e New Church

to the glorious heights ,he had envisioned for her he was no.!.. going to

~·Jwilliam Benade, to ~P. Stuart, June 5, 1850, AA.

>- --"" - ­
64 Ibid •

65william Benade to James 'P. Stuart, January 22. 1850, AA.

66R. DeCharms to George Bush, November 5, 1850, Bush

Letterbooks. V (1850), SSRA.
 106

~ efforts
1850 DeCharms-"
support\any.one

~d
to do so. Whatever the reason, after

t9-shift his writingJr.Q!Il-p-urely d09trinal matters

to_is~u~such as ~ery, S~ual1sm, and ~eopathy.

Richard DeCharms returned to his hometown of Philadelphia

in 1850, but not as a pastor of a local society. Baltimore was his

last regular charge. As always, his activities there ranged far beyond

his own pulpit. He helped establish the Washington, D. C. New

---
Chl.lrch Society, ordainin 'Rufus Dawes,as pastor. 67 He also wrote

profusely. Among his major works of these years 1845-1850 were

Freedom aod Slavery, 68 and the massive Report on the Trine which

required fourteen hours daily for over a year. 69 When he returned to

Philadelphia he did so with no job and impaired health due to the

rigors of preceding years.

Ever since he had left Philadelphia twenty-four years earlier

to prepare for the New Church ministry, DeCharms had been plagued

about the best means to serve his Lord and his church. He came to

b~e ~uale!lts were such that the New Church should support
'/
him~ll-time as a general minister, not burdened by the cares of any

~e s~~. b~ e to write, publish, and plan for the whole church.

67DeCharms. "Autobiography," p. 81.

68 Ibid .• p. 82.

69 Ibid .• p. 78.

 107

- --- - . --.
To let the New Church know tha t he was not going to let their lq,ck
­
of initiative deter him any longer, he set himself up in Philadelphia

as a general literary and printing agent for the New Church and
---4- - -- ­
.~ . ~

announced that he was read~upport and patronage.

The difficulties inherent in such an independent venture

proved overwhelming. Even if he had been appointed to the position

by the General Convention, which he was not, DeCharms would have

'"
had trouble supporting his large family. 70 His first appeal fo~
/'

...::­
came in 1851 and was intended to draw in funds to help pay for his

printing office; The result was a~ inad~.9uate three hundred dollars. 71

------
After this setback DeCharms must have decided to make a last effort

to return to preaching, for he accepted the call of the New York

_.------~

Society to candidate there in the summer of 1852.

70Ibid •• pp. 109-111. DeCharms' eight children were,

Elizabeth, who died in the first year of her life; Sarah, who later
became the second wife of the Rev. John R. Hibbard of Chicago; Mary,
who married a Philadelphia Barclay; George, who died fighting in the
Civil War; William. who died in 1901 in Cincinnati; Richard r.,
who becam~Churchminister and supported the Academy move­
ment; Eadith;and Virginia. Even in the years before 1850 New

~
Churchmen were supporting the education of DeCharms' children. In
1846 Timothy Shay Arthur of Philadelphia asked William Benade to
contact ke men at the upcoming Central Convention meeting about
inc~eaSi.!!9 their financJ?l assi~ce for theeducation ofthe ~ren.
Arthur singled out N. F. Cabell, Daniel Lammot, Samuel Barclay,
William Chauvenet, A. Thomas Smith, and a Captain Page as
promising contacts. T. S. Arthur to Benade. June 2, 1846. AA.

('11DeCharms, "Ourselves." pp. 181-184.

 108

The full story of that summer will be told later; here it is

only necessary to say that his controversial preaching on Sp~~m

did not secure the job for him. 72 A Philadelphia New Churchman

related to a friend in November of the same year that DeCharms had

given up preaching. 73 December brought forth? des..Eer..ate second

appeal to the New~ch. The printing office was established as

a result of the firs t plea and personal sacrifice; he had paper and

ideas; but no money was available to run the press and keep his

family alive. 74

Shall I appeal to you this second time in vain? . .

~ Hasthe de~otion of my Ilast life iven me no claims

. upon you? or must I be t~rned off, like·;;; hard-worked

ananow worthless old horse, to starve on the common?

f Whatever you do, do it quickly! Recollect tha tat this
) v~_'!l9-me.nt my children are stretching out t eir an s
, for bread which I cannot give them! . . . The case is
urgent. If the church discards me, I must go t he
~ ! Methinks I stand on a beetling cliff: the vast
ocean of common society outspread below me; the
elevated plateaus of spiritual use and duty rising one
over another high up, and stretching far inward, above
me. My eyes are turned to you. my brethren. By the
wave of your handl--Imay go u.1l-t.o high emprise; or,
plunging~to t~boiling caldron ~lo~ disappear from
/
CZ3beCharms, "Autobiography." pp. 85-86.

73William Benade to James P. Stuart, November 22, 1852,

AA.
4 . .
'chard DeCharms, Second Appeal to ~ Members of the
New Jerusalem. December, 1852 (Philadelphia: Richard DeCharms,
1852), pp. 2-3.
 (:5>

your sight beneath its surface, and the place that

now knows me in the visible church, know me no
more forever! 75

- --
This dramatic second appeal garnered eight hundred dollars. 7 6

In spite of that generous response DeCharms could never rise out of

--,---­
his financial straights because he could never win sustained.

( r~u1~ support as a "general" minister of the New ~hurch. He

--­
~ld {:lo.Leven sell ~ks he was able~rint. In the Fall of

1854 DeCharms lamented that'6utside employm~ illness, and

,.,---------- .-' ./

poverty~ driving him into the grou~nd the sale of his own

works was not alleviating the situation. In the last four months he

had only received $12.60 from such sales. 77 While he naturally felt

that !10 one wanted him or his works, a fellow Philadelphian saw the

problem in a slightly different light.

He cannot succeed in the way in which he i§...!l9w

proceeding. He ties nis own hands so that he_cannot
fulfill his promises; and this destroys all confidence.
It does appear to be a subject 'Of deep regret--that~
a~ojher gifts. he has not received that~~e
--comIEon sense. 78

7 5Ibid ., p. 16.

76DeCharms, "Ourselves," pp. 184-1.90.

77 R1chard DeCharms to'Ge~ge El .b~ April 24, 1854. Bush

Letterbooks, XIII, SSRA.

7
illiam Benad~toJa;nes P. Stuart March 1. 1853. AA.
 110

DeCharms' last effort to sustain himself in New Church use

was the revival of the Newchurchman, a successful periodical of

earlier years. But in 1855 it became apparent that this gallant move

was doomed to failure also. F.inally the frustration of yea~st

fo~h in ~ngthy diatri~n the Newchurchman in which DeCharms

defended himself, probably as much for his own benefit as to answer

his detractors. For a moment DeCharms threw open the shutters of

his ~fe, releasing th.e pent-up-' bi~S of a heart torn by exalted

hopes a"nd dashed dreams. The most tragic aspect of the piece is his

intense sincerity, through which he reveals hi~o.-!al inability to

comprehend what had gone wrong. He believed he knew why he was

being persecuted. He saw himself as the chosen instrument of the

~rd~espised by men, to expose ~e self-love of the New ~ h by

means of his bold rhetoric and then to lead it to new maturity with his

voluminous writing. 79

~
You have had u~inducted into the ministerial office i.n
your church, why do you not sustain us in it? Q~L~pjJe
our shrinking reluctance, you dragged us from the shades
of obscurity, and:-putting us in leading positions, made
us your standard-bearer on the ramparts of our Holy City
in the defence of its vital principles, why have you now
abandoned us at our post, andIefi: us to fight 0 all
alone in "th; imminent deQ.di'Y_Qreqch?" Have we dis­
turbed and rent the church asunder with our heresies?
No. Have we preached C!!ly-! lse doctrine: ~ has
a
preferred that charge. Have we lived manifestly
immoral life? Even the breath of calumny has not dared

~1eCharms, "Ourselves," pp. 167-170.

 to brea the it. Are we incompetent? Few. if any,
o~nly assert it. Have we not been sincere. faitnful
and'bonest in the discharge of our duties? No one
doubts or denies it. Then why have we bee virtually
"knocked down and kicked out" of the minist;Y? That
is the question we are now constrained tOCi'iscuss
and answer at least satisfactorily to ourselves. But
we will only ask just now, Is it not because we preach
unpalatable truths, and advocate un~princiPles,
in the church ?80

At the end of this third appeal DeCharms firmly assures the

New Church that it will hear from him no more .

. I have now done. I have said my very last say about

myself and my works. In the futl:ire I shall keep my
mouth shut and sealed on these most unworthy and
unpleasant subjects. 81

Rather, he would f~~3_n speak "only of those things which con­

cern the good of souls. and pertain to men's eternal peace. ,,82 But

in 1861 a long silence was broken with the publication of a Circular

\
2 ) designed to. raise money subscriptions to set DeCharms u~ a

( plumbing and gas fitting establishment.

The circular begins with a notice that DeCharms has not

paid his rent. cannot pay it, and is about to be eVicted. DeCharms

himself adds that he does not even have car fa@ to go ani'Ythere.

80Ibid .• pp. 155-157.

81 Ibid .• p. 215.

82 Ibid . In I~nuary. 1857 DeCharms did send a private

appeal for aid torC~aunceyGi~in Ohio. DeCharms to Giles.
January 24. 1857. SSRA.
 that he has been abandonedb his wife and family, and that he has

for some five years been living in semi-starvation with no bed to

sleep on and very little clothing to wear. The notice closes with a

statement of backing from New Churchmen who were trying to permit

DeCharms to "continue a life of usefulness on the lower plane of

~mmon socie~" They were willing to forget his "polemic writings,

peculiar theological notions, or even his obnoxious political

opinions. ,,83

Richard DeCharms died in obscurity in 1863. The events of

his last years are shrouded in secrecy. 84

@bircular (n. p., 1861), 1 p. A copy of this circular with

the names of two fifty-dollar ubscribers is in theSwedenborg School
Archives. - -~ ---

. 84In the Academ Archives in Bryn Ath n there is a body of

,(.!~striSled material on DeCh~..rE1s,most of which relates to the last
years of his life. Only New Church ministers are permitted to see
these documents. ~his restricted material was not usedby thi~
J researcher. In correspondence in 1860 N. F. Cabell' entions-
returning some papers DeCharms had sent to him for examination.
Cabell suggests that DeCharms take them to hi,S attorney. He also
refers to the "delicate"
. - -and "J)ainful" entanglement~
of DeCharms
with regret and concern. Given DeCharms' financial embarrassment
shtce 1850, and the inferences of Cabell's letters. one might guess
that DeCharms was in marital trouble. Whether this was-allthat
~as involved is impossible to say without access t'o the res'tricted
f' \'1.0 materials. N. F. Cabell to R. DeCharms, July 13 and Augus t 3.
1860,-AA.
 CHAPTER V

THE INTERNAL STRUCTURE OF THE

SWEDENBORGIAN COMMUNITY

CRich~d DeChar"is had always been a self-propelled dynamo,

a prolific writer, an energetic lecturer. and an indefatigible traveler.

He was a dedicated man in a hurry. As he labored to define the,

nature of the New Church and institute his own vision of the Church's

future, men and events thwarted him. By 1856 he was in a position

similar to the one in which he had launched his career as a New

Church minister in 1826. He was penniless, frustrated, and ham­

strung by his past. The major difference was that the Richard

DeCharms of 1856 was out of time.

Such tragedy does not mean tha t DeCharms' life had no

further impact on the 'New Church. He lived to see his religious

principles defended by others. and although he perhaps did not

realize what was happening beneath the surface of New Church cir­

cumstances, before his death in 1863 his ideas had been incorporated

into a theological stance. T..!!i1i Academy_p02.iti0!1 ~ame the basis

~ormation of the G_e_n_eral_C_h_u_rch_o_f_P_e_nn_sylvanii! inj.!..l·Si---,,-,,-,:w...il.:.._ _~

The Academy or "Harmony" leadership in the late 1850's and during

113 .
 114

the 1860' s worked within the General Convention to accomplish

their goals rather than through a separate organization like~

CentralConventionl William Benade, 'Nathan C. Burnh~m:, and)am~s

,Park Stuart were three of the most prominent Academy ~.

A second group within the Swedenborgian community of the

mid-nineteenth century looked to Boston for leadership. and supported

I the General Convention as it was constituted at the time. This

~~_Conventio_np"'arty was led by Thomas Wo~c~Efr. Theophil~s

Parson~ Sampson Reed and t Caleb Reed among others. After 1853

the New Ierusalem C:zine ecame the official organ of the Con­
...­
vention, switching from the unofficial status it had borne since 1827 .
./
In 1855 thej;onv ntion also purchased the New Ierusalem Messenger.

The w/:kly Messenger rather than the more rigidly controlled

/

GagaZi~' be~ame the arena for Academy-Convention debates in the

1860's.

The New Church contained a third element also. a group

so diverse in its composition that the designatio~ '~Free Spirits n)

I\I
seems appropriate. The'Free Spirits lwere strongly anti-sectarian

and anti-Con~tion. Somewere '0 anti-In"""tiona!. likefRemy

Tames, Sr.1. that they refused to associate with the organized New
---~'
Church. Others like iWilliam Elder of Indiana expressed anti­

clerical sentiments. Still others were at one time affiliated with

an organized society of New Churchmen, or a convention. but now

 115
~ r-­
s_h1e~wayJro_such attachments. B. F. Barret He Weller.

'Thomas LakeHarri~\ an ~"1'George Bus 'Jfall into this latter category.

A distinctive feature of the.Free Spirits was their propensity for

1: Academy Movement

Richard DeCharmsJ lamented in his appeal of 18SS to the

"
New Church that he had been" kicked" aside 'by his brethren."'/- That
_.--- ------­
charge was true in that no society was willing to risk its internal
--------- -
peace by' inViting him to become the pastor. and the New Church as

a whole was not going to break precedent and .!.stablish ~ch an

erratic person as its general spokesman. But DeCharms did have

loyal friends such as N. F. Gabell.l0f Virginia and'Nathan C.

Burnham., I

.......=....~~
Iwas born January 11. 1813. at Woodville, Jefferson

Count):". New York. He became a receiver of Swedenborg some

seventeen years l~ter, and like DeCharms faced the ~ecision of

'- (whether or not to enter the N;:' Church mini~;' 2 ~ut Burnham did

not possess at seventeen ~emptive urgency and compelling

• R. Hibbafcilto}j:-p. Stuart. December ?, 1861, AA.

Hibbard calls attention to the fact that DeCharms is in Chicago on a
visit to NCB. N. F. Cabell1to;R. De'Charms, July 13 and August 3, ,
1860. AA. - ­

N. C. Burnham "Journal of Life" (unpublished autobiography,

AA), p. 1.
 116

--- -----
vlslOQ.Qf. a DeCharms at thirty. Time was not pressing him. Delaying

his choice of a final career. Burnham read law for a while and then

--- --
drifted into schooltea"ching. 3 He was engaged as a teacher in
~

Seville. Ohio. when he received an invitation to come to Cincinnati

to serve the Cincinnati Third Society as la ~ader. 4

--"~

In Cincinnati ,Burnham made at least three significant life

commitments: \?ecoming a minist~rial protege.£! Richard DeCharms.

maqying Mary A. Pancoast on October 25. 1842. and enteringE:to

.~
the study of medicine. For three winters. 1840-1842. Burnham

attended lectures at the Medical College of Ohio while fulfilling

~stocal responsibilities for the Cincinnati Third Society. While

Burnham arrived to lead the Third Society after DeCharms had

departed for Philadelphia. he wrote to DeCharms regularly for advice

about the ministry.

My desire is that my end may be use. I wish that under

the Lord. I may be enabled so ~ng-®.!..Qle banner of
this New Church. with the celestial folds glittering with
heavenly light. and flaiming Isic] with heavenly heat. as
that some needy souls may be taken with its supreme
sweetness:-and its unbounded lovliness. and casting
their Midols to the mobs and the bats." may cOi11e;and,
Alby keePing the ~mandments. "enter in through the gates
IV[ into the city." where they can find "rest to their souls. "
)

3 Ibid•• p. 2.

4lbid.

SBumham to DeCharms. January 22. 1840, AA.

 -- 117

-DeCharms' reply took the form of a letter whichlSamuel Noble

~ '----­

-
had composed for him in 1832 in response to an inquiry about the

ministry. Noble's twelve p'!..ges of mi~roscopic' detail outlined a life

")l of preparatio_,: and revealed t~th o~ th~t English :heolo;::::

scholarship. 6 DeCharms was obviously impressed with Bumham's

-
enthusiasm. for he enlisted him in the ranks of the preparatory meeting

held to launch the Central Convention in May. 1840. 7 However.

Burnham for some reason did not join the movement until February.

1845. 8

In spite of this delayed support on the part of Burnham. the

two men became firm friends in the time Burnham remained in Cin­

- -
cinnati.The young man posted letters to his mentor on every con­

ceivable subject as if he were consulting an oracle. His abhorrence

of himself 9 and his admiration for DeCharms 10 were unbounded.

~

During these ye~JDeCharms:performed ;Burnham' S' marriage to M~ry

Pancoast and ordained him into the firs_t and second degrees ~ e
-
N:::-_Church ministry. 11

0Burnham to DeCharms. March 31. 1840. AA. samUel~le))

!O DeCharms. June 12. 1832. AA.
7 Burnham. "Journal." p. 3.

8Burnham to DeCharms. February 24. 1845. M.

9,Burnham to DeCharms. September 9. 1840. AA.

lOBurnham to DeCharms. January 15. 1842. AA.

1lBurnham. "Journal." pp. 2. 4-5.

 118

After resigning from the Third Society in December, 1842,

1 Burnham moved on to ~r~e new Second Society_i!1 Ba~'::n0re. In

\ the one year there he once again attended medical lectures, this time

I ~urnhams then
- -
at the University oCMaryland. 12 The packed off to

New York for a stint in 1844 as pastor of the New York Second Society

and more medical training. 13 The winter of 1845-1846 found them

back in Cincinnati.

Up to 1846iliathan Burn~n1 had not found satisfaction in the

ministry. Perhaps he was too intense in his.R:e~hing, as DeCharms

had proved to be, for him to remain long with anyone society.

- - ---
Medicine' was also a constant possibility, and finally he entered

~Homeopathic apprenticeship in Columbus, Mississippi. 14 Burnham

~ped through medical practices with the same ease as pastorates.

In 1847 he was in Mississippi, in 1848 in Cincinnati, in 1850 in

Peoria. Illinois. 15

12Ibid., p. 6 1/2. W. H. Hinkley to George Bush, April

16, 1855, Bush Letterbooks, XV (1855), SSRA. Burnham to DeCharms,
April 17, 25, 1843; June 25, 1848, AA. All of these letters indicate
the existence of three societies at times in Baltimore in the 1840's
and 1850' s. One-was German, one was Academy in principle, and the
third was the descendent of John Hargrove's original society.

13Burnham, "Journal," p. 7.

14 Ibid ., pp. 8-9.

15Ibid., pp. 10-11.

 119

Burnham removed to Philadelphia in ~ but.!9 enter a roofing

\ business 16 rather than another medical practice. By 1856 he was back

~ ---- -.""-­
to schoolteaching in Frankford, Pennsylvania; in 1857 he pract!..sed

n'tedicine in Seville, Ohio; and in 1858 he established himself in

- -- ~

Chic~~.£Ls a physician; and part-time minister. 17 Ch.icago proved to

be one of the most prolonged moves of Burnham's life, for he remained

until 1865, partly because of the war and eartly_due to the preliminary

~ork he was doing onla major theol~ica~~y.\18 In 1865, at his

father-in-law's death, the Burnhams migrated to Lancaster, Pennsyl­

varna, where Nathan was soon elected pastor of the New Church

society there. 19 The last years of his lffe were spent in Lancaster

16Ibid., p. 11. R .li!!..g was a popular business for Sweden­

borgians due to the pioneer work in this field b the Warren brothers,
especially Cyrus in Cincinna~ Their efforts led th~m into-asphalt,
chemistry, and oil with great success. George C. Wa~n; The Pact
of the Warrens in the Development of Coal Tar, Peteoleum Oil and
Asphalt (n.1.: Warren Bros. Co., 1928). 28 pp. Samuel WarrC'~f
began in the business, then studied for the New ChurchmTrlistry
unoerlfL £-jlu;nham in Peoria, Illinois in th~rly.!.850' s. He
followed Burnham to Philadelphia, was licensed to reach there, and
eventually became a minister in Manchester, England, and Brookline,
Massachusetts. ~te in life he re-entered the family business. For
a Ume it appeared as if Warren would embrace the Academy views of
his mentor, but he held a more liberal view of Swedenborg than
~ Burnham and aligned himself more with Boston influence. There is
) an anonymous, undated pamphlet, lBev. Samuel:IDfu Warren in SSRA'
based on autobiographical notes of Warren.

17 Burnham, "Journal," pp. 11-12.

18 Ibid ., p. 12.

19Burnham to S. M. Warren, Septem!Jt;r 12, 1867, SSRA.

 120

and Philadelphia where Burnham staunchly supported ~~emy

J Movement, ~~~ach!ngj"or~~~
P rofessor of Sys~t1c

( Th~o9Y in the Academy. 20

The close friendship of Burnham and DeCharms became

strained in the 1850's and the two men' ceased to correspond.

Burnham never lost interest in DeCharms' plight, however, and in

1861 was still one of DeCharms few' New Church supporters. 21 But

support for his pri~ples did not necessarily mean cooperation with

the man in New Church activities. By 1855 Bumham had come to

the same realiza,tion as/W[Uiam Ben~efin regard to Richard DeCharms.

The question of Mr. DeCharms use to us is one of some

importance. But I would try to get along without him, if
he won't work with us. And I trust we can so get along.
• • . There may be, some~'!2 minis~, that will
ordain for us, that we can consent to receive ordination
from. 22

Burn~m.-.was probably more amenable to including DeCharms

in their plans for a new convention in the New Church than was

~na.de. Burnham felt De~s 'hhould at least be asked if he would

minist~ but
be. the new body's Gdaining
---­
if he refused,'I:-R. F:Hbbard
,

2°An in~ident which violated the sense of community at the'

Academy in Philadelphia caused Academy leaders to ask Burnham to
leave in 1884. "Minutes of the November 4. 1884, Hearing of the
' Academy Council, "AA. Once a ain these materials are restricted to
1'.' \-1., f use b New Church ministers.

21Burnham to Benade, Tune 9, November 9, 1855, AA. T. R.

Hibbard to J. P. Stuart, December ?, 1861, AA.
r--- •

I 2~Burnham to Bena.,ge, October 9, 1855. AA.

 121

of Chicago was his second choice. 23 With or without DeCharms he

favored moving ahead on plans for a new organization under the

control of Benade and himself. 24

I become more and more convinced of the need of

another Gen. body in the ch. in this country. If
ormed on "the Principles, " it certainly can do no
infury. but must do great good. 25

Such a plan was bound to rear the head of con~ersy again

in the New Church. but while Burnham deplored the type of contro­

versy DeCharms had reveled in, that did not mean all disputation was

useless.

A"controversial state" is in general not desirable. -­

Yet it is sometimes necessary, and when so it cannot
be otherwise than useful, if attended with the final end
l
of advancing the true inte'mal interests of the Church.

In regard to controversy. I wd. not engage in it unless

called for by the interests of the Church. I would wind
it up as soon as ever those interests would allow. I
would not, however. in universal terms disparage con­
troversy lest I unjustly dishonor those whose peculiar
StatiOn, temperament, talents, views or circumstances
--
have led them to engage therein frO;; motives of good)
to the church. Controversy always being an undesirable
,

23Ibid. J. R. Hibbard to Benade, March ? 1855. AA.

Hibbard wonders if Benade, Bumham, and DeCharms are trying again
to establish a separate body from the General Convention. He
..;:::- expresses his sympathy for the project and feels DeCharms should
be 'proposed as one of the "Apostles" in the new hierarchical structure.':­

24Burnham to Benade, November 14. December 3. 1855, AA.

25Burnham to Benade. October 9. 1855. AA.

.-.

122

state, I rejoice with you that there seems a prospect

of rest from it with our beloved Church. • . . 26

The attempted revival of the Central Convention or something

simllar to it was announced by Burnham and Benade in a Circular

- . - - - ----. -
which called for a general meeting of all interested persons in June,

1856.
~ --
The basis for the new body was set forth in the circular as

a state ent of "Principles. ,,27 As has already been noted in the

-------~

history of the Lancaster Society, "-Richard-DeCharms eff~ely

squelched ~terest there was in the new group b dominating

- -
the meeting and using it to announce a glorious scheme of his own~
-

- - ....---- ----.
which he had helped create.
- -----
From 1856 on DeCharms completely lost any control over a movement

Benade and Bumham struck off on a

path of their <?wn, with help from men like J. 3. HibbargJand- J. P.

Stuart,

[J~m::- Par~rtJ born in Ripley, Ohio, in 1810, graduated

from Illinois College and studied at Yale before entering ~s­

byterian ministry in·the late 1830's. 28 Stuart left his pastorate i~

Rock Island, Illinois, in 1841 in order to travel throughout the

26Burnham to Stuart, June 21, 1850, AA.

~N. C. Burnham and Willlam Benade, Circular to the

Receiverslof ~ Heavenly Doctrines of the New Jerusalem in the
United States (Philadelphia: n. p., 1855), 8 pp.

28E. J. E. S. Schreck, "Notes on Mr. Stuart's Life, "

(unpublished Ms. , AA), p. 1.
 123

Western Reserve lecturing on science. After another brief stint with

a local church, and exposure to life in the Ohio Phalanx, Stuart bega_n

readin9 Swedenborg under the direction of the/Rev. David Powel.u a

New Church minister. 29

Stuart, and his wife Mary (Leeper), were baptized into the

New Church by Powell in August, 1845. Immediately the former

Presbyterian commenced study for the New Church ministry and in

1846 he wa:1icensed topreac~ 30 He became one of the pioneer

- '"--­
missionaries of the New Church in the Old Northwest, dubbing his

travels through that area as his "wandering through the wilde.!.!!..ess. "

In the late forties ~~had friends in both the Central and General

Convention. 31 but his early association

-
withrpowel~ probably
inclined him toward the former from the start of his ministry.
.......
~--- As early as 1849 James Stu~rt had committed himself

enthusiastically to~ndeavor of establishing a New Church college

in Urbana, Ohio. In accepting a call to pastor the Cincinnati First

Society in 1851 he maintained that loyalty. Finally in late 1853

Stuart moved to Urbana to te.?ch philosophy at the University,.) and his

29 " "
Ibid., pp. 2, 4, 8. James P. Stuart, Reasons for leaVing
the Presbyterian Ministry and Adopting the Principles of the New
Jerusalem Church (Cincinnati: A. Peabody, 1845), 48 pp.

30Schreck, "Notes," pp. 9-10.

31 J . P. Stuart to Mary Stuart, June 11, IS, 1849.

 124

friend Chauncey G~lles.j a former teacher and another firm backer of

Urbana, took his place in Cincinnati. 32 Besides his professorial

duties at Urbana, Stuart pastored the Urbana Society and served as

Secretary of the college's Board of Trustees. In 1859 ~ e r

. 33
abruptly se~r:d m~f th~es and left Urbana.

The years 1858-1859 were decisive in shaping Stuart's

attitude toward the General Convention, for the situation at Urba!1a

which alarmed him was characteristic of the Convention at that time.

Reflecting that it is now tEm...Y~rs since I came to

' Urbana and set on foot the Urbana University. I then

(
determined to give teIL}l:ea s of my Life to this cause

. and see what it would bring for!h. The ten years are

past and the result is before us. My own mind is

clear: this result is given, viz. (1) New Church

. College is demanded, the time is come. (2) Students

are ready. (3) Money is re~dy to give endowment.

(4) We have neither students nor money. (5) We have

a dearth of students and money oecause we are worthy

hl,of both. (6) We have begun wron~ and our Urbana

H, University is Virtually at an end. 4

Stuart disagreed in principle wi.!.h U:'ban~' s Presid~nt, (Mile:

G.· Wllliams and with several of the trustees, most notably/Colonel

John H. Jamesi who had donated the land for the University.
---- ~ --- ­In

essence thes~n ggfered on how distinctive New Church education

32J. P. Stuart, "Diary," VI (l853), October 16, 23, 1.853

and November 5, 1853.

33Ibid., vm (1858), July ID, 1858; X, (l859), June 21, 1859.

34Ibid., IX, (1858-1859), March 13, 1859.

 125

should be. 35 Stuart believed that every subje"ct taught in the

University should be imbued with New Church philos~phy, and he

fought tenaciously for that point of view into 1858.

Until January, 1858, Stuart never gave up hope. as his

correspondence with/fC:-~rJandfChaunceyG~;;:rev~als. Ager

had come to teach at Urbana with views similar to Stuart's. He

rejected Thomas Worceste:'s_theory that education_was not a s~ial

use for the New Church at thi~ time. 36 Ager endured until 1861

when he left Urbana with great relief to take _~ pas~te in Brookline,

Massa.chusetts. 37

T_Gile;was less responsive to Stuart than Ager and more

influentiaL In Stuart's mind §les held ~he balance of power in the

Urbana crisis of the late 1850's; his decision would turn the tide

either for or a~~t the distinctive stand which Stuart supported.

As of January, 1858, Stuart realized that he had lost. 38 r~~ ~d

handed Victory to the opposition. Laterl(:;hauncey G~s would

35Stuart to Hibbard. January 26, 1858, AA.

36 J• C. Ager to Stuart, May 16, 1860, AA. T. Worcester

t_Cl~enade, April 30, 1857, AA.

37Ager to Stuart, September 16, 1861, AA. Ager's move to

Brookline concerned Benade, who feared Ager would succumb to
Worcesterite influence. Benade to Stuart, September 26, 1863, AA.

38Stuart to Chauncey Giles. January 15, 1858, AA. For

Stuart's views see J. P. Stuari:, Urbana University: El Statement
(unpublished Ms .• AA, 1855). 4 pp.
 126

become the new president of Urbana University even while holding

on to his pastorate in Cincinnati.

After leaving Urbana Stuart ardently supported the posi lion

of William Benade in the New Church, especial1y'~ade's passion

l --­

for New Church educa tion.

You are right about the Academy: and you may consider
me with you in it. You will please say to the others
associated with you, thg,t I accePt theplac;as a
member, •••-39 ­

But Stuart had not yet gone as far as Benade in his contempt for the

General Convention. He remained an active member of it and into

the sixties carried on a ,friendly correspondence ~ith Boston leaders

such as;T111y B. Hayward,1,ohn H. Wilkins)q~pl\tl!lS t~r~sJ

and Thomas Worcester. 40

In the summer of 1862 Stuart assumed the editorial chair of

the New Ierusalem Messenger. a General Conv~t~o~lyin New

York City.41 This was the paper in the 1860's that carried the theo­

Con~tion andrAcademyJ
logical debates between supporters ofrt'he
--
3;Stuart to Benade, December 31. 1859, AA.

40S tuart, "Diary." XI (1859), October 26. 27" 28, 29, 30,

31. 1859; November 1, 2. 3, 1859. These entries show Stuart was

Worcwev
on cordial relations with if.1i'0iiiaS the Convention's .
perennial president; lTIlly B. Hayward} the equaU ubiquitious Sec­
retary 0 the CQnv~ntiOn; Theopnl1us Pars"'Cii1S;JWilliam Hay'd~nl, then
an editorofthe New IerusalemMessenger; a'riai Jo~bbard' Wilkins

41Stuart, "Diary."}N (1862), June 27. July 1. 3. 1862.

 127

.-----:- "­
men, and this editorial nightmare once again seems to have moved
.
Stuart closer to Benade's position. In 1863 he was waling to do his

share in organizing the "Harmony" from the top down. 42 At the close

of our period of study Stuart was in the Midwest promoting Academy

principles. He died in 1882 before the formal brea_~_of Benade'sj

sup~ers with the General Convention. 43

As important as (iurl).h'!...rrt and~ar~ ere to the promulgation

of DeCharms' ideas in the New Church. both must be considered

secondary in importance to~ill1am Benade Benade entered the New

Church from t e Old Church at approximately the same time as Stuart

--the mid 1840's--and was subject to the same s:ctarian gressu.,Les

only from different men. Da~id Poweff}was a close friend of Richard

DeCharms. However. since he was from Lancaster and became a

-
minister in Philadelphia. and since he had come from the Moravian

-
Church with a strong sense of the importance of distinctive education,

Benade was probably more receptive immediately to DeCharms'

influence than was Stuart to Powell's.

We have already seen that Benade was convinced the Central

Convention had no further usefulness under DeCharms' do~ng

42Stuart to J. C. Ager, July 20. 1863, SSRA.

43Stuart was the Vice-Chancellor of the Academy from 1877

to 1881. and was known affectionately in Academy circles as "The
General." New Church Life. H. No. 7 (1882). 97.
 128

leadership. but that he himself never lost sight of the possibility of

a rival body to the General Convention. H~mired DeCharms'

ability to tackle with skill any opponent inside or outside the New

Church,44 but DeCharms' withdrawal from the Pennsylvania Associa­

tion in 1855
45
and ~s sabotage of the 1856 effort to revive the

Central Convention ended a friendship that at best had been a

strained..2!1e.

In 1854 the relationship between the two men seemed

sufficiently stable to permit a modicum of cooperation. Benade

tendered his resignation to the Philadelphia First Society in that year

in a dispute over th'e role of education and ~xternal orde~ .0e

C~rch, and helped inaugurate a new society. Richarci DeCharms,

- - --~ .. ­
three of his family, and L. c. It.lngerich! formerly of Lancaster, were

among the Philadelphia New Churchmen who met to organize the new

Second Society.46 Nathan C. Burnham and David Powell lent moral

47
support.

@enade to Stuart, September 9, 1853, AA. Benade lquds

DeCharms' handling of "Bushism" on the ministry.

45Benade to DeCharms, June 11, 1855. AA. DeCharms, in

a financial bind, must have sought help thr~gh the Pennsylvania
Association for his personal needs. Benade believed 'that his failure
to secure the aid precipitated DeCharms' withdrawal from the Associa­
tion.

46william Benade, Sermon to the First New Jerusalem Society

of Philadelphia. Preached on Resigning His Ministerial Office in
\ Connection with that Society (Philadelphia: Boericke and Tafe!, 1854),
p. 32.
47 Ibid ., p. 22.
 129

In stating his case Benade confessed that since his entry

into the New Church in 1844 his views on the e~nal order of the

Church had been in a state of flux. but his present view was rooted
o 4
deeply in the authoritative Writings of Swedenborg and for this reason

he could not compromise it. 48 The "Quakerish" element in the First

Society thought the i"nterior design which he favored smacked of Rome;

that and their insistence on placing the corner-stone in the Northwest

cor~er of the site, symbolizing "darkness" and "obscurity. " was proof

to Benade oJ t~ir ignorance of true church order. He refused to help

" 49
lay the stone of a building which was" subversive of true order...

The educational question was just as crucial. A strong

element in the First Society opposed Benade's, plan to erect a school­

house with the temple. in Benade's eyes denying the validity of

education ~s a special use of the New Church. 50 At the same time

that the trouble was coming to a head in the First Society, r. P.

Stuart a~iously beseiged • enade to consider coming to Urbana,

perhaps with the hope that the two of them could salvage the situation

at the University. Benade agreed to think about the offer. but he

expressed his conViction that Philadelphia was ,the key to the

.48 Ibid .. iv. xv. p. 12.

4~bl·d.• pp. 12-13. 16.

SOIbid.• p. 12.
 development of the type of New Church he and Stuart wanted. A

school aE.9.~~gazine in Philadelphia would exert tremendous

{
leverage in the Church. Besides. he felt he would clash with the

present Board of Trustees as well as the "Monster" Urbana would

~
become if those lay ustees were permitted to run the institution

On October 28. 1854. the day after the organization meeting

of the Philadelphia Second Society. Benade formally rejected Stuart's

plea for help.

Urbana's Board. b~
---------
His chief reason was the conflict of principle with

he intimates in veiled terms his hope of exciting

and significant developments in the near future in Philadelphia. 52

Those dreams were partially realized in 185-t bLit~ade still had_no

school or periodical. A schcol was founded by Benade at the

Society's Cherry Street location in 1857. and it lasted until 1861,

but it was not the minister~l tro.ining school Benade had envisioned. 53

Nevertheless, the Cherry Street school was a start. and in

~ -
. . ­
1859 Benade and a select group of friends initiated a brotherhood

devoted to realizing even greater goals.

51Benade to Stuart, February 7. 1854, AA.

52Benade to Stuart, October 28, 1854, AA.

<:....E:R1chard R. Gladis , "A History of the Academy of the New

Church" (unpublished M5'.-;r..cademy Library, III 67) , p. 21.
 r
,~

You remember our talk about the "Academy. "

Three of us met together on the 25th. of last month.
to talk about a work which we find absolutely nec­
essary as a preliminary to the proper management of
New Church Schools;--i. e. a complete dig~st of the
Writings. --which shall enable the student to turn at
once to any subject. & there find ~JUD,9t_J;S. has
written upon it&c. --As we talked it over. it became
clear that this was the work for "the Academy. " With
the thought came the deed. WerorganiZed"ourselves
into a preliminary meeting; resolved to-'foUD' the
I Academy•. --& to-i'ilvi'te yourself Revs[Hibbard Rodman.
wukS:' Cabell, and Dr. Hatch (of this city) to unite
with us. --& make up the nine first members. The
three here. are the two Tafels & myself.

We propose. for the present. to keep our organization

private. (not sectet)] therefore, please don't speak of
t. --to admit no members except by a unanimous vote.
& to proceed systematically to work. doing one thing
at a time. --& doing it as well & thOro'lghly as in our
power lies. --W~ht not to enlarge our numbers.
until we have well digested ourconstitution, & con­
solidate ourselves into an institution, which shall be
pennanent. --A....h9_st¥ enlarCLemem would endanger our
existence. The parties named would harmonize. I
think, --& act together as one body. --This body might
in time. become the Gen. Church's organ to do those
important uses. which are now given into the hands
of ~ose loose-jOi~d. Wiggling Comm' es which
after every yearly pretended, or attempted incubation
of the eggs gwen them to h~tch out, --give forth-­
"voces" (reports) "et practere~ihil. "

What the Church wants. is not reports of work to be

done. - r'blit'WOik done.)--Will you join us? And Uso.
will you send ori your suggestions in full? We must
mature our plan well. so that we may start right &
fair. --• . . 54

By 1857 Benade was ready ~take the off~sive with the

realization that the three previous experiences outside the General

G~enade to Stuart. December 6. 1859. AA.

 132

Convention had prOduced minimal results in altering the course of

New Church developments. 'D:!e Academy was formed within the

Conve~n after Benade had rejoined both it (1857) and the Pennsyl­

vania Association (1858). He tried to get Thomas Worcester to as!n.t!t

that allowing him to return wa~equivalent to accepting his principl_es.

Worcester refused to bite, but Benade had no other choice but to join

.. ----..:- - . --
given his determination to effect changes' n the external order
=­ j
f the

Church. 55

The organization of the Academy brotherhoOd was only one

of m~~vers b l...Benad~over the next thirty years which was

designed to challeng'i! th~ Convention leadership of Thomas Worcester.

( He laid out strategy like a Civil War General, using the Academy

and the Pennsylvani~~iationas a power base. To be effective

Benade had to maintain official ties with Worcester and other Boston

men eV~!Ltb,Qugh such contact was distaste~ul to himself and to other

Academy associates. The roughest part of the relationship between

c C\,_
Benade.and Worcester occurred from 1863 to 1865, a periOd of silence

provoked QY!l blistering letter from Worcester. He accused Benade

-
of deliberate deception in order to carry a point. 56
-
55lnformation on the subsequent maneuvering ot'the Phila­
delphia Second Society, for example its withdrawal from the Pennsyl­
vania Association in 1863, can be found in the New'Terusalem Magazine,
XXXVI, No. 1 (1863), 22 and "Journal of the Pennsylvania Association,"
,N. L Magazil).e, XXXVI, No. 9 (1864), AppendiX, 4-10.

(~Thomas Worcester to Benade, August 8, 1863, AA.

 133

Academy men rallied toBenade's support. [fi:.-s::~u~~J

dismissed:WorcesJer's complaint of secrecy. With the Boston

pastoc's tact~s of@eventing t!!..e free interchange of id.::a~in~e

...--------..
Convention one had to resort to secrecy
--
to
-
be heard.
- ---­ He could not

understand wh Benade
""""'"pven had a desire to continue communicating
. 57
with the man on church matters. As far as Burnh!~was concerned

LThomas ~~;;;geste_ had long ago closed his mind to new light. ~

Hibbard agreed fully with Burnham. But he was not going to give

Worcester the satisfaction 'of seeing his opposition subdued or read

~--------
out of the Convention. Personally, he was confident that he could

~ Worcestex:. and see the day when younger men would be able

to clear the air in the New Church. Until then the Academy could

"keep guard" so truth would be in a position to triumph when Provi­

-----
dence removed the ~nemesis:58
Even though Worcester apologized to Benade for the 1863
. ....---- - ~

lette~~5, 59 and the two resumed their normally cool. official

relationship, Worc~ter, had no higher view of Benade and his friends

than they entertained about him. He confided to J. P. Stuart in 1864

. --
that(Burnham/had been a bitter enemy for years .
- - --, .
 134

• • • he was bit by Mr. DeCharms. And then again

there's Mr. H. I do not think he would have acted
as he has, if Dr. B. had not bitten him. 60

The Mr. H. of the letter was John Hibbard. pastor of the Chicago New

Church Society. Worcester firmly believed tha Hibbard Bena<1~,

_andBurnhamlwer~ the leaders of a small. unrepresentative cliq~e in

the Convention that would "secede" from the New Church in the face

of opposition. 61 He d£>E!s not" seem to have taken them too seriously.

&orces..:=.r;had company in the Convention in this denegrating

attitude toward the Academy. [Sam~2-n Reed! believed that the

Central Convention had been killed by internal bickering, 62 and that

anti-Convention vituperations from all sides were the work of

factious men, or as he called them, "am~ous spiri~ desi~of

b~ng up and breaking down the existing order of things, or any

--
order of things, over which they do not exert a controlling influence.,,63
-
He did not confine his remarks to Academy men only; by such

remarks Reed intended to cover Free Spirits like [G;orge BUS~ and
(Benjamin Barrett. ~4

60T• Worcester, to ,Stuart, January 12, 1864, AA."

61 T. Worcester to Stuart, April 30, 1864, AA.

62Sampson Reed to ? (Stuart), May 15, 1850, AA.

6"R~'to St~c::t, April 26, 1851, AA.

64Reed to ? (Stuart), May 15, 1850, AA.

 135

The exception to the animosity of Worcester. Reed and other

Convention men to the Academy was/LP. Stuart In 1855 Reed had

~d Stuart about the possibility of becolTlin9 assistant ed!!or of

the New Ierusalem Magazine;65 in 1862 Stuart was accepted by the

Convention as the editor e"f the Messenger. While many Convention

supporters may have been glad to see~art!step down in 1865,

Worcester was not one of them if his words to Stuart can be taken

seriously. He felt that Stuart was compounding the error of leaving

-----
the Messenger by planning to return to missionary work, for missionary

enterprises needed men of proper internal preparation and the New

Church had not yet reached such an advanced state internally. 66

The friendliness toward Stuart was partly due to the fact

was in the 1860' s a

( connecting link between the two parties. At least until 1865 he had

not yet completely given up on the Convention as had Burnham and

Benade. In 1863 he was probably the only man who could a_cJ-.a.s a

mediator betwe~n Benad r an Worceste, and he was ir:.stru~ntal in

~aring the air 'of charges and counter-charges. 67 Even more

65Reed to Stuart. March 5. 1855. AA.

66T• 'Worceste to~rt, May 26. 1865, AA.

-- -
67Stuart to T. Worcester, September 8. 1853, AA. Stuart
tried to restore Wo ester's faith in Benade by insisting Benade was
not guilty of any ;conspiracY) against him.
 136

important, Stuart had not yet completely sorted out in his mind the

difference between Worcester and the Academy on a very crucial

issue--the authority of Swedenborg.

The question of Swedenborg's auth2rity was the supreme

issue of the 1860' s in the New Church just as the conjugial h~.resy

had been in the 1820's and the 1840's, and Spirit~m was in the

1850' s. And like each of these other questions Swedenborg's

authority became a highly emotional matter which encompassed other

doctrinal and personal problems and proved to_be a we~ on ca able

of exerting great influence over people who might not have heen

S\roused by the theological question alone. Benade, for example,

found it useful in eliciting support for his educational plans and in

combating the Convention.

A positive step toward the formation of the type of training

school Benade had envisaged was taken in 1866 by two Academy

-
men, J. P. Stuart and 1. C. Iungerich. Stuart, fresh from his

experience on the Messenger, was now ready to institutionalize the

Academy.

From the first of the Harmony I have felt the want of a

body that every body could see as well as a heart Cc
lungs that they co~ot see. The time has now come
when we can find out, I hope, how tQ p.lL Q!L!his
) (~dispensable body. 68

68Stuart to Benade, January 31, 1866, AA.

 137

He then went on to suggest an en~gement of_memb~hip and the

support of institutions within the Convention such as a publis'!.ing

house and a "School of Priests and Kings" for the training of ministers
I - ­
and academicians. Leadership of this expanded Harmony would be

~ested in an invisible "pre-established harmony" which would have

come to agreement on major decisions before they allowed themselves

-
to be dra~to the labyrinth of Convention politics. 69
. in the year Iungeri£.:JI. took Stuart's proposal one step
Later

farther and offered to subscribe three hundred dollars a year for three

years if Benade would found a theological school independent ofjhe

Convention
_ _ _ _• but in general accord with it. 70( Stuartl had already
S, ~ ~-..J

-~ -----
chaired a Convention committee in 1865 'and been turned down on a

recommendation tha t a theological school be established in New

York with Benade as its president, so obviously the Boston leadership

did not want any school under Harmony control. Instead, Worcester

led an effort to establish a theological institution in Waltham,

- --
Massachusetts, at first with Harmony men on the faculty, then

reorganized under Worcester's presidency to exclude the Harmony

---...,.
men. 71 B~nade h~d seen the move coming as early as November,

69 Ibid .

701.. C. Iungerich to Benade, November 18, 1866, AA.

71 Block , New Church, p. 210.

 138

1865, and was suspI~iou~ oU.!!e "Archbi~hop" all along. 72 Not until
1877 was the dream of Benade, Stuart. and Iungerich realized with the

founding of a theological school in Philadelphia. 73

~~e'~ primary concern in the 1860's was not the school,

nor even eJ!!~na.L9rder. He wa~usy ~lishing a power ba.,;;e in

the Pennsylvania Association and in the New Church at large by

perpetuating throughout the decade a ~t~-= authority of

(
\. Swedenborg's writings. This issue succeeded in drawing Thom~s

Worcester out of the shadows of church affairs where he had been

operating since the conjugial furor and exposed him to the personal

attacks he had been trying to avoid. 74 Benade skillfully manag~d

to convince many people that Thomas Worcester was anti-Swedenborg,

--­ --~ -
a_nd to be anti-Worcester was an expression of loyalty to their

Founding Father. Swedenborg. In short, the debate over Sweden­

-­ '_--J

borg's authority p~f1ed the pola~tion that had been developing

in the New Church at least since the 1820' s.

The final bre~k between Academy and Convention did not

occur un

72Benade _!.Q..Stuart, November 10, 1865. AA. Benade notes

in the letter that Archbishop" Worceste . is buying land in Waltham,
Massachusetts, fora sc~ol.·

73 Block , New Church, p. 215.

74Thomas Worcester to ?, undated (1838 ?): AA.

7_5Jilock, New Churcb.,~29.

\
 139

probable was laid in the years before 1870. By that year the situation

had progres~ed_or de~e~orated (depending on your point of view) to

the point where the two elements had two incompatible_concepts of

New Church doctrine and life.lr Remaining together only served 'to
- - '--­
frus~~both sides and drain off energy that could have bee"n devoted

to more us~ul pursuits than mutual recriminationJ What had been

a meaningful internal dispute, in the sense that it forced all New

---'--- - -
Churchmen to rethink the nature of the commitment they had made
-- ­
--
to the New Church, had gone beyond the pale "of honest, reasoned

discussion.
r::-- - -
Whether the furor overJ Swedenborg' s authority was ever an
r---­
ho~t discussion for eith.:!l~Q{"ces~rJor~l!ade'isan open question,

for both men had their minds closed to influence from each other if

not to the substantive issue at hand. 76 Benage did not trust

Worcester's judgment.

I have no faith in T. W. 's rationality, --nor in his

understanding of the doctrines of the Church; & the
circumstance, that he can so entirely becloud the minds
ofOth'er ministerS'in the East.- gives me but little hope
of "iheprcrfess of real knowledge of the Truth, in these
quarters. .

76Benade to Stuart, January 5. 1866. AA. Benade is confident 1

that the time to move the New Church to their position has come. ~y)
must uit talkin and begin acting. Thomas Worcester to Stuart,
November 23,1863, December 29, 1863;-AA.-AS{arasWo~cesteris }
concerned the views of(Burilham'fBenade, andrHibbarg. in regard to I
Swedenborg are "absurd. " "

77Benade to Stuart, November 30, 1863, AA.

 140

Worcester would eventually come to view Benade's position on

Swedenborg as an injuri£1ls one for the whole New Church, 78 much

as Benade and DeCharms blamed Wo~er''5 conjugial heresy for

subsequent difficulties in the Church.

~b
-
The opening round of the crucial debate was inaugurated in

om his recently consolidated position in the Penn­

sylvania Association, and took the form of a Report on the Nature of

Swedenborg's Illumination. 79 From then on he justified his inter~e­

tations on every doctrinal issue with an appeal to Swedenborg. For

example, in 1870-1871 Worcester was delighted to see Bcnade take

up the cudgel against the views ofl heophl}us Parson

-- --
on the ministry.

He could not think of parson,,:,s· attitude "without nausea. ,,80 But

Worcester's enthusiasm waned quickly when Benade interjected

Swedenborg's infallibility into the argument.

-
As far
---
asN,r~ester
was concerned Swedenborg's illumination from the Lord was gradually

progressive and thus his earlier writings were less clear and more
,-­
subject to error than hi~ later works. 81 For Benade Swedemborg's
\ . to
writings were revealed truth. 82

78 T. Worcester to Benade, February 13, 1871, AA.

79wU1iam Benade, Report on the Nature of Swedenborg's

Illumination (Philadelphia: A. Swann, 1861), 90 pp.
80T. Worcester To Ikna~~ovember 5, 1870, AA.
8l T. Worcester to Benade, March 26, 1871, AA.
82Benade to T. Worcester, February 28, March 20, 1871, AA.
 141

The heated corr.espondence between the two men, supple­

mentlng the formal debates which had gone on in New Church

periodicals since 1861,83 continued into May, 1871, but by then

the exchanges had dWind~d into min~a. The letters became shorter

and shorter until they ceased altogether. The two men remained

poles ~rt; they had lost sight of the ~rux2.f._!h_e_ar.gym.ent,~ e y

knew further words were futile. In a very real sense this particular

correspondence on Sw..:.denborg's au~ty in 1870-1871 symbolized

the deterioration between the Academy and Convention and forecast

what would eventually happen to the two parties. Tired and frustrated,

unable to communicate meaningfully with one another, they would

go their separate ways. As Benade put the matter in 1864,

83The"controversy over the authority of Swedenbor 's

writings"dates at le~st from 1788-1789 in the pages of th Aurora an
English p odical edited by Manoah Si le andf ose h Pro' See
Rt. Rev. Alfred Acton "The writings As the WordYNew Church Ufe,
LXXXII 282-291. -The American phase dates as we have seen from
DeCharms essays in the Precursor from 1837-1839. He continued
it in the Newchurchman. 1(1841-1842), 124-136, 186-208, but
B~s Report to the Pennsylvania Association in 1861 definitely
mark'Sa new phase of the debate. o:=&-Hibba~~addressto the
Illinois Association in October, 1862, reprinted in the New Terusalem
Messenger, added fuel to the fire ("Swedenborg: A Man Sent of God. "
.N. L Mess .• VIII, No. 32- [18~3]. 125 ff.): The 1860' s culminated
with a mission by. udolph Tafel}o Sweden to translate the r~~g
Swedenborg manuscnpts t ere. Tafel at this time was an Academy
man who had no doubts abO~t the in~piration of Swedenborg's writings
(R. Tafel to Benade, December 31, 1869, SSRA). See also the article
written bl'fTafel)and sent from Sweden in 1869 which stressed the
fact that Swedenborg wrote "the living truth of God" w!JhOUterror
(Rudo1ph Tafel, "Emanuel Swedenborg aj;<i- His Relation to the New
Church," unpublished Ms., SSRA, 1969, 66 pp.).
 142

It has come to the point, that th~the Church

must choose petween the divine iQ..1ill19l!.ty)of the

-
Writln~t. W. I S !?~;::_e:l?tions
,

My friend & brother. this game must be fought out

to the bitter end. before we can attend to anything

else. with the hope of reaching a conclusion--W

must_first settle tl!~~.~.tion_o J.!th2f.ity) I have,

from the beg inning, been convinced tha t the trouble

among us. had it.s...s.ealiust here. 84 ~

IL The Orthodox Convention Party

To reiterate the full history ot:.Qle Convention would be to

duplicate the work of Marguerite Block in her The New Church in the:

New World. And enough of the Convention party's story has been told

so that a few comparative and descriptive remarks here should suffice

to reveal that indeed there was such a group. That a loyal~n-

tion ~rty existed should not be construed to mean that it was a fully

harmonious fellowship. It remained coherent in the face of a steady

assault from two sides. but u ~ the surface concrete differences

existed.

(Thomas Wor~esterf. of course. represents one powerful

strain in the Convention, probably the most influential through the

period of our study. Strangely enough. he agreed essentially with

illiam Benade on many points of doctrine. especially the p~y

of the clergy in the C~rch and the need f~ atithoritaria t~f

84
Benade to Stuart, March 8, 1864. AA.
 143

:hurch polity. as The chief difference between the two men. other

than the vital one of Swedenborg's authority, lay in the Judgment of

when the Church would be ready for the external order' ~el}ade ,pr~­

po-=...ed. LBenade felt ex~rnal~er had to be forced upon the New

Church before intern~.rowth could ta}::e ~lace;lworcester believed

that nternal developmentjhadto precede external order, and t!!e

institution o..!-.external changes should wait upon the Church's readi­

~~ willingness to receive them. although he had not always felt

that way. As we shall note later, the implications of these positions

c~_O'yer into politics and helped shape these two men' s views of

AmeriC9-n overnment.

A second strain existed within the Orthodox Convention

group which differed from Worcester chiefly on the role of la men in

the Church. W<2-rc..Wer's own son Benjarni~was a leader of this

group, as was(!§"<:>E~!llS Parsons! These men agreed with Worcester

on Swedenborg, for example, as the following statement from~1 )

Outlines of the Religion and Philosophy of Swedenborg reveals:

Emanuel Swedenborg was not one of those so employed

to write the words of God. He was not inspired. • . '.
He was s~cted fo~e he performed, as a man of
remarkable intellect, which was as fully cultivated and
prepared by study and work as was possible; and he was

aST. Worcester to Benade, February 13, 1871, AA. William

Benade to J. C. Ager, September 26, 1863, SSRA.
 144

then taught spiritual truth in a way in which it

had never been taught to any man. He was

assisted in every possible way to understand

it; and as he understood it, and only so, he

communicates it to others in his writings. The

idea that these writings were intended t~r­

sede in any way or measure the Word of God, or

;;ddto it or supplement it, would"have shocked

hIffi; for the purpose of his whole work was to

enforce and illustrate that Word. 86

They also agreed with Worcester on the perfected type of

church government; namely, an epi.:copal or ev~n a papal form. 87

But.in the mind of ,Benjamin Wo~r his father's greatest mistake

had been in trying !Q-S.-chieve this idea!..!Q9 quickly.

As to th papal theory I will say nothing now, for

I think that·-in the New Church, in the present age,
we ~a_ye nothln.g to do with it, altho' I see that the
little instruction we have through Swedenborg in
referel1s;eftoChurchorerfl1s more easily applied
to that than to any other theory of order. . . :

• . . I will only remind you that many years ago

the Convention, mainly under the lead of Boston,
went so far in the development of~rch order that
it was forced to stop and take the back track. So
you must not be surprised at our being very cautious
hereafter to advance no farther than t~'ple )
freely and intelligently go with us. 88

8fTheophi~s Parsons~ Outlines of the Religion and Philos­

QIiliy of Swedenborg Boston: Roberts Bros., 1876). p. 195.

87Benjamin Worcester to Benade, February 9, 1863, AA.

88Benjamin Worcester to Benade, May 5, 1863, AA.

 145

Fer the present Benjamin adamantly insisted. to tile chagrin

of his father as well as Benade. 89Ghurch orde should be simple;

-
laymen should be utilized more effectively; and" something near

unanimity" should prevail in the Church before an attempt is made to

proceed to a more~plex Conn of order. 90 Laymen should naturally

~l ~
be ~~to the clergy_on religious matterS,()but they~be

pennitted to handle the ~ ~ r s of the Church'~1·Ed~s~.~on

- ~

and ubl1shing were two more special uses that could be handled by

laymen. 91

Benjamin understood clearly that suc~y -;- anizatiolJ as

he proposed entailed a major change in the operation of th~..f9n-

---
vention. but it would be worth it to engage prominent laymen once
-
again in such uses. He felt the Convention had made a serious error

~s~go in taking upon itself the duties of printin a ld-nu..b ishing.

When I was first old enough to take an active part in

the proceedings of the Convention, I found it engaged
in ~ new business--that of printing and publishing;
and to my sorrow I found that myoId friends. Mr. f Caleb
Ree~[Mr. Wilkins andrMr,-~a!~sl, felt themselves

90B. Worcester to Benade. August 20. 1862. M.

91 1bid .
 146'

laid on the shelf, thro~n-9ff the track. overridden,

as Mr. Wllkins himself expressed it tome. by the
Convention's having entered upon work that they
felt did not belong to its ecclesiastical ca acity,
and which they thought wouldmaterially hinder its
spiritual usefulness. 92 ­

The reason Parsons and the others did not resist the

questiona.ble endeavor was because Thomas Worcester was backing

, 93 ­
i.!. and o~~~ce they remained silent. This example once

again documents the great fear. r~t, awe, and loyalty which

olworces~presence.
many New Churchmen displayed in and out
. - -­
No wonder ~s-YIJlQolized_the GonventioJ) for its op,J;lcments. To

som~ Convention peo. le; even though they fiercely defended their

in~ividual ~berty, Worcester's judgments must have carried the

authority of the Lord, almost as if he really were a

ex cathedra. For others, especially Academy men and Free Spirits,

Worcester's~percePtionsand ower had to be challenged for the

Church to progress.

The IAcademy; movement was the m~ghtly-~ni_t of the

three parties existing in the New Church in the 1850' sand 1860' s.
~ _ _--,,'L
Next came the Orthodox Convention group, for while Worcester was

9'B. W~rcesterltofBenadeJ~ebruary 11, 1863, AA.

93 Ibid .
 147

livtng he exercised a deferential control over the activities of the

Convention. The most amorphous of the three elements was the

. --- J
brotherhood we have called the£iree SP'!ritsJ Men likerHenry Welle~

[Ge-orge &;"sh/ andtBenjamin B~tS'communicated.with e~ch~her but

they would never have tried to conform to each other's oPinions.!5?r

th~e of exercising power within the Church. The Free Spirits

were just that--responsible to no one for their actions ~nd attitudes

but th~rd. Their most binding tie was their opposition to the

Convention and to Worcester. And no one was more representative

_of their mood than Benjamin Fiske Ba~s

- - ~yentered the world inauspiciously as the son of a

sarpenter in Dresden, Maine. His religious education was pra_c_~i~lly

~on-exis!.ent because the family had n formal religious affiliation. 94

Regular schooling was also scanty until he entered Bowdoin College

in 1828. 95 In college Barrett began searching for a viable faith. He

read the Bible assiduously and gradually drifted toward Unitarianism,

but the only position that he asserted openly at Bowdoin was that of

being anti-se~an. 96

(9 'Barrett, Gertrude A., ed.. Benjamin Fiske Barrett: An

Autobiography (Philadelphia: Swedenborg Publishing Association,
1890). p. 1l.

95Ibid., pp. 17, 22, 24.

96 Ibid ., pp. 28, 30.

 148

After graduation and a brief spell of school-teaching.

Barrett entered the liberal Harvard Divinity School in 1834, only to

find it devoid of spiritual depth and unable to take him much further

in his search than the anti-sectarian stance of the Bowdoin years. 97

In one respect. however. the tolerant approach of the Divinity School

did alter Barrett's thinking. . He was jolted from his earlier dependence

upon Scriptural authority a~<!!.rected to a philosophical a.Qproach_ to

relig~on. In the process he found the works of Swedenborg faSCinating. 98

Sampson Reed's Observations on the Growth of the .M.!..ru1

proved to be especially magnetic for Barrett, and by the time he moved

to Syracuse in 1838 to fill a Unitarian pulpit he Wc;lS no longer sure he

. ::;;
was still a Unitarian. if indeed he had ever been one. 99 Only a few

months were necessary to confirm Barrett's doubts; he had beco~

~er.-:>f Swedenborg. He rejected an amazing offer from the East

Bridgewater, Massachusetts Unitarian Society to come there and

preach "as much Swedenborgianism

~ - - ~ he pleased or might deem use­
­
f~l, and call it Unitarianism . . ." 100· Rather than " sacrifice_my

ma~~, " by w~ch Barrett seemed to mean his inte..!le~tl,!.al freedom

a~egrity. he resigned from the Unitarian ministry.

97 Ibid •• pp. 40, 45.

98 Ibi d .• pp. 51, 59.

99 Ibid . , p. 67.

I'
100 bid .• p. 91.
 149

<;> The next step was to openly confess his new faith. Under

the influence of Thomas Worcester of the Boston Society of the New

Church'B;rrett ( oined the Boston Society and submitted to r:e-baptism.

Before a year was past Barrett Journeyed on to New York, now

ordained a New Church minister, to pastor the feeble group there

( which had not gone with@ fi)o~hty) He went as' the emissary

of Thomas Worcester, boldly preaching Worcester's views. 101 In a

blazing set of public lectures/Barrett drew large crowds and the

1 -~ ­
I I attention of the New York press. 102

Barrett's popularity and strong leadership did much to set

the New York First Society on its feet after the defection of the

Doughty group and its subsequent adherence to the Central Conven­

lion.
.­
He remained until 1848, and by that year the society had
.:;:.
in,5reased in membership fro~ty to two hundred fifty. 103 In the

intervening years Barrett faced tw~ests which blew throughout

- --
the entire Church: the New Era Movement, a spiritualistic endeavor
--.
to revitaliz0e New Church; and a controversy over re-baptism.

101Benjamin F. Barrett, ~Plain Letter to Tho's Worcester,

D. D. (New York: Mason Bros., 1864), pp. 8, 9-10 .

. 102 G . Barrett, Autobiography, pp. 103, 105. These

l popu.lar lectu~ were published as 11 Course of Lectures on the

1 t. Doctrines of the New Ierusalem Church (New York: n. p., 1842),

443 pp.

103 Ibid ., p. 107.

 150

The New Era Movement will be discussed later in another

connection; the re-baptism controversy is the storm most relevant to

Barrett's intellectual development in the years in New York. About

1846~rrett)had come to doubt both the wisdom of Thom~cester

that the New York Society had split over the Convention Rules of 1838,
~

the con~here¥,.and other issues which~rcesteVhimse1fhad

spo!1sored or support~ iE,. the ~~ntion. He also found a re.!!!2!"k­

a~le lack 0.f..:21~ity among New Church people in New York. 104
Consequently he came to the conclusion that the New Church was no

more free of sectarianism than ~ny oth~r Christian body. Even though

he believed ~~~!9 w~~ the answe!...!9.r n_eeded reformation of the

Christian Ghurch, he could not sanction New Church exclusiveness

which ~ly condemned the Old Church.

Barrett spent the rest of his life challenging eX~ist

atti~des in the Convention and became public-.J'!I'!-ernY..1lurnbeL.Qfle for

the Convention into the 1880's. He may be one reason why OrthOdox

Convention leaders failed to take Benade ans! .!he Academy more

seriously in the 1860' s; Benade worked within the Convention and

thus a certain amount of loyalty was assumed, whereas~~open

assaults from inside and. outside the Convention were far more

spectacular and attracted more attention.

 lSl

The challenge to Convention assumptions by Benjamin Fiske

Barrett initially was mild. He submitted an article critical of

re-baptism to the ~ Ierusalem Magazine i~ 1846 which was rej~d

Q.o.J!le grounds that the ~aptism question had peen settled long ago. lOS

--
The next step was a deterioration of the personal relations between
~

That was followed by the gradual easing of Barrett from all posts of

i,3fluence ~it!.l.!!LQle Co~ion, a procedure facilitated by the fact

that Barrett was in the West in the late 1840's and early 1850's. 106

Barrett moved to Cincinnati in 1848 and was generally well­

received. Cincinnati was another strategic New Church center like

New York that had e~peri~nced bi!~_?~s in the 1830' sand

needed a reconciling touch. One Cincinnatian related that Barrett's

"calm and placid manner acts like oil, on a fever sore. ,,107 Barrett

ten years later wou"ld be more like oil on fire, and he would not

always be so "calm and placid, " but in 1848 he was a <lood antidote

for Cincinnati. Fortunately the spirit of reconciliation preceded him.

The Third Society. had folded and

- the tensions which had led
... to the _ _.
~trai)and, Western Convention bre~ith thiGeneral}Convention
had' eased substantially.

p. H.

p. 29.

L:.:.==':"":::=:!:.::-::-:J to~.!!ade January 14, 1848, AA.

 152

Not everyone liked ~rrett.

---- -
..

p~ng and met in the home of a § . Yulee;' 08 others tolerated

­
Some refused to sit under his

him. In 1849 ~Buriinam wife of N. C. Bumham, spoke of the

situation in CincinnaU in a long letterQo Richard DeCharm~

We think that he [Barrett] manifests rather an illlPl:QY..Lng

s irit of late--he is not quite so self-confident. and is
more opento convict~n. -In hi~p~;;aching there is no
change--as a compiler of other men's views he gets
along admirably.-andwith effect;'"" but as to originality
of c~nception. or .force 0 argument. he ll, and I fear.
will ~ sadly deficient. O-S1
In spite of their dissatisfaction with Barrett the Burnhams did join

the Cincinnati First Society. Very likely they were part of the hard­

core of OPPoSition(Bmet~had there on the question of the infallibility

of Swedenborg's writings. 110

The years in Cincinnati were frustrating ones for Barrett due

to this opposition. his poor health. 111 and ~ental anguish he..!!.lt

in his endeavor to define his personal role in the New Church. He

became increasingly bitter toward the General Convention ~~ de.nied

him~nd ~thers of like liberal persuasion. the right to speak in

108
Barrett to Stuart. November 13. 1848. AA.

109Mary Burnham to Richard DeCharms. April 12, 1849. AA.

llOG. Barrett, Autobiography. p. 119.

I11Barrett to Stuart. August 13. 29. December 27. 1849. AA.

Barrett complained frequently about cri !in head pain.
 153
. - - '. 112
Convention Journals. Finally, in 1850 he left the ministry to
.-/

e~r the roofin<;j business of the Warren family, settling in Chicago

~--
until.1854. During thi~ t!'!le he recover_ed his health, reconsidered

-
his sphere of use in the Church; and recouped financially so that if
----
he_did ret~rn to the ministry he could maintain an independent stance.

~rret d~ided in 1854 to return to the New Church ministry.

In that decisive year he was invited to visit Thomas Worcester.

Neither man yielded from their earlier positions and Barrett left with

the impression'that]Worce-.:>ter woul<:l continue to block his path in

the..Eew Church until he desisted in his opposition to Worcester's

views. 113 Whether right or wrong in his Judgment, BaI!..ett had his

opinion confirmed in the months to follow as Worcester allowed a

bitter enemy ~rrett's, Thomas W~.!kS2.1\l14 a man who had supported

the ~~al Convention, to hold a committee assignment in the

General Convention while Barrett himself was bypassed.

--::::::::- ~ -
While in Cincinnati and in Chicago B~Jt had continued his

battle with the Convention to the point that ia;Yer J. Y. Scammon

-_ .. of -­
11 a;;;;U;tofGeorge BUSh; September 22, 1848, Bush
Letterbooks, II 1848-1849). SSRA--:- In a revealing letter to Benade,
Benjamin Worcester asse®d the right of editors to c9Qtr 1 eir
magazines, but he f~lt the rigid exclusion of all criticism of the
Convention from the New Jerusalem Magazine had done more injury
than good. B. Worcester to Benade, May 5. 1863-;-AA.

113Barrett, ~ Plain Letter. pp. 33-34.

114 Ibid •• p. 39.

 154

Chicago wished Barrett would go back to th~ Unitarians and leave the

Convention alone. US But until the crucial meeting with Worcester in

1854 ~(s efforts had been localized and were no more damaging

to the Convention than the criticisms of a number of other New

Churchmen.

and with any previous longsuffering ~~hin, ~ed what would

p~be a life-long vendetta against the Convention through the

mag;azines he edited and the pamphlets he published. 116

After nearly ~y_years of Barrett's criticism Convention

leaders finally r~moved his name E~ the ro1l2f mini~ers and

refused to consider reinstating him upon ~orial favoringJ:l.~m

from members of the Philadelphia First Society. U7 In 1864 Barrett

11 L. Y. Scammonlto George Bush, March 3, 1855, Bush

Letterbooks, XV (1855), SSRA. ~~'-y-.§.ar.s earlier Barrett had ca~tigated
Scammon as one of the most "im udent" and "t annical" men he had
ev-er met. Barrett to-Bush, September 13, 1853, Bush Letterbooks, XI
(1853), SSRA. [S.cammon I a law er who held 9ffic~ in the Convention
f as high as Vice President, wasas unpopular with the Academy as with
the FreeSpirits. He.-§..ym~olized the la "conceit" Benade detested.

116In addition to the works listed here by Barrett, he

authored numerous other doctrinal and controversial books and
pamphlets from. the early 1840) tp the late f880's. He was restored
f y the General Convention in lli~~but he never slackened his re)ent­
less assault_ against sectaria_n a iP ,episc~aCtengencies in that body.
In 1872 he voluntarily s'eVered Convention ties for good. Barrett
edited ~~Cijor~eriodica1s in the years 1840-1870: (1) Swedenbor ­
[ ian, 1858-1860, 4V:\ (2) New Church Monthly, 1867-1869, 3v Tlie
._ Monthly erge wIth John WeBer s ew ~ n ependent. a Free
SQiri periodical in LaPorte. Indiana.

Relation pp.
5-6, 11.
 155

had assumed the pastorate of that society which was one of the major

New Church societies in the United States still ou~ the general

~tion. In 1867 key members o·f the Philadelphia First Society,

tion against Barrett as well as the documents relating to the situation

and(ldeclared Barrett to have been falsely dealt with by the Conven­

~onl'18 By then full ,ec~nCiliation wo> beyond hope, but~t] }J

was readmitted to the Convention roll of ministers'in 1868.

! drive him out of !?~urch and then, when the first tactic proved

} unsuccessful, us.!.ng official means to oust him. 119 But he was also

alert enough to perceive a much larger division in the New Church

that transcended his feud with Worcester. He designated two parties:

OiiiiioMo.-.""",,_r~t!Janda "High Sch~ol or Sectarian" party The latter

position, that of the Convention and the New Jerusalem Magazine.

was derived from an overly-exalt;:s! v~w of Swedenborg's authority. 120 '

IThis "High ·Church"

. -
view _was narrow, . exclusive,. and authoritarian.
-- J

~ .
C~eport of the Committee of Investigation; Containinq the
Results of S!. Careful Inguiry into the Allegations Against Rev. .!!. E.
Barrett and Proving Those Allegations to Be Untrue (Philadelphia: n. p. ,
1867), 88 pp.

19l3arrett, b. Plain Letter, pp. 48, 55.

120B. F. Barrett, Letter from Rev. .!!. E. Barrett Q!l the

Alleged "Harmony of the New Church" (n. p. : n. p., n. d.), pp. 181­

193.
 156

His own liberal viewpoint allowed for the Lord's working through both
---_..-
the Old and New Churches, for the true church was a gathering of
}
faithful people from all sects.
(121
One evidence of Barrett's openness toward other Christian

groups was his attitude that baptis_l11 was va_lid i~ pe_rfo~ed by any

r C hristian body. 122 Another was his rapprochemont with the Uni~ns.
As early as Marc , 1848, in New York Barrett had gladly accepted an

invitation to speak in the prestiglous pulpit of Unitarian Henry

~~w. He interpreted it as a symbol of current Unitarian !"eceptive­

r ness toward the doctrines of Swedenborg.

Nearly the whole body of our eastern Unitarians have

shown quite a decided leaning..J.Qwards the NE;lw
Theology for the last few yea,rs; and well they may
trea"tIt witJ1r'espect, for s;;e of their most eminent
men are deeplr interested in our doctrines, an~preach
'( nothing else. 23
I
Had he been less optimistic of internal New Church growth

in 1848, Barrett migh.t have embarked then on his mission to the

Unitarians. But that venture had to wait until the 1 I S hen the

) New ~hurch~an institution had no more attractio~him, and

w~ had found a means of bridging the gap which existed between

the New Church and Unitarianism. Barrett's book, Swedenborg and

121 Ibi d., pp. 187-188.

122 8 . F. Barrett, ed., New Church Monthly, I (1867), 127.

123Barrett to Stuart, March ?, 1848, AA.

 157

was intended to be the link between the two in its sugges­

tion that Channing had leaned heavily upon Swedenborg for his own
124
intellectual development.

Barrett's hopes were left dangling. for the New Church did

not im~iately_~row more catholic and th~ C.Eurc_h s~emed to

l~~~at interest it had display!!d earlier in the ideas of Swedenborg.

Like so many other New Churchmen enjamin Fiske Barrett looked

bac.k upon a life of dedicated work and ambitious hopes and saw so

N. Conclusion

From the entry o~~ard DeCharms\into the New Church in

1826 and his subsequent cla~htiii:o;;as Worcester the New

. Church contained at least two separate tendencies. (Both were
r exclusivist and ~ectarianJin the sense that they posited a New Church'
~ ~

which was intended by the Lord to supersede the. Old Church. The

basis for the development of this New Church was Emanuel Sweden­

b~~ re-interpretation of the Christian faith set forth in his

voluminous writings.

In point of time the Boston position' was fully developed

before) DeCharm~adventand Thomas Worcester was able to capture

---- -. - - -­
l24r- ~
IBarr~tl to[Stuart December 28. 1878, AA. B. F. Barrett.
Swedenbcrg and Channing (Philadelphia: Claxton., Remson, and
Haffelfinger. 1879), .288 pp. .
 158

and hold the General Convention to Boston's point of view throughout

the entire period of this study, l8~70, in spite of many efforts

to tar the New Church from its Boston orientation.

---' -----­
Personal animosity,

regional Jealousy, a religio~s balance of power, and sociological

division were all factors involved in the divergence of the two

tendencies, but the iSS~ which attracted attention within the

membershi were theological.}25 In short, to forge a separate move­

ment within a religious configuration one must have either a compre­

----.
capable of arousing an
........-- ----
hensive and understandable world-view or a distinctive emphasis

emotio~al an<!..int~le~tual response.

-- .­

Within the scope of the Swedenborgian world-view lchard

DeCharms]at first u~lized a negative emphasis in his chal~enge of

l2:>The evidence for a scciological split in the New Church

is slight but p~sjstently evident, The distinction 'Has not necessarily
based on wealth and actually seems to be related more to family'
origins, or- erha.l1..s to social status conferred by one's occ"GPcfti·on.
There is no clear cut correla lon of-family origin and status to theo­
logical stance except perhaps in Boston where old aristocratic
families did tend toward the Orthodox Convention posUion, and the
"plainer order" leaned toward the Academy and the Free Spirits. The
Free Spirits tended to be ministers and editors, both before and after
theTrentrance into the-New~ch, with a sprinklin9-o m.ofes ional
people. They did not come from New-Churchfam1lies. Academ; men
- - ---..-.---~
w~e usually of more common family origins; many were of immigrant
stock; and most were businessmen and artisans rather than profes­
~ ._--­
sionals. : But in lancaster, to take but . oneexample, ever one-;;as
either upper middle or upper class in socio-econOmic terms, but
nearlya11 supported a general cademy position. Nevertheless, a
sociological split was apparent if S. S. athvo is to be taken
S~iously, and it evidently had little or nothing to do with theology.
 159

the Boston leadership. [DeCharmSjwas anti-Worcester. anti-Conven­

lion. and anli-conjugial theory. The New Church did not accept his

negalivism. But with persistent skill his successor. William Henry

Benad • was able tgJ.ak.e_the. theoJpgicaLRQ.!!em of DeCharms (which

itself owed a great debt to Englishmen such as Robert Hindmarsh and

Samuel Noble). especially the stress on the infallibili!y of S~en-

borg, and use it to form an informal Harmony, to capture an Associa-

lion within the New Church, and finally to found a separate organiza­

lion which ~~_u!d eventually outstrip the General Convention in size.

The Academy and Orthodox Convention groups differed in

degree more than in kind. in timing and emphasis more than in essence.

Both st~nd in clear relief against the third tendency in the New Church

after 1845. that of the Free Spirits. The Free Spirits were generally

of a more liberal stamp than either of the other two groups in terms of

their attitude toward Swedenborg and the Old Church. But like

DeCharms their position was basically a negative one: anti-Worcester,

anti-Convention. and anti-clerical. In heritage they were closer to

--
John Clowe!? of England than any other theologian of the New Church,

but even there major differences were apparent. especially in reg~d

to the clergy.

Even though B. F. Barrett numbered the liberal wing of the

New ·Church at }5 00 to I ~~~g jcompared to the/i 000 me~bers: of

the High Church party (as he~gnate~t@~~my nd Orthodox
 160

1--
Convention
--------
roups). and even though he blamed the High ~hurch wing

-
for throttling the rights of expression of the minority. 126 he himself

wa's living evidence of why th ~

~

SPiritsl failed to win an even

greater hearing fn the New Church. They never: developed a positive

position capable of uniting themselves. let alone a position which

would gather new support. Like Barrett the other Free Spirits
----..-
hammered out their own ideological~~es but had difficulty helping

others to a. meaningful eosition.

Strangely enough. given the similarities between the

~ ~

common with ~em

men~and vice versa.

-
Richard De~harmS and George
-----.
Orthodox and Academy positions. the Free Spirits found more in

mt3!~than they did with \f2:.thodox Convention

Bush were

cordial friends long after both had stopped writing to Thomas Worcester

or Sampson Reed. Yet they never found enough common ground to

enable them to work together to challenge effectively the Boston

l~
leadership of the Convention. In essence, the thre~ elements of the
- - Z;- .
New Church became mutually exclusive in the 1850's and 1860's,

even to the point that in this period three separate sets of New C.h!:!rch

correspondence exist.
-
Certain men. like J. P. Stua~anJ Chau~
~ ~
Giles.) do provide exceptions to this rule. but they are few in number.

126Barrett. ed.• N. C. Monthly, HI (1869). 4-5.

 161

Theological differences do characterize the three New Church

groups, and they partly explain the progress or decline of the res pec­

tive parties. But o~ fac~.£? are necessary to_tell the~ull story of

1 why the Academy wa:-. able to use Swedenborg's infallibility so

effe£!.ively in the 1860's to gain support, and to rel~te why the [free

S~ritsl were not more influential during the same time. Other factors

are needed to explain fully why~e New_ Church as a whole was not

----
able to capitalize on the strategi<: position it had from 1840 to 1870

in American
--
soc~ty. Sectarianism or w~ng f~<:..!!.o~m certainly

hurt the New Church, but no more than other sects; besides,

seCtaria.~m"can have invigorating as well as debilitating results.

-- --
The impact of Spiritualism, social reform, and tne Civil War are also

essential to the story of wha t happened to the New Church from 1840

to 1870.
 CHAPTER VI

THE SURFACING OF MODERN SPIRlTUAUSM

Spiritualism, broadly defined as the belief in communication

with spirits of the deceased, was one of three major influences on the

New Church in the years 1840-1870. Of all the religious bodies in

{ the United States in the mid-nineteenth century the New Ch~s

~~ll}Q.st susceptible to the inroads of Spiritualism, largely

because of the claim that Swedenborg himself had experienced such

communication with the Spirit World.

While Spiritualism in some form or another has probably

existed as long as man, in the mid -~ineteenth centuIY_a Rir"tu"alist I

i
!l10velll-Ell!Lswept the l!£1!.ted States, attracting widespread attention.·

This movement, rather than the sporadic outbursts of poltergeists,

witches, and other occult phenomena throughout history, has been

designated" Modern Spiritualism." To speak of the background of

-
Modern Spiritualism is not to analyze the persistence of spiritualistic

belief or to explain the causes of such experiences. An exploration

of this background will reveal some of the factors of nineteenth

·r ~ntury

movement.
America which enabled Spiritualism to surface as an organized

162
 163

(Mesme~or Animal Magnetism was the single most

important preparation for an outburst of Spiritualism in the 1840' s.

Mesmerism itself was a ?cientifically-oriented outgrowth of the

thinking of seventeenth and et~~.nturyr.ationaJist. m1'..!;tics.

An essential element of their thought was the belief that man, who

himself was a microcosm of world forces, exuded a force capable of

acting upon matter. 1 The nature of that force, physical or spiritual,

remained ~~er of debate, but around the basic premise that man

could control matter these rationalist mystics endeavored to build a

---~ ---------
world-view opposed to Newtonian science's emphasis on power

resident in natural laws and natural forces. 2

The ideas of the rationalist mystics attracted no widespread

support until the late eighteenth and early nineteenth centuries, when

orthodox Christianity a~d D ~ _w...;.e_re_f_ound wanting as religious

systems among a number of educated men, and science and medicine

were becoming increasingly materialistic in outlook. Then the basic

----- - . ­
concept that man, or man in union with God, could control matter

pushed itself up from beneath the intellectual waters of European

experience. Swedenborgianism, Spiritualism, Mesmerism, and Phren­

ology were a few of the resultant new movements.

1Frank Podmore, Modem Spiritua!lsm' 8. History and 2­

Criticism, Vol. r(I,ondon: Methuen and Co., 1902), p. 45.
2 Ibid., p. 48.
 164

Mesmerism was not a formal religious system but a scien­

tific faith which endeavored to incorporate the dual realities of spirit

and matter into its view of life. Initially only the German Mesmerists

were acutely sensitive to non-naturalistic considerations. 3 In France

and England the main interest of Mesmerists lay in developing the

medical potential of their thinking. Even that concern hardly had an

opportunity to mature before Mesme!i~!.!l was d~erti!d from reg~ar

scie~tific an~li-dical.£hannels bY' an.odipus identi(ication' with

Spiritualism -that frightened people. Only a segment of the German

magnetizers known as the German Somnambules ever embraced Spirit­

ualism, and in England and France, where interest in spiritual reality

had been less a concern than in Germany, even fewer Mesmerists

became Spiritualists. 4

Nevertheless, the two movements did overlap and the tenuous

connection between them was enough to establish the harmful stigma.

Hearsa
-
and hasty investigations also helped to cloud the atmosphere.
.
A similar situation occurred in the United States in the 1840' s but

unlike the course of events in Europe, in Americ Mesmerism) had

~lready gained a firm foothold before S iritualism burst upon the

3lbid., p. 81. Frank Podmore, Mediums of the Nineteenth

Century, Vol. n (New Hyde Park, New York: University Books, Inc.,
1963). p. 350.

4Podmore, Modem Spiritualism, Vol. I, pp. 92, 100-101.

 165

scene. Because Mesmerism spread more widely and rapidly in the

United States than in Europe,(Modern Si~ff(tugil,s:mJhad a more solid

foundation for growth in America than in Europe.

T~e reasons for Mesmerism's greater success in the United

States are many. First, Mesmerism entered the United States in the

1830' s in a matured form, after a half century of turm'oi! over its

. -- - - ---­
merits had trans'pir~d in Europe. Second. even if the brand of

Mesmerism introduced into the United States by Charles Poyen St.

-Sauveur had been a less hardy variety than it was, the young

republic had no organizations or institutions capable of quickly and

effectively challenging the claims of Mesmerism, 6 as the C'ath~ic

Church and a !'rench government commission had done in France.

American religion, medicine, and science were all too fragmented to

cope with Mesmerism.

A thid reason for Mesmerism's popularity in the United

States was the way the movement took advantage of the state of

American society in the 1830's and 1840's. In this era the first mass

generation'
-
o~ducated Americans

almost anything in print, regardless of

gullibly and hungrily devoured

i~erit.
-
Critical faculties

5 Eric T. Carlson, "Charles Poyen Brings Mesmerism to

America," Iournal of the History of Medicine, XV, No. 2 (1960). 12l.
See also Poyen's own Progress of Animal Magnetism in New England
(Boston: Weeks, Jordan and Co., 1837).

6Podmore. Modem Spiritualism, Vol. I. p. 208.

 166

were naturally undeveloped and even more discriminate readers tended

I to regard anything with a scientific air a's "Truth." For most Americans

the only guide by which they could judge the validity of a printed

claim was their own understanding of the Christian faith.

In addition, ~40 printing technology had cheapened the

publishing process to the point where a mass output of books,

I magazines, and newspapers were made availa"ble to the new reading

p~1ic. A ho~ Mesmerist editors and writers sprang up to utilize

-
this inexpensive medium; others took to the lecture trail as part of

an elaborate effort to satiate adult American curiosity. WItbJ.Q.p,id

improvements in transportation the relatively small number of

Mesmerists could circulate throughout the entire country.

Mesmerism was able to furnish Spiritualism, ahd a number

of other new movements of the ante-bellum years, with experienced

- :.......­

lecturers and editors. 7 It also provided the type of scientific fa"i th

) which Spiritualism could complement and extend, and a t.~~que-­

( the trance--which Spiritualism could utilize in communicating with

the Spirit World. 8 Mesmerism carried a strain of political thought

which Spiritualism adopted as well. This poli!~train owed its

origin to(N;;;olas Bergasse; a Frenchman who systematized the melange

J •

7 Ibid., pp. 202-204.

8 Ibid., p. 203.

 167

of political ~deas floating aimlessly in Mesmerist circles. 9~ BetJass.eJ

was one of the founders of the Parisian Society of Universal Harmony,

which was organized in 1781 to promote_ Mesmerism. A year after the

French commission officially co~~ed Mesmerism, in 1785,

~s5e) and (Guillame Kormann plit f;om Mesmer's wing of the move­

ment in order to explore more freely the social an~political implica­

tions"'of Mesmerism. 10 Positively, the two men developed a philos­

. . ­
op!!>-: of "harmony" which proposed to res~~mony in society and

( between men and their environment; negatively, they pr.?p~d a

radical critique of the Ancien Regime. 11

The critique embodied objectives which were to be achieved

. 12
peacefully over time, an approach which was soundly rejected by

the events of the Napoleonic Era. But after 1815 the climate proved

more conducive to the spread of Mesmerism in general, including

(Ber~i.nterl?~tationojJts rel~.!~...!?~itics.·'. The Society of

Universal Harmony resurrected itself~15 and a generation of

young Mesmerists influenced the social theories of men such as~

e- - 1 3
~n and (91_?rle~ FourierJ

9Damton, Mesmerism, p. 112.

10 Ibid . , pp. 51, 72, 83.

11 Ibid . , pp. 90, 101, 113, 119.

12Ibid. , p. 135.

13 Ibid . , pp. 141, 143-146.

 168

Mesmerism was only one of the appealing sets of baggage

being ll.!gged around Europe in the eclectic nineteenth century, but to

a people living with a fresh memory of the scars of war and hate, a

faith which offered universal health and harmony with scientific

[ S=t"iO: was bound to win a ::wing. ;:~IY blliance of Alexander
I of Russia was one of the more spectacular manifestations of such

thinking. T~lliance was a religious and political scheme con-

jured up 1n the head of Mesmerist-mysti Madame de Kr~dener. 14

In the United States Mesmerism moved much more sedately,

but its cumulative impact upon the rise of Spiritualism was more

significant in the long run than the Holy Alliance. As shall be noted

later, not even a majority of Spiritualists came out of the ranks of

Mesmerism, but the decisive impact on one of the three Wings of

Modern Spiritualism was exercised by two former Mesmerists,

{Arufrew JacKson Davis and fTLa~RM6::-:-~u;":";n='e""'r'1'a:;"'n~~

The advent of Modem Spiritualism in the United States is

usually dated from(the "Rochester RapPingsJof November 14, 1848,

the first in a series of remarkable manifestations of spirit influence.

To some that event signaled an invasion of a decadent, materialistic

society b forces of good from the Spirit World; to most Christian

I -- .- - "
people it marked a new phase of the continual bombardment o~~an

14lbid. , pp. 139-140.

 169

by ~e forces of Hell. In retrospect the Roche:ster Rappings involving

~-argarerT@doappear to be the first outburst of a popular,

sensatiQnal variety of Spiritualism, but the acknowledged founder

of Modern Spiritualism is not ackson

Davis 15
~

To clarify matters it must be noted that Spiritualism in the

United States from 1845 to 1870 had three distinct components:

15Joseph H. MerriU§J"cott T. Swank September 3, 1968.

This letter by the Secretary of the National Spiritualist Association of
Churches, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, deSignates~ J. DavT as '~a fore­
runner of Modern Spiritualism" and dates the Association from 1893.
~Sp1ritualists do not place much stress on! Davi.:'! as a founder of
~piritualism; they emphasize the movements which led to Spiritualism.
I ave singled out Mesmerism as the single, most important, imme­
diate preparatory movement for Spiritualism. ri;h-n
H~;;; hie. N .~sJ
accepting the public identificatio!) of Spiritualism and Swedenborgian­
_~rp. saw the two systems "identical in essence." "Spiritualism is

Swedenborgianism Americanized. ,Andrew Jackso~ began as a

medium of Swedenborg, . . "J. l:i. No es, History of American

Socialisms (Dover ed.; New York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1966

[1870]), P.:...l.!0. @itney ~CrosS Burned-Over District, pp. 334­

- 3Jf5:"" follows the same -!file of thinking when he argues that Sweden­
borgianism "provided a leadership, a theology, and a set of social
concepts which required only a mechanism for communication with the
dead to become spiritualism." The New Church resLs.ted any. 'dentifi­
cation with.§ i itualism. Swedenborgianism as a philosophy did
exercise a decisive influence on SpirituaHsm but to say that Sweden­
borgianism was "transfonned into Spiritualism" (p. 345) is a gross
error. (~o S. - ~'d~q:n,)Religion in America (paper ed.; New
York: Charles Scribner's Sons, 1965). p. 197, is more correct when
he says that Ulliversali§.m provided the most recruits for Spiritualism
of any religiouT"group. The fault of Noyes, Cross, Hudson and
others is their interpretation of Spiritualism as just another fantastic
religious cult. Many leading Spiritualis ts, like Davis did not come
immediately from any religious sect but from a sCIentific faith called
J
Mesmerism.

 "
170

PQP-ular Spiritualism of[ihe Fox Siste!j variety which won the largest

following with its emphai?is onrappings, knockings, seances,

-----
prophesles, and spirH manifestations; Christian Spiritualism. which

drew a small, elite followi!lg from"!!'pera1 C' 'stianity, especially

--
Universalism and Unitarianism; and Naturalistic Spiritualism, which
_._--­
was philosophical and reformist in character. Davis and Sunderland

were definitely part of this third element.

!Andrew Jackson Davis/was born into poverty and ignorance

r
I in Orange County. New York, in 1826. His father, a weaver and shoe­

maker, generally found life most appealing ;:;hen intoxicated.' When

debts..3-E.d creditErs became nuisances the Davises sold their meager

possessions, migrated~d began the futile cycle over again, all to

Mrs. Davis' chagrin. §"~..!lJ,lp):l~avals occurred five times in Andrew's

first thi~eILy~ars. Each dismal cycle aggravated domestic harmony

to a greater extent than the previous one. In.-.-!!.t~~ocess ~vis

J became obsessed with the fear of losing his m~her, a rather super­

stitious woman who represented security to him. 16

At various times Davis had been exposed to Episcopalian.

Methodist, Presbyterian, and Dutch Refonned teaching but basically

he remained unschooled religiously. In 1843 he proceeded as far as

the Methodist' "anxious bench, 11 only to be repulsed when the preacher

16Andrew Jackson Davis, The Magic Staff (Boston: Colby,

1885,[1857]), pp. 48-49, 52-53.
 171

informed him that if he did not accept God that night he would see

Hell. 17 Shortly after this near conversion experience Davis made his

first contact with Mesmerism. By 1844 he traveled with a Mesmerist

lecturer, testifying to his own newly found harmony with nature through

the new faith, and e_'!tra~~ing h~m~E'!.!~_to demonstrate the technique

«apable of unlocking the mind.

The year 1844 witnessed a turning point in Davis' life.

While envisioning a flock of white sheep milling about in confusion

In a dream one evening, ~ ~tr_an-gers visited him to enlist his aid in

shepherding those same sheep. The two men were Swe~org and

~ns: They offered Davis ~ag~c ~ff of healing which would

enable him to spread peace and harmony throughout the world. That

staff symbolized an attitude of mind embodied in the slogan "Under

[ all circumstances keep an even mind. ,,18

As his thought congealed in the months following the vision,

-~

Davis found his position best summed up in the word "Harmony." His

own life, and much of the activity he perceived at a distance. was

marred by str~fe. Women had no independent legal existence and were

- - -
chained to their husbands; Protestantism was split into warring sects;

and man was' so alienated from his natural environment that disease
-

~Ibid.• p. 199.

18Ib1d .• pp. 240-248. 263.

 112

ran wild. For Davis, utopia would follow man's achievement of

"mental unity." This unity was "the· harmony ~an with himself,

with his neighbor. with the universe--or. with Father-God and

Mother- Na ture ! ,,19

Davis responded meaningfully to certain thought-patterns

and social characteristics of his immediate milieu. B..Qfn into scarcity.

,!!!£ertainty_~d helplessness. he constructed a belief~system which

gave man a larger measure of control over his physical and spiritual

environment than most men would have dreamed possible. He then

,reduced that system to writing in his multi-volumed Harmonial Phi­

JJlosophy. 20 But Davis was not merely an abstractionist. for he

reacted to the specific problems of his era with vigor. Andrew

Jackson Davis sided with ~ sr:nall band of eclectic reformers who

promoted divorce refOrm) anti-slavery.lassociationism) m~~aling,

legal reform, vocationally-oriented education, peace, and temper­

~~

ance. 21

At the core of Davis' philosophy lay t!te con9..eRt of mind over

---
matter that had been transmitted from the rationalist mystics of the
.

19 lbid., p. 383.

I 20The thirteenth edition (1880';)-of this five vOlume original

I from 1850-1859 is The Great Harmonia, 5 vols.){Boston: Colbyand
Rich. 1880-1884). .

21Davis , Magic Staff, p. 478.

 173
seventeenth and eighteenth centuries to the harmonia I socialis"ts of

the nineteenth century through Mesmerism. The untapped mental

powers of man excited him. For example, since he firmly believed

that disease only afflicted the body of man an'! man's serit was tDe

heaUn essence of a human or~sm, that creative spirit must be

capable of curing its own body and possibly even the bodies of other

diseased men. 22

The exceptional weight placed upon man's active role in

~g and the general con 01 over ,!@!ter precluded the possibility

of a harmony of interest between Davis and many of his fellow

Spiritualists. All Spiritualists agreed that spirit communication was

( possible, but ~s refused to relinquish the soveu:)lgnty of his own

\ mind to the spirits as he felt the majority of Spiritualists did. Con­

sequently, he rarely compromised his ideas for the sake of Spiritualist

harmony. The spirits proved the existence of life after death for him;

I the
- -
could not be relied upon for guidance due to their own limited
­
I
l k~dge. All of their communications had to be subjected to a

sifting by man's reason ~nd conscience. 23

The internal wrestling of the Spiritualist movemen"t did not

become crucial until the 1860' s. ~"~[~!Il<l.in~~ th~ darling of the

22Davis, Magic Staff, pp. 240-241.

23

Ibid .• p. 544.
 174

new movement until then. In 1847 he had b~c ~ center of ~o­

versy overnight in sO~iety generally with the publication of Nature's

----
~ Revelations. 24 The work had two primary aims: (1) to set

forth a new concept of the universe. and (2) to present a new plan
. 25
for the social r~en~ation of mankind. Borrowing concepts from

Mesmerism. Phrenology. Fourierism. Geology, and other current

philosophies. Davis posited a theory of man's development. Man

wOl,1ld slowly progress from matter. to a human combination of spirit

and matter. through the purifying process of death. to eventual union

with the immaterial soul of the universe.

Nature's Divine Revelations revealed to many liberal

Christians initially enamored of Davis' fresh approach that his intent

was not to shore up Christianity. Davis by-passed the concept of a

personal god. He stressed the unique humanity of man but w~e

«;t~e.E?1 framework of Natur~..1.~sm. 26 In effect. he founded a faith more

genuinely humanistic than the anti-Calvinistic offshoots within

Protestantism. Man would effect his own progress by destroying

L!4 New Jerusalem MagaZine. XXI. No. 10 (1848), 433-442.

Ibid., No. ~509-515. Sabin Hollg11,"Remarks~n the ;'Revelations"
of El. L Davis. Clairvoyant (Columbus. Ohio: Willfam Siebert. 1848
[?]), 36 pp. .

2 'Rober:t Wode- Delp~

- "' The Harmonial Philosopher: Andrew/I
Iackson Davis and the Foundation of Modern American Spiritualism
(unpublished dissertation. George Washington University. 1965). p.
48.
26 Davis , The Magic St~ff. pp. 367. 383.
 175

sectarian biases, healing crippling diseases, and mending broken

economic and social relationships.

The more popular, sensationalist wing of Spiritualism had

no unified opinion on God either, but it expressed little sympathy for

Davis' reform efforts on behalf of man. Popular Spiritualism reveled

in the multiplicity of manifestations and co.~unications that people

reported from all over the United. States. The story of this second

wing of the movement has recently been toldin Earl Wesley Fornell's

uncritical The Unhappy Medium: Spiritualism and the Life of Margaret

Fox. 27

The pages of the history of Popular Spiritualism are cluttered

with court cases, investigations by so-called experts, dramatic

conversions, scandals, frauds, and other spectacular incidents. At

one point in the 1850' s at least, Spiritualism drew national attention.

In 1854 Senator James Shields of Illinois presented a petition to

Congress with some fifteen thousand names, a petition asking Congress

to appoint a scientific commission to investigate Spiritualism. 28 It

followed a series of sensational events in the early 1850' s which

27 Earl Wesley Fomell, The Unhappy Medium: Spiritualism

and the Life of Margaret Fox (Austin: University of Texas, 1964),
181 pp. Fornell blithely accepts the S iritualist's own esJimat~ of
( their strength in the 1~0'~-ten million! I

28 U . S., Congress, Senate, 33rd Congress, 1st session,

Congressional Globe, XXVIII, Part 2, pp. 923-924, 1082.

 176

attracted national attention. Among these events were the 11 Stratford

Ra ings 11 of 1850 involving a respected Presbyterian clergyman, and

the conversion of New York State Supreme Court Judget10hn Worth

Edmond~lto Spiritualism. 29

One of the most tragic aspects of Spiritualism in its first

full decade in the public eye was the tendency of opponents to declare

the zealous converts insane. This practice probably did not lose

-
favor until a number of men of Edmond's caliber became Spiritualists,
,

taking the steam out of those anxious to ignore any merit Spiritualism

( might have. An unknown number were c~mmitted to asylums as was

LMr5:" Rhoda Wakeman of New Haven, Connecticut. She claimed to

have returned from the Spirit World after being ~~en years. 30

Others missed the asylum but were deprived of certain civil rights

temporarily or permanently.

A case of the latter involved an Ohio man named Paschal B.

(\ Smith who was declared insane but not dangerous. He was deprived

of legal control over his own financial ~irs. '31 Smith belonged to

29 The 11 Stratford Rappings 11 of 1850 involved Dr. Eliakim

Phelps and the strange movements, breakages, and writings in his
Connecticut home. Delp, Davis, pp. 75 ff. For more information on
Judge Edmonds see Podmore, Modem Spiritualism, Vol. I, pp. 223-4.

----
riOrornell, Unhappy Medium, pp. 97, 101.

(3i':ile.~_ Case
Exhibiting the Mill Extraordinary Develop­
.J!lents Peculiar to Modern Times (Cincinnati: Daily Atlas Office,
1848), p. 30.
 <>
177

a "Brotherhood" of a Spiritualist stamp which supposedly had

i
dedicated itself to eradicating the great evils of society, and being

a man of considerable fortune he wished to donate his wealth to the

group. His wife objected, enlisted the able counsel of Salmon

Chas and.~es BirneyJ and won the case and the money.32 Smith

of his own defense puzzled the Bench.

--
was obviously insane in the eyes of the Court, but the pungent logic

Sadly, no record of any

doubt about the wisdom of the decision is recorded. The Court

J{ c~luded that Sm1!.h ~ould prob,!bly recover once solidly settled

among more respectable company.

Throughout this lurid, sensation_al!-ll.nd often tragic first

decade of Spiritualism's histo Andrew Jackson Davis( steadfastly

adhered to his own course. He hardly even deviated to attack his

detractors within the burgeoning Spiritualist camp. But finally, at

a Spiritualist Reform C~ion in Worcester, Massachusetts, in

Sel>tember, 1852, Davis denounced the_usurpation of reform by

sensationalism at that gathering, and warned that if spirit phenomena

were permitted to become an end in themselves the higher goal of

social regeneration would be defeated as specific reform measures

had been crowded out in Worcester. 33 In the next few years Davis,

32Ibid., p. 5, 30. The sum of money involved was $40,000­

$50,000.

33 Delp , Davis, p; 92.

 178

Judge Edmonds, and other reformist Spiritualists souncted additional

-----
wa"rnings to no avail. The New York Spiritualist Association of 1857

culminated their effort to draw together men dedicated to their brand

of Spiritualism. 34

Institutionalization mixed poorly with A. J. Davis. He had

sloughed off any moves toward it in the 1840's, probably because he

feared being captured by men of a liberal Christian persuasion who

surrounded him early in his ~areer. 35 By 1857 that element had been

repulsed by Davis' naturalistic emphas.is and had gone its separate

way, but now he needed to dis tinguish himself from the naive j:lreten­

sions of Popular or Phenomenal Spiritualism. The New York

Association, and the new journal, the Herald of Progress. which he

had launched in 18.60. promised to expose the contrast.

Davis rapidly lost his harmonia! patience with his "phenom­

enal" brethren in the 1860's as they came to dominate the organization

he had created. He proceeded to inaugurate new institutions on his

own terms. A burst of energy in 1863 sparked the Children's Progres­

sive Lyceum in New York, to promote educational reform, a Moral

Police Fraternity to aid social outcasts such as orphans and prostitutes,

34 Ibid •• pp. 132-133.

35Ibid., p. 73. Delp sees Da vis' resistance of efforts at

institutionalization in the 1840's as a case of his extreme indiVidualism,
was not necessarily incompatible with organization of his own stamp
of control.
 179

and most importantly. ·the first National Association of .Spiritualists.

The MPF died in a few years. but the Lyceum work quickly spread to

seventeen states by 1871. However. in the National Association a

/
struggle for power inten:.1fied until in 1868 Davis lost contra! o!....~is

own creation once again. In disgust Davis declared Spiritualism

unorganizable and withdrew. 36 The name was changed to the

American Association of Spiritualism but without Davis the organiza­

lion only lasted one more year. 37

....---
Angrily Davis took the offensive against Phenomenal
..

Seiritualism in the 1870' s. enlisting the most liberal Spiritualist

journals in his cause. 38 and printing diatribes of his own such as

The Fountain with Jets of New Meaning (1870). When the odds over­

whelmed his effort at the internal reform of Spiritualism. Andrew

Jackson Davis and his followers openly broke with the Phenomenal

segment in order to form The First Harmonial Association of New

York. 39 From 1878 Davis moved with more ease among the members

36 Ibid .• p. 166.

37Ibid .• p. 167. The National Spiritualist Association was

formed in Chicago in 1893 and in one form or another has continued
down to the ~sent National.Spiritualist Association of Churches.

38The Banner of Light: 11 Weekly Journal of Romance

Literature and General Inteiligence (Boston). Religio-Philosophical
Iournal and Weekly Occult News (Chicago).
39
Delp. Davis. pp. 182-184.
 180

of movements such as Mind-Cure and Ethical Culture than among

fellow Spiritualists.

Naturalistic or Reform Spiritualism could not survive apart

from Davis, and for all practical purposes he had lost his power bid

within the wider movement by 1870. These two facts spelled total

Davis could not match

/
its appeal.
--
Yet in a sense he defea ted himself by failing to garner

support from the one element within Spiritualism that could have

helped him--Qhristi~Spi~sm. But by 1870 Davis had few

followers outside of New York City and Christian Spiritualism was

becoming a forgotten strain of the movement called Modern Spiritu­

alism.

Christian Spiritualism was an affiliation of former liberal

Christian ministers, editors, and reformers who now declared

themselves above sectarian bias as Spiritualists. But since it was

not a formal organization this loose affiliation also embraced

reformers, ministers, and editors who still carried another sectarian

label but displayed Spiritualist tendencies. The most common

attachments, previous or present, were ~arian. Quake~nd

Universalist. A ~w_ Christian Spiritualists were Swedenborgian.

In the early heyday of Spiritualism--the l8S0's--people of

all stripes flirted with Spiritualism for a multitude of reasons which

shall be mentioned later. The Christian Spiritualists generally

 181

supported Spiritualism as a fulfillment of their anti-sectarian dreams

01" as an exciting new hope for social regeneration. Adin Ballou,

Horace Greely. Henry C. Wright. Warren Chase. William Uoyd

Garrison. Elizabeth Cady Stanton. Susan B. Anthony. Elizabeth Cakes

Smith. and Thomas Wentworth Higginson were some of the reformers

who explored the liberating claims of Spiritualism. 40 Most of them

held to Spiritualism for a period of time but with varying degrees of

intensity.

T. W. Higginson enthusiastically testified for Christian

Spiritualism even though he remained a Unitarian and never allowed

Spirit~alism to override his zeal for abolition or women's rights.

Spiritualism's task was to weaken sectarianism by purging the

churches of dOgmatic, lifeless theology. and then strengthen Chris­

tianity by infusing exhilarating life. 41 Spiritualism would also cope

with man's natural fed of death much more effectively than Christi­

anity had been able to do. and would make life worth living since

one could be assured of existence after death. 42 Higginson expressed

his own gratitude for Spiritualism as follows:

40See Robert E. Riegel. American Feminists. paper ed.

(lawrence. Kansas: The University of Kansas. 1968 [1963 J). See
pp. 44, 67. 107. for the link of the three women to Spiritualism.

41Thomas Wentworth Higginson.· The Results of Spiritualism

(New York: S. T. Munson, 1859). pp. 19-20.

42 Ibid ., pp. 9, 14-15.

 182

• . . if there is anything which I owe to spiritualism,

it is a more healthy and deep reverence for human life
and less indifference to prema ture death; I value men's
lives more not less for being a spiritualist; . 43­

The reformers with Spiritualist tendencies, like Higginson,

agreed with the reformist ideas of Andrew Jackson Davis, but found

him weak in his commitment to Christianity. Davis' followers in

turn had difficulty swallowing the religiosity of many of the reformers. 44

But the reformers could find common ground to facilitate cooperation;

the real barrier between Davis and Christian Spiritualism lay in the

fact that their only mutual attraction was Spiritualism itself, and

here they were in fundamental disagreement. At least this was true

of the Christian Spiritualists who were not primarily reformers. The

main concern for many of the Christian Spiritualist editors and

ministers was the problem of reconciling science and Christianity,

something Davis had never toyed with for a moment.

These Christian Spiritualists longed for scientific verification

of their liberal Christianity and saw Spiritualism as the answer. Since

for most of them Spiritualism represented a matured Mesmerism, 45

43 Ibid ., p. 18.

44Warren Chase was an exception. He was not a Christian

Spiritualist but a Reform Spiritualist with Davis' naturalistic bias.
This prominent Wisconsin politician, reformer, and Fourierist is
discussed in Chapter 9.

45Allen Putnam, Mesmerism, Spiritualism, Witchcraft, and

Miracle (Boston: Co1byand Rich, 1884 [1858J), pp. 6, 39. AlIen
Putnam, "Mesmerism and Spiritualism, " The Spiritual Age, I, No. 14
(1858), 1.
 183

their new faith was both a science recognizing spiritual reality and

a belief-system with scientific attestation. One of the outstanding

examples of this early concern with the importance of reconciling

Christianity and science was the work of A. E. Newton, a leading

Christian Spiritualist editor.

Newton's paper the New Iillgland Spiritualist, was clearly

catholic in its interests. Both Popular Spiritualism and A. J. Davis 46

found space in its pages. After all, Newton did sympathize with

some of Davis' goals and as a Spiritualist he could hardly ignore

the spirit manifestations which had aroused intense interest through­

out the country. For the Spiritualist these were the "grand fact" of

the day. 47 The crucial question se'emed to be how much authority

one placed in the content of the spirit commun~cations. Then again,

Newton was a liberal, anti-sectarian man. He recoiled against

criticism of other Spiritualist individuals or groups in fear of creating

in Spiritualism the dreaded scourge of sectarianism.

While Newton kept the paper open to the general Spiritualist

community and avoided personal criticism, he did maintain a positive

editorial stance. In the second year of the paper, 1856, he syste­

matlcally explained his own position. First, Newton defined

46A• E. Newton, ed., New England Spiritualist, 1, No. 7

(1855), 1.

47 Ibid., I, No. 1 (1855), 2.

 184

Spiritualism by delineating its four essentials: (1) That man is a

spiritual being, (2) That man has eternal existence as spirit, (3) That

departed spirits can communicate with embodied humans, and (4) That

much good and truth can be derived from such communications. 48 On

the basis of that definition Newton felt justified in claiming reforming

potential for Spiritualism. It would "contribute to the ADVANCEMENT

OF THE RACE and

. -not
- ­ to the establishment of a sect. .. 49

As he wrote more explicitly Newton explained that Spiritualism

could free man's minds from superstition and materialism, at the same

time opening those minds to new channels of truth. 50 Religionless

science and scientifically groundless faith were equally anathema to

him. Given such confidence in Spiritualism's unique contributions,

Newton's announcement in November, 1857. that a Boston Association

of Spiritualists was forming may seem natural. 51 But there is some­

thing incongruous about it in light of Newton's many preaohments

against sectarianism.

Like A. J. Davis. and most other anti-sectarians, Newton

interpreted sectarianism to mean commitment to a religious organization

48Ibid.• II. No. 1 (1856). 3.

49Ibid.

50Ibid .

SI Ibid., m. No. 34 (1857). 3.

 185

as an end in itself. At least this is how he understood sectarianism,

even if the concept is somewhat simplistlc. For Newton organization

as a means was compatible with anti-sectarianism. In short. antl­

sectarians were not necessarily anti-institutional. But Newton

lacked a sophisticated understanding of the workings of institutions

and their impact upon constituents. so he sensed no danger in a call

to organize anti-sectarians. Only those anti-sectarians who pushed

their thought to its logical conclusion--anti-institutionism--questioned

any social unit of church or state which subordinated the individual. 52

Reform Spiritualists. of the three groups mentioned. were

most likely to be both anti-institutional as well as anti-sectarian.

and the combination may be one reason for their eventual defeat by

the Popular Spiritualists. The Phenomenal Spiritualists found

suitable substitutes for the familiar and important practices and

symbols which people left behind in leaving a fellowship of Christians,

including mediums for ministers and Spiritualist words for traditional

If Christian hymns. 53 But the more philosophical Reform Spiritualists

52 S. B. Brittan, ed., Spiritual Age, Quarto Series. I, No.

10 (1859), 5.

53James M. Peebles and J. O. Barrett, Th~ Spiritual Harp.

(3rd ed.; Boston: Will1am White and Co., 1869), p. 87. Verse 2 of
"Joy to the World" starts: "Toy to the World! The Angels Come!"
Some of the hymns use familiar titles and music b t ch.ang.!LQb.~us

\(
~s. Others are totally rewritten. One of the earliest attempts to
create a Spiritualist hymnody and liturgy was by E. C. Henck, Spirit
Voices (2fiCre'<L;Philaaelphia: G. D:--Henck, 1854), 144 pp.
-­ -
 186

never provided such crutches for their followers in order to foster a

community morale. The Reform Spiritualist leaders could hardly even

cooperate with each other. One of A. J. Davis' staunchest supporters.

LaRoy Sunderland, never established a working rapport with Davis, but

the fault probably lay as much on one side as the other.

Sunderland, like many other figures in Mesmerism and early

Spiritualism, staggers the imagination. These men have suffered

bec~use the movements to which they adhered have so drastically

changed or died in ignominy, but they were not the "crackpots" of

their era. Sunderland was a highly sensitive, intelligent pioneer in

the wasteland of medicine and the dreamland of psychology. His

irascible egocentricity cannot nullify his importance.

LaRoy Sunderland began his public career as a revivalist

preacher in 1823, having been converted just a year earlier. Mter

twelve years experience with evangelical sectarianism Sunderland

called into question the nature of the revival experience. With the

theories of Mesmerism ln mind as early as 1835 Sunderland con­

eluded that revivalism was nothing more than an induced phenoinena,

a series of mental manipulations exploiting the fear and credulity of

people. 54 He gave up preaching and became a professional mesmerist.

One of his most influential projects in these years when Mesmerism

54LaRoy Sunderland, The Trance and Correlative Phenomena

(Chicago: James Walker, 1868 [1860]), pp. 10, 11.
 187

caught hold in America wa~ the editing of tbe Magnet, one of the
- 55
first Mesmerist papers in the United States.

The shift in direction for Sunderland was sudden but not

premature. Sunderland had been no typical revivalist prea.cher.. He

had quickly come to observe the powers he personally exercised over

a crowd of listeners, and had experimented with revival techniques

based on his findings. 56 LaRoy Sunderland was also a -reformer

before 1835, specializing in anti-slavery activity. His ideals

dripped with Christian sentimentality.

If Slavery is ever abolished from the world. it will be

l{done by the influence of t~~Ch.Ij.stian Re . ion. ~ri
never will abandon slave-holding, till they feel it to
be a sin against God; and the reason why all who are
now concerned in the support of this system. do not
feel and act under this conviction is. because they
have not examined it in the light of God's Word. 57

The Testimony of God Against Slavery made the examination.

All that was needed was for men to read it. It was the book to doom

slavery, and for the few who did not acknowledge the authority of

Scripture LaRoy Sunderland threw in the Declaration of Independence

55 Ibid .• p. 17.

56 LaRoy Sunderland. Book of Psychology: Historical, Phil­

osophical. Practical (New York: Steams and Co.• 1857). pp. 41-42.
Sunderland remarks that he began experimenting with his audiences
as early as 1823.

57 LaRoy Sunderland. The Testimony of God Against Slavery

(Boston: Webster and Southard. 1835), Preface, p. Hi.
 188

and the opinions of prominent statesmen that a.greed with his own. 58

The reluctance of Christians to rise up en masse to destroy slavery

puzzled Sunderland, but he never thought that the trouble might be

that the Christians were not reading his book. Instead, Sunderland

assumed Christians did not know about slavery. One more book

should end the system once and for all. Sunderland's Anti-Slavery I
Manual was designed to be an encyclopedia of facts on the horrors of ,(

slavery which would oIt a athetic Christians into action. 59

The two slavery pieces went through a second edition at

least, so some people bought the books. Whether they were Christians

or whether or not they read Sunderland's tracts hatdly matters. Nothing

happened and the shock of that unexpected turn of events convulsed

Sunderland. He not only gave up preaching; he proceeded in 1841 to

test scientifically the claims of Mesmerism. A rational approach to

slavery had failed and Sunderland wanted to know more about man's

mind since it obviously did not operate in the classical manner. The

rest of his life was spent in some form of mental research.'

The research in 1841 was conducted in New York in coopera­

tion with a number o~ other prominent men of the city. Professor George

Bush was one of many intrigued by Sunderland's activity.

58Ibid .. (2nd ed.; New York: R. G. Williams, 1836). pp.

151 ff.

59IaRoy Sunderland, Anti-Slavery Manual: Containing ~

( Collection of Facts and Arguments on American Slavery (2nd ed.; New
L York: S. W. Benedict. 1837). 142 pp.
 189

He [Bush] was at the time very much int9rested in a

series of my experiments which he witnessed. some
of which I performed upon Professor Bush himself.
He was quite susceptible. and easily impressed b~
certain methods I adopted for operating upon him. 0

.According to Sunderland. as the experiments continued into 1842 Bush

became a friend and was responsible for coining the word Sunderland

would subsequently use to designate his system of mental healing-­

Pathetism. 61

Sunderland's first Mesmerist book bore the title Pathetism

(1843). While intended to distinguish his work from that of many

other Mesmerists. the term Pathetism to Sunderland basically corre­

sponded to the more common labels of Mesmerism or Animal Magnetism.

Specifically Pathetism referred to the process of mental manipulation

of the organs of the brain or the phySical manipulation of the body by

which Sunderland produced certain desired effects. 62 The technique

seemed to be based on the assumption of Phrenology that each per­

. sonality trait identifiable in man had a corresponding. separate organ

in the brain that could be cultivated. Even more basic was the

Mesmerist concept which dates back at least as far as Swedenborg

60Sunderland, The Trance. p. 37.

61Ibid.• pp. 18, 37.

62 LaRoy Sunderland, Pathetism: With Practical Instructions

(New York: P. Po Good. 1843). p. 3.

 190

and holds that mind or spirit is capable of acting upon or even

controlling matter. 63

The process of cure, not the basic principle of Mesmerism.

was the point where Sunderland and others parted ways. In his New

York. experiments Sunderland and his colleagues, Orson S. Fowler

and Dr. Henry Sherwood, had discovered the following principle:

That when a relation is once established between an

operator (or any given substance, real or imaginary.

as the agent) and his patient. corresponding changes

may be induced in the nervous system of the latter

(awak.e or entranced) by mere volition, and by sU<;1ges­

tions addressed to either·of the external senses. 04

Cure, for Sunderland, A. J. Davis. and other "harmonial" thinkers in

the mid-nineteent.;'lcentury, was a matter of relationship and balance

of the forces operating between men and between man and his natural

and spiritual environment.

.'
The nature of the curing "force" or the techniques best able

to elicit the proper effects were not settled question.s for Mesmerists,

and Sunderland's particular Views were subject to criticis m from other

prominent mental healers. Two of the most important of these were

1- S. Grimes, who espoused a theory called "Ethero!ogy, ,,65 and J. R.

63_1_,.
Ib ' d p. 7.

64Sunderland, Psychology, p. 51.

65 LaRoy Sunderland, "Confessions of ~ M.agnetizer" Exposed!

(Boston: Reddingand Co., 1845). pp. 34-35. 42-47.

 "
191

Buchanan, whose system was known as "Neurology." An illustration

will reveal the type of differences which existed between these men.

Buchanan believed that a cure resulted from the operation of a

universal fluid which acted as a medium between the healing agent

and the patient. 66 Sunderland, on the other hand. theorized that the

agent himself could serve as the medium for cure directly or by means

of a thought-transferrance process from several miles away! 67

Of the three prominent" Mesmerists mentioned here, Sunderland was

probably the closest to the thinking that later helped spawn Christian

Science and Mind-Cure.

LaRoy Sunderland was not a typical mental healer, any more

than he had been a typical revivalist preacher. He still crusaded for

reform, although he no longer limited himself to one specific cause.

Sunderland's bitter experience in the late 1820's and early 1830's

over slavery led him into research on the mind. That research in turn

led him to a theory of comprehensive reform which he thought quite

revolutionary. Pathetism need not be restricted to the cure of

physical disease; it could enable men to influence children, recon­

cild marriage disputes. and eventually perfect humanity by bringing

men into full harmony with each other and their environment. 68

66Sunderland. Pathetism. pp. 231. 233.

67Ibid., p. 233.

68Ibid., pp. 237-239.

 192

With such views all Sunderland needed to embrace the

Spiritualism of A. r. Davis was the willingness to do so. No intellec­

tual or philosophical differences of consequence eXisted between the

two men. But" Sunderland prided himself on his pioneering ~fforts in

Mesmerism, 69 and must have resented the spectacular popularity of

Davis who had been a Mesmerist only two years before he drew

national attention to himself in New York in 1845.

Look at its [Mesmerism's] developments in the person

of Mr. A. J. Davis! And, probably, but few who now
rejoice in the light of his wisdom, have any idea of
the conflict with which the pioneers of this cause, had
to maintain the truth, eight or ten yearS ago. And then,
as the result of Mr. Davis progression, The Univercoelum
was published. And, what candid mind ever read that
. periodi981, who d!d not sincerely regret its discontin­
uance!

Picking up Davis' editorial mantle unsol{cited, Sunderland initiated

a new' magazine, the Spiritual Philosopher, to succeed the Univer­

coelum. 71

In this periodical Sunderland aired his Spiritualist convic­

tions. The paper did run separate sections on Psychology, Anthropology,

69Sunderland regarded his earlier magazine, the Magnet, to

be the first periodical in the United States devoted to psychological
subjects to run for over a year. He credits it with bringing the
science of "magnetism" to public attention. LaRoy Sunderland, ed.,
Spiritual Philosopher,!, No. 1 (1850), p. 9.

70Ibid.

7l Ibid .• I, 200.
 193

Pathetism. Unity. and Spiritualism and included articles favorable to

certain Reform and Christian Spiritualists. But Sunderland wasted no

time or space on Phenomenal Spiritualism. He had written off most

of what passed under that banner long before A. J. Davis took the

offensive in the 1860' s. Early experience with fradulent Mesmerizers

had taught Sunderland not to allow himself to be tainted with suspicion

because of association. 72

His own prime peeve with Popular Spiritualism related to the

reliance which mos t Spiritualists placed on the content of the spirit .

communications. He emphasized that the spirits were only human

spirits one step further along the line of progression than man himself.

and subject to many of the same limitations man had to admit and live

with in resignation. 73 The reliability of a spirit remained as relative

a matter as among humans. where a variety of techniques would be

used to determine whether a man's word were good or not. Even if

the spirit. or man, were basically trustworthy, the communications

from him should be tested a9ainst known truth before being received. 74

Of course, Sunderland's real point was that the communications should

72Sunderland. Confessions. p. 23.

73Sunderland. Spiritual Philosopher. I (1850). SS.

74Ibid.. pp. SS-56.

 194

oot be regarded as an end in themselves, but as a means of achieving

a higher state of goodness personally and for mankind. 75

The Reform and ChrisUan Spiritualists all interpreted the

spirit manifestations of their day to be means rather than an end.

Consequently, Spiritualism itself was not an end to them, but a means

of achieving progress toward their divergent concepts of God. Sunder­

land called the end Harmony.

As God is Absolute Goodness, Absolute Power, Absolute

Intelligence, itself, so these elements in .Him "are
Infinite Harmony. Hence, Progression is advancement,
growth, from a state of discord to one of complete
harmony. The greatest good of each is lndiv.idual,
Social, National! Universal, Progressive Harmony. 76

Sunderland naturally had many specific beliefs which

coincided with the rather nebulous concept of "complete harmony, ..

such as the eternal and inevitable progression of mankind, the

definition of evil as comparative good, and the sovereignty and dignity

of each individual. 77 But unlike th~ Popular Spiritualists, Sunderland

had no clear-cut source of authority for his ideas. He rejected any

single authority like Scripture or spirit communications, and depended

:)0 "Superior Wisdom" derived from nature and reason. 78 Because of

7 5Ibid., p. 56.

76Sunderland, Psychology, p. 120.

77 Ibid., pp. 115-116.

78 Ibid ., p. 117.

 195

the subjective character of "Superior Wisdom" Sunderland logically

advocated a pluralistic approach to religion. Uniformity of belief,

opinion, or action were· neither possible nor desirable. 79

Within the Spiritualist movement from 1845 to 1870 there

were external and internal pressures encouraging Spiritualist unity if

not uniformity. But the Spiritualis ts embraced three distinct positions

which over time became mutually exclusive. They did not achieve

unity or harmony before 1870 or after, but by the time the. Spiritualist

movement fully institutionalized in the 1890' s uniformity did prevail.

_ The Davises, Sunderlands, and Newtons had lost to Popular Spiritu-

alism. 80

One of the main reasons for the three segments of Spiritual-

ism was the manifold origin of Spiritualism. We have concentrated

on only one of these roots--Mesmerism. Men like Sunderland moved

with quiet ease from Mesmerism to Spiritualism; it required no mental

surgery or gymnastics, for Reform Spiritualism was merely an ampli-

fied form of Mesmerism. Christian Spiritualism likewise developed

from Mesmerism, the philosophical intuitionism of Transcendentalism.

7 9 Ibid ., p. 118.

80whitney R. Cross, The Burned-Over District (Harper

Torchbook ed.; New York: Harper and Row, 1965 [1950]). p. 348.
While some of Cross' conclusions about Spiritualism are in error, he
correctly assesses the fact that most intellectually-oriented followers
left the movement for religious modernism of another variety.
 196

and the liberal wing of Christianity. including Swedenborgianism.

Popular Spiritualism was the most startling of the three. for it was

based directly on the outburst of phenomena which occurred in the

1840's and 1850's. It seemed to come from nowhere and spread like

a grass fire.

To stop with the suggestion that Phenomenal Spiritualism

originated ex nihilo is of course ridiculous. but the origins are not

readily apparent. Within sectarian Christianity. in small communi­

tarian groups such as the Seventh-Day Baptists. or the Shakers, and

in the religious intuitionism of the Quakers and others, there was a

strain which under proper conditions could have become thoroughly

Spiritualist. But the connecting link between this intuitionism as

cause and Popular Spiritualism as effect needs to be found.

 c

CHAPTER VII

When Spiritualism surfaced in the United States as a move­

ment, it exploded in the New Church as if someone had lighted a

mat~h in a gas-filled room. The atmosphere of the New Church had

been charged before the 1840' s and was extremely sensitive to the

introduction of Spiritualism. Part of the touchiness was due to the

damagin; association of Spiritualism and Swedenborgianism in

(
Europe, but the situation lay rooted in Swedenborg. Swedenborg's

visions and the communications which he claimed to have received

from the Spirit World opened the door for~uaJWc tr~thin

th~ew~urch.2

1
Block, New Church, pp. 52-53, 57, 70.
"'\
G~ee for example the folloWing two works: (1) Emanuel
Swedenborg's Iournal of Dreams and Spiritual Experiences in the Year
1744, translated by C. T. Odhner (Bryn Athyn, Pa.: Academy Book
room, 1918), 108 pp. (2) George Bush, ed., l'he Spiritual Diary Qf.
Emanuel Swedenborg; or, !:; Brief Record, During Twenty Years, of His
Supernatural Experiences, 5 v. (New York: Lewis C. Bush, 1850).
The Spiritual Diary was a record of what Swedenborg saw and heard
in the world of spirits, man's abode immediately after death.. It was
first published in England in 1846 by J. H. Smithson from the Latin
Mss. See also New Ierusalem MagaZine, I, No. 7 (1828), 216-218.

197
o
198

Up to 1840 in the New Church. both in America and in Europe.

the trace of Spiritualism never caused much trouble within the Church.

The association with Spiritualism in the public eye, and the damaging

stigma resulting from it, were more bothersome than any Spiritualism

practiced by New Church people. That changed in the 1840' s with

the development in the New Church in the United States of a spiritual­

istic emphasis which came to be known as the New Era Movement.

The exact origins of the New Era are obscure. but one of
(
the early adherents was the venerable Samuel Worcester. brother of

pos.!9n~ _Thomas Worcester.

-
Samuel. a teacher in the 1820' s when

he left his brother's influence in Boston. had become a New Church

minister in Bridgewater. Massachusetts. After his death in 1844 his

-
~~p-athies.
,_._. ---- ~ ... ­
tracing them back at least to 1835.
-
son. Samuel H Worcester. published an accoun of his father's New
-
In that year a

daughter named Anna died at age seventeen after great suffering.

Shoctly after that tortuorous death. Mrs. Worcester experienced a

manifestation in which she saw Anna reating peacefully. 3

Samuel Worcester delayed his open endorsement of spirit

communication until 1843, even though he experienced a number of

manifestations between 1835 and 1843. A few months before his death

3Samuel H. Worcester, !!! Letter to the Receivers of the

Heavenly Doctrines of the New Jerusalem (Boston: Otis Clapp, 1845).
pp. 8-9.
 199

Samuel boldly declared his appointment by the Lord and Swedenborg

to convey a vital message to the entire New Church. In essence the

proclamation stated that the New Church must accept Swedenborg as

. 4
a "present as well as past Revelator." Worcester's role would be to

act as Swedenborg's agent on earth to transmit current revelations and

herald the coming of a "new age. ,,5

Worcester had been cautious in accepting spirit communica­

tion to begin with. and according to his son. he exercised his "spirit

sight" with care and

• • • never allowed himself to speak to any spirit with­

out permission from Swedenborg; and that, before conversing
with Swedenborg. he always looked to the Lord. and earnestly
desired to be kept from evil. 6

In fact. from available evidence Worcester's contacts with s irits

seem to have been exclusively with New Church deceased.

In spite of the caution With which he assumed his new position

of authority.'S amuel Worcester' met determined opposition in Bridge­

( -',
water. Trouble in the East Bridgewater Society had been building up

( fO(' a number of years on other grounds and Worcester had been forced

to resign. 7 The extent to which his New Era attitude contrIbuted to

4Ibid.• p. 3.

5Ibid•• p. 7.

6Ibid.• p. 3.

7 "Documents Respecting the Rev. Samuel Worcester' Diffi­

culties with the Bridgewater Society, " Newchurchman EXlra~, (1849),
Appendix No. Ix. pp. lvi-Ixxv. .
 200.

the detenocation of the pastoral relation is unknown. But the fact

that his son and wife both continued their association with the New

Era after Samuel's death in 1844 indicates the seriousness of the

family's involvement. Certainly their friends in Bridgewater must

have been aware of the situation before 1843.

The center of the New Era MovE;lment was New York City. In

this city in 1844 Samuel H. Worcester met With a small group of like-

minded people where he was ~n~si p~sona!!y bi': Emanuel Sweden- -

borg as the priestly successor to his father. 8 Worcester's own record

- . .

of his spirit communications indicates that he too conversed only

~
with New Church spirits such as Robert Carter. his father~ Emanuel
-
....S wedeJ;$9rg .e, other earl
------
leaders of the ChurctZ'9 Other members

of the New Era group in New York were Samuel H. Worcester's mother.

his sister Sarah Doughty. Silas Jones. and Mr. and Mrs. John

Douglas. 10

Given the New Era's belief in direct access to Swedenborg.

the Lord. and celeStial spiritual truth. and its natural di~dain for

mere human ordination. the movement was bound to clash with the

8Samuel H. Worcester. "Statements Made by Samuel H.

Worcester with Regard to Himself and the New Era" (unpublished
Mss •• September. 1845. AA), pp. 1-2.

9Ibid•• p. 7.

10samuel H. Worcester. "Reveiations Said to Have Been

Given to Some of the •New Era'" (unpublished Mss .• September. 1845.,
AA), p. 7.
 201

institutional New Church. The conflict in New York raged more

fiercely than anywhere else in the New Church and for a more pro­
,
longed period of time. The minister of the New York Society at the
( -

time was BenJamin F. Barrett.· Barrett in 1843 was still a loyal

advocate of Boston ideas and the struggle evidently began over a

challenge to Barrett's priestly authority.

--..._-­
Jo~n Douglas\was
-- ..
the chief protagonist against Barrett in
.~

1843. He regarded Barrett tainted because of his recent Unitarian

background and refused to yield to Barrett's rule in the New York

Society.11 When events went badly for Douglas he catapaulted the

whole controversy into the open by publishing his own account of the'

clash in 1843 an<;L roceeding to marshall support for him If against

Barrett. The New York Society expelled Douglas. 12 Barrett then

issued a printed rebuttal to Douglas's pamphlet. Neither of these

two drastic steps succeeded in squelching the agitation completely,

for it was related to the larger question of authority being raised by

the New Era Movement.

-----
The real sparkplug of the New Era in New York was

JO~ Little is known of his early life, but before receiving Swedenborg
i as.

11 John Douglas, Statement of the DifficuJties Between the )1

First New Terusalem Society of New York and Mr. Tohn Douglas, One
of Its Members (New York: n. p .• 1843), pp. 2-3. .

12BenJamin F. Barrett, !i Few Comments upon ~ Pamphlet .Qy

Mr. Tohn Douglas (n.p., n.p.• 1844), pp. 2, 10-11.
-
202

he had lectured many years on Phrenology. 13 He was part of that

circle of Mes"merists and Phrenologists that proved to be so susceptible

to Spiritualism in its early years. In 1843 he supported Douglas in the

confrontation with Barrett. 14 By the late 1840' s Tones was one of the

leading exponents of New Era concepts in the' New Church and' one of

I the only ones daring enough to print his systematic teaching on the

subject.

~~was without question a Swedenborgian, not a

Spiritualist. He was not welcome material in the eyes of most New

15

Churchmen, especially to B. F. Barrett, but in 1850 he found the

Rev. Solyman Brown willing to ordain hi..m into the New Church min-'

,. o
istry. The ordination was not recognized by the General Convention 16

but there were plenty of New Churchmen who would find that fact a

credential rather than a liability. They shared ones' anti -clerical

views if not his New Era beliefs.

The New Era in Tones I mind would serve to reform and

revitalize the New Church and a leadership which lacked sensitivity

13Silas Tones, Practical Phrenology (Boston: Russell,

Shattuck, and Williams, 1836), p. viii.

14Barrett, Comments, pp. 10-11, 14.

15a. F. Barrett to T. P. Stuart, August 29, 1849, AA.

16 New Jerusalem Messenger, I, No. 43 (1856), 169.

 203

to the Lord's directions.

-
The clergy needed divine rather than human

ordination and th;.y.needed to support themselves in t~ mi~istry

order to experience the trials of life as laymen met them. 17 The

in

whole New Church under the New Era would be directly ruled by

Divine Love, ot the present ecclesiastical machine~ In a practical

way this direct rule of love would be transmitted through the Lord's

Supper and the Word so that each man would be able to receive the

I
-­
Spirit of the Lord "immediately for himself, according to his state of

reception. ,,18 Tones intendedl the New Era..;to also be a direct

challenge to the Convention, for he advised friends nO.1.-to-.:1!:.ater­

nize for u~.§.e.s.~so~ialworship' with Convention people. ,,19

But the New Era was not simply ~nti-Co_nve~tio~ce,

although it was tha t in part. The key to New Church rejuvenation was

the practice of spirit communication. Such intercourse with spirits

opened men's minds to the influx of new truth and provided the

authoritative base for all the claims made by Tones and other New

Era leaders. 20 ones, 'like Samuel Worcester, realized the threat to

17Silas Tones~orm- of -
the-New
- -Era
- -of-the
-- New
-- Church
--
Called the New Ierusalem (New York: T. P. Prall, 1848), pp. 5-6.

18Ibid., p. 9.

19Ibid.

'x 20Silas Tones, Eras of the New Ierusalem Church (New York:
n. p., 1848), pp. 11, 15.­
 204

rational freedom inherent in spirit communication, but he felt good

communications and spirits could be discerned by their orderliness

and their consistency with Scripture. 21

While the dangers involved seemed minimal to Jones com­

pared to the personal benefits of relieving the fear of death and

providing aid for one's own regeneration, he knew New Church

opposition would be fierce. The New Church as a whole was still

too preoccupied with ext~FnaL~r~~r to see its need of internal refor­

mation. 22 But even many who were sympathetic to his general aims

would be distracted by the abuses of spirit communication which

were rampant.

The re~;ult of Jones I effort to revitalize the New Church

through the New Era was the inauguration of ~~~_~n~nal discord.

His own arrogance infuriated many, for those who disagreed with

New Era concepts were regarded as inferior, sensual brethren who

were to be pitied for "their blindness. A bright new day was dawning

but only New Era men would see it! However, New Churchmen were

used to arrogance. A more disturbing aspect of the New Era was its

inherently irrational claim to truth. ExperieJ)~ce_s...I,!l)~sedftdJeY1llation

of a more objective sort and made room for more extravagant claims
(
, and less scrupulous people.

21Ibid., p. 24.

22Ibi~., pp. 24-25, 36, 39, 42.

 205

Even some New Era men turned back. Samuel H. Worcester

an openin9 into the regular New Church ministry.

.---­
had renounced his New Era association by 1850 and was looking for

His uncle Thomas

blocked the way. Samuel conceded that he still believed ordination

'

was an acknowledgment of authority given by the ~rd rather than the

) conferral of authority, but he was willing to accept the rite of ordina­

tion on that basis. His uncle thought such a view sm~d of the

old errors. 23 Worcester taught for a living b:; he felt useless in [(

regard to the promotion of New Church truth. Evel'ltually he did

outlast his uncle's resistance, but he and his family had difficulty

liVing down the New Era stigma. 25

Others who remained loyal to N~w Era ~pts discredited

the movement with their obnoxious, extended claims' i James Johnston )

of New York was a pathetic example. He conceived his mission to be

23 S. H. Worcester to George Bush, February 10, 1850, Bush

Letterbooks, IV (1850), SSRA. Worcester did still believe spirit
communication was possible. See New Church Repository, IV (1851),
305, 448.

24S. H. Worcester to George Bush, December 7. 1850. Bush

Letterbooks, IV (1850), SSRA.

25 In a letter from Samuel Worcester 11, a grandson of Samuel

Worcester, to C. T. Odhner dated May 14, 1900, the grandson
requests that Odhner not publish anything in his Annals about the
.
famny connection tothe New Er-a.--He mentl:ons a memoirOI Samuel
I ( Worcester's life written byMs grandmother, but this docu111ent is not
\ located in the Academy Archives with the letteZ The me-;;oir may-­
sun be In private hands iTit is extant. - ­
 206

the completion of Swedenborg's task of re-interpreting Christianity

and establishin~ a truly new Church. 26 Actually, the real James

Johnston never lived in New York, in the flesh at least. He was an

Englishman who died in 18~0. Johnston claimed to be in regular

communication with the angels up to his death and his last message

to his apostle,( John Martiri,lwas that at his death his abode would
--------'
be New York City. 27

Both Johnston and Martin were New Churchmen. Martin

came to America in 1840 and remained for nine years, so he would

certainly have been aware of the New Era Movement in New York

even though he gives no hint of haVing been associated with it. By

the 1860's Martin was back in the United States or at least he was

printing some of Johnston's documents from New York. 28 The following

26James Johnston, The Everlasting, Church: As Represented in

the Remarkable Manuscript"Entitled Intercourse with Angels (n. p., n. p.,
1866), pp. 9-11.
I
. I
27 John Martin, Diary of the Mission, Spiritual and Earthly, )
of the Late Tames Iohnston (n. p., n. p" 1881), pp. 497-498.

28Martin published three documents in New York in 1866

relating to Johnston's "angel" communications, the first two anony­
mously and the third under the name James Johnston: (1) El Short Account
of ~Remarkable Manuscript Written in the Years 1817 12 l§.iQ. Entitled
"Intercourse with Angels. " (New York: n. p., 1866), 16 pp. (2) gg
Legacy and Solemn Information Written in the Year 1826 (New York:
n. p., 1866), 16 pp. (3) The Everlasting Church: As Represented in
the Remarkable Manuscript Entitled Intercourse with Angels (New York:
n. p., 186,6), 155 pp.
 207

example illustrates the nature of the entries in Johnston's diary of

angel communications.

An Angel from the Most Ancient and Eastern Heaven, more

East than that from which Abel comes, and where they all
appear naked: addressing James he says: "I have the
honor to be sent here, and I am informed that there is not
a man in all the Earth, except yourself, that any of us
. 29
can take by the hand: • • •

Few people took Martin or his publications seriously, but

another Englishman was much more successful in promulgating his

personal authority. He so dominated th~ New Era Movement, even

after officially severing ties with the New Church, that he must he

credited with destroying whatever semblance of the movement existed

within the New Church after 1860. In the process of discrediting the
- . - -.
New Era Movement he caused a furor throughout the whole New

Church that reverberated for decades. This powerful, compelling,

eni~niatic figure wasf!ho_mas ~ke-Harri"sJ

Born in England in 1823 and reared near Utica, New York,

Thomas Lake Harris blazed an independent intellectual path early in

life. He rebelled against the Calvinistic Baptist faith of his parents

and became a Universalist minister. 30 He served as pastor of the

Fourth Universalist Society of New York in 1844-1845, but during his

29Johnston, Everlasting Church, p. 45.

30Richard M'Culley, The Brotherhood of the New tife and

Thomas Lake Harris (Glasgow, Scotland: John Thomson, 1893). pp.
2. 5.
 208

stay he investigated the unusual circumstances surrounding a young

Mesmerist. Andrew Jackson Davis: His findings led him in 1847 to

resign from the Universalist ministry in order to begin lecturing on

behalf of Davis. 31 Dur'ing the remainc':!r of 1847 and into 1848 Harris

spent much time promoting Davis' ideas as expressed in Nature's ,

Divine Revelations (1847).

In New York A. J. Davis formed an attachment to a "Spirit­

sister, Of a Mrs. Dodge who had supplied large sums of money for

Davis' early publishing ventures. The two raised eyebrows of propriety

in 1848 ~y living together in the home of Samuel B. Brittan. The

.ensuing scandal was the immediate reason for a split in Davis'

-----
fledgling movement;32 T. L. liarris was one of the disillusioned

who disassociated himself. As the furor engulfed the young Spiritu­

alist movement Davis did marry Mrs. Dodge, but the damage had been

done. The confidence many followers had in him was jolted and
~

would never be restored.

The scandal undoubtedly precipitated the schism of 1848 but

other factors must be considered in ana1yzing the defection from Davis'

31The reason recorded in Richard M' Culley' s biography for

Harris' departure from the Universalists is that Ha~ris was too poetic
for the logically-minded Universalists. M'Culley, Brotherhood, pp.
5, 22.

32Davis, ~agic Staff, pp. 397, 401. Podmore, Modern

Spiritualism, Vol. I, p. 171.
 209

ranks. Harris, Brittan and others were troubled by Davis' naturalistic

philosophy, and themselves can be designated as Chris~~an S..!~tu­

alis!s even before their separation from Davis.)Woodbury Fern~d,

one of these early suspicious supporters, represented the doubts of

his friends in a review of Davis' The Principles of Nature in 1847.

Fernald leveled two basic criticisms at Davis: (1) his

naturalism and (2) his effort to establish himself as a new source of

authority. Yet Fernald could not write off the work as a "tissue of

absurdities, " j1ust as he could not regard it as a divine revelation. 33

But~m was a fundament"l flaw because of its impact on

Davis' entire approach.

• • • it is the great defect of Mr. Davis's system,

that its theology, if it has any, is the universe of
promiscuous spirits, whose God is nowhere to be
found. 34 .

Such thinking led Davis to assume that human character could be

improved by altering man's environment. To Fernald, who was a

Swedenborgian, this emphasis denied the necessity for individual

regeneration, but he still hoped Davis' "natural spir!!.ualism" would

--~

serve as a bridge to transport men from materialism to the New

Church. 35

33woodbury M. Fernald, Review of Davis's Revelations

(n. p., n. p., n. d.), pp. 1-2.

34Ibid., p. 4.

35Ibid., pp. 15, 17.

 210

Woodbury Fernald was already a Swedenborgian in the late

1840' s; T. 1.. Hams was still on his way intellectually. First Harris

followed BrHtan more deeply into Christian Spiritualism. He had

already evidenced a poetic gift in his speech and writing so Brittan

did not have difficulty convincing Harris that the gift was the work

of spirits. 36 Hams deliberately cultivated this poetic sense until

in 1850 his search for spiritual illumination was rewarded. In a

serl~s of three visions the spirits promised to open Harris' interior

sense. 37

Shortly after this invasion of his mind by the spirits, Harris

joined the Apostolic Movement of former Baptist James Scott of Auburn,

New York, a trance speaker who claimed to be the chosen vessel of

St. John. 38 For nearly two years the two men struggled to maintain a

cooperative agricultural experiment in Mountain Cove, Fayette County,

Virginia. Harris gave up in 1853. 39 In that same year, upon his

return to New York City, Harris began dictating poetry regularly from

36Herbert W. Schneider and George Lawton, !i Prophet and £

r( Pilgrim,~ the Incredible Hi~~ory ofJThomas Lake Harris and
\1 Laurence Oliphant; TneirSexual Mysticism and Utogian Communities
(New York: Columbia University Press, 1942). p. 8.

37Thomas Lake Harris, An Epic of the Starry Heaven, (4th ed;

New York: Partridge and Brittan, 1854), pp. 204-207.

38Podmore, Modem Spiritualism, Vol. 1, p. 159.

39Sc hneider, Prophet, p. 13. M'Culley, Brotherhood, p. 16.

 211

an entranced state. The result was An Epic of the Starry Heaven'J

which Harris insisted was inspired by an elite circle of medieval

spirits, including Dante 140

_.-
During the mid-1850' s Harris practically lived at night in
-
the Spirit World where he met his Spirit-Bride, the Lily Queen of the
­
ConJugial. 41 During the morning hours he would compose poetry

based on the experiences of the night before. The Lily Queen did

not prevent Harris from marrying. In 1855 he married Emily Isabella

Waters of New Orleans, a devout Spiritualist, who accepted !he

celibitic terms ~ar::is' eternal ma te ~ had imposed upon any h~_man

relationship. 42

J Thom~ Lake Harri~ had moved to New Orleans early in 1854.

He immediately formed a society of Spiritualists which must have

had Swedenborgian overtones from the beginning. 43 This "Christian

Church of the New Jerusalem" stressed an interior communication

with spirits rather than the external phenomena which marked most
-
traditional Spiritualists. All the memb~rs of H~rris' Soci~y claimed

40Podmore, Modern Spiritualism, Vol. I. p. 276.

41Thomas Lake· Harris, 11 LyriC of the Morning Land (Glasgow,

Scotland: n. p., 1869), pp. 48-49.

42Schneider, Prophet, p. 20.

43 Jane .? to George Bush, February 20, 1854, Bush Letter­

boqks, XIII (1852-1854), SSRA.
 212

to have had their spiritual senses opened to some degree.

44 New

Church people from other parts of the country who visited New Orleans

frequently attended worship with Harris' group in these years, but

, they were puzzled by his novel ideas. In a private talk with toe

----_
Harrises a New Church woman learned that Harris relied more on the
.. ------_._­

spirits for his messages than on Swedenborg. She concluded that his
- - ~ - - ­
means of getting information was "disorderly" and he was too much

under the influence o~ ~s Spiritualist..:::ife. 45

Over the next few years Harris moved steadily deeper in his

commitment to the New Church. By 1857 he could no longer be called

a Christian Spiritualist but a full receiver of Swedenborg who had cast

aside his most obvious Spiritua'list tendencies. 46 Interestingly. that

year was an auspicious one for Harris' advent in regular New Church

circles, for it represented the one hundredth anniversary of the Lord's

Advent according to Swedenborg. Harris real~~d the significance of 1

1857 and chose that time to a~unce the opening of his mind to the

celestial sense, a step above the spiritual sense open since 1850.47 J

~4Josephine ? to George Bush, February 27, 1854, Bush

Letterbooks. XIV (1854). SSRA.

45 Eliza (Rushton ?) to GeorgeBush. October 20, 1855, Bush

Letterbooks. XIII (1852-1854). SS RA.

46SchneiGer. Prophet. p. 22.

47Thomas Lake Harris! The Wisdom of Angels, Part I (New

York: New Church -Publishing Association, 1857). Preface. See T. 1..

Hams. Song of Satan (2nd ed.; New Church Publishing Association,

 213

In a series of books and articlesf.!homas Lake Hams bombarded the

New Church with the firstfruits of his momentous spiritual advance.

Opposition to Hams mushroomed in 1857 after the publica­

tion of hi~ Arcana of Christianity, led by men like~ F. Barret2who

had personally been condemning both Harris and A. J. Davis ever

since he had tangled with them in New York in the ~id-1840's. 48 For

Harris the ~ntense resistance demonstrated the validity of his message.

( Only truth could arouse such Satanic opposition. 49 He challerigeq his

attackers by stressing the sectarian character of their thinking which 'I

closed their minds to any new insights that were post-Swedenborg. 50

He also began organizing his followers into "The New Celestial

Church. " J
--
The New Celestial Church never grew very large. but three

congregations formed in New York City; Griffin, Georgia (Rev. Alfred

1860). 87 pp. for an account of the disorderly spirit communications

which preceded the opening of his celestial senses.

48 In 1848 Barrett had given a series of three lectures

designed to counter lectures made by T. 1.. Harris earlier that year
in Cincinnati. ra:-F.-~ Review of Rev. T. 1.. Harris' Lectures
on Spiritual ~1oSophy Cincinnati: n-:-p~n. d.)~ 1~ "Rev.
J. 1.. Harris," New Church HeraJd, 11, No. 7 (1857), 331-334. New
Ierusalem Magazine, XXXVI. (1863). 130. 296, 347, 476.

49Sc hneider. Prophet. p. 24.

50Ibid•• p. 36.

 214

---------
Buckner); and New Orleans (Rev. George W. Christy).51 Its official

organ was the periodical Hams had founded in 1857, The Herald of
(
Light. One reason for its stunted growth was Harris' departur~or

England at a crucial time in the late 1850' s. EVidently he hoped to ~

- (
gam~ the ,upport of lofluential Engli'h New

attempted reform of the New Church.

Chu,chmen~" )

At first Hams was received with acclaim, but his extrava­

gant claims and Spiritualistic leanings s~~enated most English

New Church leaders-. Part of a lecture given in London in 1860

reveals Harris' very considerable intellectual debt to Spiritualism.

Modern Spiritualism may be defined, as a series of

actions on and in the human spirit and body, and on the
objects of the natural world; produced by the more
abundant descent of the Divine Spirit into Christendom
and the world, for the purpose of unfolding the more

---
interior and spiritual, as well as natural, human faculties,
into higher states of force, perception, and utility. 52
- - --
This type of dual existence, inhabiting the natural world yet capable

----. - --­
of communicating with the Spirit World, 53 matched Harris' own

experience since the early 1850' s and would eventually become known

as open or interior respiration.

51 Ibid •• pp. 36-37.

52Thomas Lake Harris, The Millennial Age: Twelve Dis- 1

courses on the Spiritual and Social Aspects of the Times (New York: r
New Church Publishing Association. 1860), p. 1.

53Ibid•• pp. 51-53.

 215

The struggle in England between orthodox New Church

leaders and~rrisites climaxed in 1861. The Harrisites physically

occupied the London New Church Book Room, charging discrimination

against the sale of Harris' literature and forcing the reinstatement of

Wll11am White as the book agent. Only a court case finally settled
------ -
the matter at hand and broke the spirit of the supporters of T. 1.. -

Hams. 54

In the face of overwhelming opposition to his views in the

New Church on both sides of the Atlantic. Harris petulantly br~ke

with the organized New Church in order to pursue an independent

course.

\
A solemn conviction rests upon us, that the Lord has
forever removed us from any special relation to the
Swedenbor ian sect. For three years. incessantly,
we have labored to promote. by p'ersonal appeals to its
members. evangelical holiness. Our special work in
this direction1S don-e. Henceforth we turn to the
Gentiles. 55

54C. T. Odhner, "John Pitcairn. " New Church life, XXXVII,

No. 4 (1917). 231.

55Schneider, Prophet, pp. 42-43.

 216

Harris announced his retirement f~om "public uses" for a

three year period starting in 1861. When he resumed his mission

developed his theory of inte~~sPira_tion.

-----
late in 1863 he proceeded to mount a major offensive, having more

fUI_~y Contrary to the

Spiritualists, Harris believed organic changes could occ~r within

~which would enable him to breathe the very breath of Christ and

establish an organic union with God while living in the natural world. 56

Harris also had thought through his concepts of marriage and a

bisexual deity. In addition he decided to gather his followers into a

communal "Brotherhood of the New Life" where the common bond

between the members would be open respiration. 57

The communal eXlJeriment began during Harris' "desert" years

when a handful of followers formed a colony at Wasstac. New York.

The group moved to Amenia, New York, from 1863 to 1867. 58 However,

the major community was located at Brocton, New York. near Lake

Erie, where Harris succeeded in attracting some seventy-five_to~ne-

_~undred Swedenborgians, Shakers, and other sympathizers. They

-J' (,
lived together under a theocratic socialisti~omybased on wine
(
production and a~nistered by Thomas Lake Harris. 59

56Ibid., PP. 107-108.

57 Ibi d .• p. 46.

581llli!..• p. 145.

59Ibid.• pp. 146, 148, 160, 181.

 211

From the 1810's to his death Harris became more and more

a recluse. His philosophy took a distinct oriental turn in those years.

In 1815 he moved to California, taking part of Brocton with him to

establish a new haven on the West Coast.

began to disintegrat~ in
--
The entire movement

the 18.?O's as Harris' chief disciple and

-_.- ­
financial backer, 'tneBritish aristocra Laurence Oliphant challenged

- - .. _--------
Harris' authority on the basis of his own contacts with the Spirit

World. 60 Oliphant broke with Harris completely and tried to recoup

--
colony in March, 1906.
- ----
some of his once-considerable fortune. Harris died in his Santa Rosa

Even though Harris had severed all formal association with

the New Church in 1861, he remained a Swedenborgian. Consequently,

he continued to enjoy at least token support from some followers in

... ~

the New Church who refused to follow him out of the Church into his

exotic adven~ures. As late as the 1880' s a few of his adherents

( within the New Church were still causing a commotion. 61 In the

186 O' s Harris I mos touts poken supporter in the New Church was his

old friend l ~ry ~.

-
Fernald was too liberal-minded to worship Harris as an

infallible oracle; after all, he did not even render such..idolatrous

60Ib1d ., Pp. 325, 336-331, 401.

61George Christy to William H. Holcombe, ? ,1882, AA.

Will1am Holcombe to ? Barr, August 11, 1885, AA. Both letters
relate to George Christy's claim that he practices internal respiration.
 218

obiesance to Swedenborg. But Fernald was convinced that Harris

heralded the opening of mari's "celestial sense." Fernald's book, ~

New Age for the New Church (1860), interpreted Harris' message as

the chief I:?pe fo.: New Church~'!.~li~.~ra~ce.!romthe exclusiveness

which was slowly choking it to death. 62 In fact. Femald had diffi-

culty marshalling reasons ~y the Lord permitted the New Church to

exist in its present state except that at that time it represented the

only agency capable of disseminating the works of Swedenborg. 63

Now that Harris had appeared as a herald of a new age, as a modern

counterpart to Swedenborg. a new style should characterize the New

Church. Tha..!-:.tyl.: ~ould be non-sectarian. especially in its emphasis

on the Lord as the authority of the Church rather than Swedenborg. 64

Fernald' s ~ New Age was no more palatable to New Church-

men than Harris himself had been.

role for Harris within t~w

-----
No one could have salvaged a

Chur?h in 1860 except Harris. least of

all Woodbury Femald. He was suspect becaus~ of his earlyassocia-

tion with A. J. Davis and his continued friendship with Christian

Spiritualists, Universalists. and Unitarians. and because of·his

- --- -
antipathy to the General Convention. Fernald complained. like B. F.

6~Woodbury Fernald. ~ New Age for the New Church (Boston:

n. p., 1860). pp. 5-6.

63 Ibid ., p. 19.

64Ibid., pp. 10, 16, 39. 43.

 219

Barrett that h~l~ never win a fair hearing in New Church periodi­

cals. 'FinallY in 1860 Femald withdrew his name from the Convention
(
- : : of ministers. The Convention, convinced that Fernald held

heretical views, refused to recognize him any longer as a New Church

minister. 65
\
With. the defection of Harris and· Fernalg' about 1860, and
, ./

the earlier demise of the organized New Era Movement, the New

Church in the eastern part of the United States was relatively free of

the spiritualistic strain that had persistently adhered to it since the

mid-1840's. The fur or in the West had subsided also, but the calm

in both parts of the country was an uneasy one because a magazine

still existed to remind many New Churchmen of New Era days. Its

editor was [Henry welle~ pastor of a New Church society in LaPorte,

Indiana. When Weller died in 1868 it is significant to note that his

obituary was written by his friend WOodbur(;emald \ or the General

Convention periodical, the New Church Messenger. The Messenger

. refused to print it so it landed in Weller's own periodical, the New

Church Independent, now run by his brother John Weller. 66

r, like Harris and many other prominent nine­

teenth century New Churchmen, was of English blood, born in Sussex

65Woodbury Fernald to J.C. Ager, May 8, May 12, 1871 (?),

SSRA. New Ierusalem Magazine, XXXIII, No. 1 (1860), 28-31, 72.

66Woodbury Fernald, "Rev. Henry Weller, " New Church

Independent, XVI, No. 7 (1868), 106-108. .
 220

I. in 1801. He too rejected orthodoxy and moved in free-thinking, anti-

I sectarian circles as a YOuth.

67
As a mature young man he and his

wife migrated to the United States in 1836 or 1837. settling in New

York City where they found friendship in a group of N~Churchmen of

English origins. 68 The stay in New York was brief. Weller moved
- .-----,

---.
west into Michigan, for a time living with George Field, a famous

New Church missionary preacher. Fi~,!-~ds that Weller became

- --
a receiver during those days together in Marshall, Michigan. 69

-
Upon reception of the doctrines of Swedenborg,' Weller almost

-s
immediately plunged into the New Church ministry. He was ordained
y --~
into the first degree in 1848 and in that capacity helped form a New

Church group in Grand Rapids, Michigan. 70 The society there wanted

(' Welle I to perform the full preaching and ~c:Eramentald~ of a

minister which he could not do under the first degree ordination. The

--- --- >­ ---

Michigan Association of the New Church obligingly ordained Weller

--
into the third de ree in 1849 over'George Field's}objection. 71 Field's

protest related.to the doctrine of the mnal order of the ministry; he

was disturbed that Weller had skipped the second degree altogether r
r
67 Ibid., p. 106.

68Field, Memo'u s, pp. 3 - ...

69Ibid ., p. 5.

70Femald, "Weller," p. 106.

71Field. Memoirs, pp. 195, 199, 206.

 221

and that he had been pushed through the whole_process in ~ over

a year. In disgust Field resigned the pastorate of the Detroit Society.7 2

-- ------- ~

George Field's retreat not only strained the friendship

- .

----
between he and Weller. but it vaulted Weller into a dominant position
- -
~ tEe small Michigan Association. At first the consequences seemed

minor.
- ---
Weller was anti-sectarian in outlook and generally in accord
-
with the liberal ideas of Georg
----- .

Bush and his New Church Repository

on church E01.!ty, 73 but many other New Churchmen in the West felt

the ·same way. Serious difficulty developed when Weller' s thinking

took a drastic turn late in 1851.

Early in 1852 Henry Weller iss~er to leading New

Churchmen in Michigan calling for a convention to meet that year in

Grand Rapids. He shocked his colleagues by announcing that Emanuel

Swedenborg had just ordained him as the Lord's High Priest on earth

with the responsibility of laying the foundation for a reformed New

74
Church. George Field in particular dismissed the whole venture as

absurd, even though Weller sent him a special letter of endor~nt

from one of Field's most prestigious friends, the Honorable Lucius

72lbid .• pp. 199, 206.

73Henry Weller to John B. Niles, April 17. 1850, Photo­

copies of Niles Mss:. SSRA. H. R. W;{ller to George ¥USh; January
7. 1850. Bush Letterbooks, IV (1850).ls-SRA.

74 F1eld • Memoirs. p. 216.

 222
7S
Lyon. The fact that Lyon was dead obviously seemed to be no dis­

qualiftcati?n for WelIer.

The proposed convention in Grand Rapids was also dead

without Field's prestige behind it and attendance was light. However,

the undaunted few

Weller's course drew an investigation from a committee of the Associ­

ation, followed ~ c~n~ure and ~val by the official, annual

gathering. 77 It was "Field's turn to carry the day.

The victory was a Prnhic one, for the case agains Weller

.:va~ not as simple a f Fiel ) and others believed it to be. The censure

offended_the tolerance of many New Churchmen who knew \. elleri to

be a warm, sincere person as well·as an effective minister. The

widespread sympathy for him, if not for his Spiritualist tangent,

enabled Weller, to sustain the new periodical he created at that crucial

time.
--------
He called it the Crisis. The two areas that supported Weller

7SIbid., pp. 216-217.

76Ibid~, p. 217.

77lbid:, p. 218. New Church Messenger, I, No. 3 (1853),

44.
throughout the entire affair were Grand Rapids and LaPorte, the two

towns where Weller had spent the most time. 78

In spite of rumors circulating at the time, the controversy

was not initiated by WeBer'

/ rg people
_ in Gran-d Rapids. 79 According

to Weller the Grand Rapids Society remained harmonious in spite of

efforts from Detroit to stir up dissen~ion. In August, 1852, the

group was flourishing to such an extent that it dedicated a new

temple. 80 Nevertheless, the Crisis was being published in LaPorte

and Welle! wante..9 to join his magazine in a more central location.

The LaPorte Society had been l~ing for a minister for some time, 81

Grand Rapids seemed capable of growing without him, and Weller

.78S. S. Carpenter to J. B. Niles, March 9, 1852, Ph.oto- .

copies of Niles Mss •. SSRA. ? to Niles, June 11, 1852, Photo­
copies of Niles Mss., SSRA. W. W. Wick to Niles, June 19, 1852,
Photocopies of Niles Mss., SSRA. Mr. S. to George Bush, New
Church Repository, V, No. 6 (1852), pp. 284-286. The full story
of Weller's association with Spiritualism from a sympathetic point
of view can be found in the following articles: (1) He~lJ.er,
"Forty Years of Public Religious Life, " Crisis, VI, No. 2 (1856), 28.
This series continued with regularity for three ears, ending with
volume VIII. No. 24 (1859). (2) Woodbury Fernald, "The LaPorte
S(;i;iety, .. New ChurChIndependent, XVllI, No. 3 (1870), 67-69.

79Henry Weller to George Bush, July 9, 1852, Bush Letter­

books, XIII (1852-1854), SSRA.

80 H /'Weller to J. B. NUes, May 5, 1852, Photocopies of

Niles Mss., SSRA. - ' August 9, 1852, Photocopies of Niles
Mss •• SSRA.

8lwUliam Hayden to George Bush, April 12, 1851, Photo­

copies of Niles Mss., SSRA. George Bush to ,. B. Niles, July 16,
1851, Photocopies of Niles Ms s., SSRA.
 224

.wanted a solid base for promulgating his id~as. By 1853 Weller was

settled in LaPorte where he remained the rest of his life.

The few years after his censure in 1852 were difficult for

Henry Weller as he faced the suspicions of New Churchmen every­

, " ,

where. Blit Wellei did not use the Crisis or any other outlet to answer
----
<,?r attack his detractors. He preferred to let his positive words and

actions speak. for themselves.

I verily believe that questions of life are ultimately

decided by perceptions flowing from good--and not by
any external reasonings. . . . For the sake of the
very existence of the Lord's church, 1~l!s hope that

(( there are those who neither look to themselves nor to

SwedenbOrg pre-eminemtly, but who regard the Lord and
His Word above all Wngs. 82

The one charge that Weller did flatly deny was the rumor that labeled

him a writing medium.

Weller admitted that his first breakthrough into the Spirit

World was frightening and disorderly but it had been the necessary
-- t

first step toward "the most wonderful spiritual experiences. ,,83 As

late as 1868. shortly bef£re .!Us death, Weller was still explaining

the unusual events of thQse early days to private inquiries from

fellow New Churchmen.

• • • As to spiritism you are mistaken in supposing

that I was ever lOSt in it. I underwent six weeks of

82 Henry WeBer to George ush. October 23, 1852, New

Church Repository. -V, No. 12 (1852), 564.

83Ibid •• p. 563.
 225

trance or vision state, but it was none of my seeking

and when over irenounced all responsibility as to
.whatoccurred during that period. . • • 84

Even Weller's friends viewed the Situation in 1852-1853 with

more seriousness than Weller's casual comments of 1868 would

warrant. J. B. Niles of LaPorte, a lawyer and one of the leading

laymen of that Society, wrote to eorge B~S~that 'while on the

Association committee to· examine Weller he had urged restraint and

/'"
kindness in handling the affair, for he had welcomed Well_epinto his

. home frequently over the last several years an~ regarded him highly. 85

/' Nil ) confidently hoped that Weller would find his way out of the mire
==-=­
of ~piritualism, and while at first he had deplored the strong medica­
--- -
tion forced on Weller, he now believed the censure hadynappe_c! the

--
minister back into reality. 86
-
Most New Churchmen in the Michigan, Indiana, Illinois
~
area were less gracious than Niles. Abiel Silve argued that Weller,

yvas plainly under the sway of evil spirits, and in light of the reluc­

-
tance of Niles and others to take immediate remedial action he wondered

if Weller had not cast a "mesmeric" spell on some of the Indiana

84Henry WeBer to A. O. Brickman, April 4, 1868, AA.

85 J• B. Niles to George Bush, April 15, 1852, Bush Letter­

books, VIII (1852), SSRA.

, 86 J• B. Niles to George Bush, February 15, March 17, 1853,

Bush Letterbooks, X (1853), SSRA.
 226

people.
87
Silver favore strong
-
~S~i~tiOn ac'tiOii)to
before it was necessary to publish his "ridiculous writings" and
halt Weller

expose hi~o the_world. 88

The writings Silver mentioned must have been composed by

Weller during the six weeks trance period. He had not tried to hide

them from anyone and he made no claim for their content.

the spirits were an unreliable source of information and he had

------
He admitted

allowed the documents to fall into other hands because he wanted

everyone to know exactly what had happened to him, "as Swedenborg

-----_._.-.--­
had done." 89 The strategy backfired.
".
The-d~uments fell into the

clutches o(J. R. Hibbard of Chicago who used them unmercifully for

~ars to discredit Weller. ~O

Hibbard as of the opinion that the Michigan Association

should have squashed Weller once and for all in 1852 by making the

whole""stinking" mess public. 91 Disturbed by the access which

­
Weller)enjoyed to New Church pulpits and minds,. ibbard in 1856
~ -
('" ~iel Silver to Robert Murray, January 1, 1853, Bush
LetterbOO~XIII (1852-1854), SSRA.

88Abiel Silver to George Bush, June 10, 185(2 ?), Bush

Letterbooks, VIII (1852). SSRA.

89 Henry Weller to George Bush, March 2, 1852, Bush Letter­

books, XIII (1852-1854), SSRA.

90 New Church Messenger, I, No. 3 (1853), 45.

91( R. Hibbatd to J. B. Niles~ March 18, 1856, Photo­

copies of Niles MsC: SSRA.
 227

was
--
still gathering information oll!;e "Weller case" so that New

Churchmen everywhere would know the full story. He asked Niles

--
and acted in response to the leading of spirits. 92

--
specifically about reports that Weller consulted with known mediums

~. F. Barrett was Just as aggressive a9ai st~l~. as he

had been agai~~aVis an~ Harris.

,/
At the ~me the Weller episode

--
~~~d

Indi~na,
Barrett wa s in Chicago. Reportedly he Joined the Michigan,

Illinois Association in order to prevent any recognition of

Weller b!i9re he was also discredited before the General Convention.

On the last evening of the Association meeting he preached against

----- . (' f;;:::: ­
th~ concept of ope~ intercourse. 93 ~ttJ had made up his mind on

Weller in 1852 after reading his writings as the High Priest of Sweden­

borg. I1~found nothing of an "illuminating" spiritual power to

authenticate Weller's claim.

On the contrary, much that he has written and printed

within the last six months, is conclusive evidence with
me, that he is, much of the time, at least. in a sphere
\ quite different from that of the Lord and heaven, and
. acted upon by an influence quite different from tflatof

L theangels. 94

92 Ibid •

93 New Church Messenger, I, 44, 47. B. F. Barrett to J. B.

Niles, February 16, 1853, Photocopies of Niles Mss., SSRA. ~tt

was convinced that WeBer would suffer mentally for his bondage to

~pirits.

94 Barrett to Niles, September 17, 1852, Photocopies of

Nlles Mss. ,SSRA.

 228

The reactions of New Churchmen to Henry Weller' s flirtation

with Spiritualism smack of panic. They had at least two reasons for

alarm. First, the New Era claim to authority by direct revelation was I
an unsettling experience since it was logically irrefutable. Second,

Modern Spiritualism stalked all over the West in the early 1850's and
--'" ­
appear~ to be a significanUh!:eat to Christianity of any t~e.From

The refusal of most New Church leaders to ever for ive

w~~nd forget is harder to explain than their alarm over his

excesses in 1852 and 1853. Weller was effectively os~aclzed from

the.ses.-ular institutiqlls of the New Church. Actually, at least three

major issues divided Weller from the main body of the New Church.

The most obvious was the matterof the New Era in general and

Thomas Lake Harris in particular. 'Weller defended Harris when few

----" ­
others dared to do so, arguing that Harris had great potential as an

expositor of interior New Churc~h which should not be squelched. 95

However, by 1868 he realized that Harris' egotistical claims were not

just a temporary phase of his development, and he began to express

serious reservations about the prophet. 96

95Henry Weller to A. O. Brickman, April 4, 1868, M.

96 Ibid •
 229

A second question separating Weller and the Convention was

that of the nature of the marriage relationship. [Thomas Worcester.

accused Weller. of advocating free love;(a charge also leveled at

George Bush) along with a series of other serious errors. 97 Differ­

ences among New Churchmen on marriage will be examined later; it

was less important as a substantive issue than an emotional one in

Qhe Weller ca~ and probably served to further arouse those who were

already critical of Weller for other reasons.

The third maj'or difference of opinion between Weller and the

Convention centered on :!:urch g~vernment,~speciallythe ministry.

Here Weller had many allies that cringed at his New Era ideas but

supported him fully in the battle against ecclesiasticism in the Church.

~
If it were not for his links to Harris and Spiritualism, ~ r would fit
I
~ the brotherhood of the Free Spirits.. In fact. after 1854 he may

most fairly be considere~ a Free Spirit rather than a New Era man.

Weller insisted that a New Churchman ultimately was respon­

sible only to the Lord. For this reason external order was unimportant

when compared to the internal development of New Church people.

and Weller was convinced that the New Church worried too much with

the external trappings such as conventions. associations. and ordina­

-
. tion. 98 Naturally. the denegration of external order was a slap in the
----- ---
97Henry Weller. ed.• Crisis. IV. No. IS (1855). 232-234.

98Crisis. I. No. 1 (1852). 6.

 230

face to the General Convention. Many of its members probably felt

.,
as Sampson Ree that the Crisis was not worth the time necessary to

read it. Reed grumbled that he had stopped reading it years ago

because of ~schief" it was doiJ1g in the New Church. He

sugge~ed t~e Crisis not even be extended the courtesy of having

its name mentioned in any General Convention papers. 99 No doubt

----
Weller's anti -Convention position would have been enough reason
-- . -- ­
for his repudiation by the New Church, even if the scandal over

Spiritualism had never occurred.

and ecclesiasticism were rooted in Weller'

-
All three of the controversies over Spiritualism. marriage,

belief that further revela­

lions from the Lord, other than Swedenborg's, were both possible and

desirable if the New Church were to be perfected. In this conviction

----- -'~

Weller never wavered from 1852 to 1868.

The only way to analyze Weller's stance in the New Church

and delineate his views is to explore the pages of his periodical, (the

~sJ This important New Church magazine hit the presses first in

99Sampson Reed to J. P. Stuart. February 1. 1865, AA.

(Stenry Weller to A. O. Brickman. April 4. 1868. AA.

 231

Grand Rapids, Michigan in 1852. but Weller soon moved it to LaPorte.

Indiana. where his brother John handled the bulk of the work involved

in publishing it. As the title indicates. the Crisis ~ dedicated to

the crisis facing organized religion nd materiali m now that the

reality of the ~despread spirit manifestations was established fact. 101

WeBer graphically explained the "infestation" of spirits into his _own

systema!1_d.!!.sdeliverancefromthem.using the experience as both

a warning to others and a pr9.0f ol~.E;:..1~ossibility of spirit c0-Etact.

As the visions of doubtful truthfulness faded, Weller's

interior sense became more sensitive to truth and the r ature of the

spirit communications to him changed. These later communications

informed him that the present spirit manifestations signaled the "con­

summation" of the Lord's Last Judgment which had begun in 1757. In

the "crisis" peri evil and the Old Church were to be dealt a death

blow' and the New Church was to be lifted from its doctrinal phase to

new life. The full manifestation of the New Jerusalem was imminent! 102

Weller wasted no time in setting forth his attitude toward the

l
spirit phenomena of the day. In a series of nine articles in the

Crisis 103 WeBer plumbed the depths of the New Era Movement and

101Crisis. I. No. 1 (1852), 5.

102 Ibid., pp. 6-7.

103This series covered nine successive issues commencing

with Crisis. I, No. 5 (1852), 38-39.

 " 232

Modern Spiritualism. In general he accepted most of the phenomena

as real. but refused to subordinate New Church truth to spirit com­

munications received by men outside the Swedenborgian cqmp. He

also plainly stated the dangers inherent in open intercourse with

spirits. especially that of losing

- . c - -one's
-- rational
_ freedom.

Once he had thoroughly covered this primary concern of 1852­

1853. Weller moved on to other subjects. He was not obsessed with

the spirit manifestations as some of his opponents intimated. The

Crisis contains frequent refer~nces to recurring phenomena and to

books relevant to the topic, but never again did Weller broach the

subject of Spiritualism as systematically as in those early months of

----~
the magazine's history. In his ow~nimitiible way Weller had stated]

his case and let it rest. His interest remained keen. however.

Weller audaciously toured the eastern part of the United

States for seven weeks in 1853 in order to gain personal knowledge

---- - -- --_
about the spread of New Era concepts. diagnose the present spiritual
.

---------
. state of the New Church, and observe the progress of various reform

movements. He returned to laPorte dismayed by the pervasiveness of

~. -­
pseudo-Spiritualism and pseudo-reform outside the New Church. 104

T~ralysis within the Church was ~e~sc;ouraging. but

Weller did notice sparks of light in the expanse of 5!ark!!.ess. Wood-

b Fernal of Boston was one bright ray of encouragement.

'-..--­

104Crisis. n, No. 9 (November 1. 1853). 68.

 233

The greCit apostle .£.f darkness was one and the same for

both Fernald and Weller- IThomas Worcester WeBer observed that

Wo!cester adamantly refused to allow any new truth to penetrate his

mind. He was a vert table granite monument to all that Weller opposed.

The laws of Charity are violated by t h e ~ p ­

( ~!Q~hat to us is consi n d th custody of the oracles
of God--and human prudence shal et rmine what may
and ~hat may not be uttered. 105

• . The dismal picture WeUer drew from his eastern ~t illus­

trates his conviction that a great crisis in history was galloping

- -- -

toward him. T~e forc~~_o~ell w~r~~~hallin~ their ~gth for

the last, cg.lamitous b<,!ttle. The armageddon was inevitable. Naturally

Weller was not surprised by t~ tragic history of the 1850' 5 in the

United States. ~n the Civil War held special significance fo~ him.

War is of a breaking up, vastating, destructive character

--it will effectually destroy the ~ec!?rian character 'of
the whole ~hurch, old pt ne~_~~repare the ~(iY for
making things new. . e look f ard to a great work
!obe done ;hen this 'conflict isover; a work on­
struction u Oft new rinc!J!les, for we befieve t e church
as well as tlie state nee s purging of its old-time
prejudices and evils. -..M,.....e-n..:.t""a!;"r!iif,..reo-'<-e~i n the
wake of physical liberation, and a new, organic form of
t~~ bvilLe.ntirel u on itSlife of e, will spriyg
---
up from the as es of false and disorderly externalities. 06
- "'--­
-------
This hopeful expression of sentiment about the Civil War came

late in 1863 when Union fortune had finally flipped to the victory side .
.---­

105Ibld.

~crisis., XII,
No. 1 (1864). 8.
 234

When the war ended in 1865 Weller was certain that "the crisis" had

ended with it.

--------
He and John renamed their periodical, dubbing it the

New Church Independent. They Wel'e optimistic about the future but

doubt had settled about the l..:.a~I!9' role of t~w C'!.urch in that

bright era.

Actually, Independent would have been a fair description of

Weller's life and work throughout ms editorial career, for after 1852

he wa_~ver really a part of the ins ti bltional New Church. He

existed 9JLit ringe, harassing the Convention and extolling the

virtue of allowing one's internal sense to be opened. The New EJa

Movement within the New Church died with WeBer in 1868 even

" thoug" J;ri)maintained a similar editorial stance for a few mo~e

years. ~~had gone his own eccentric way an I"Fernalq: was no
more a part of the institutional church "than Weller had been. He did

-- -----
not even have a magazine outlet which <!lid reach into the membership

of the New Church.

107 New Church Independent. XIII. No. 2 (1865), 21.

 235

In the brief span of time from Henry Weller's death to 1870

another situation did crop up which related to Spiritualism. but the

incident seems unrelated to Weller or the New Era Movement. Similar

claims were put forth but the two movements seem independent of one
~

another. The affair of the late 1860's involved the Rev./Thomas Wilks

and is intriguing because it is one of the few cases of skirmish

.

with Spiritualism by either a Convention or an Academy man.

------- Most

~f tpe men discussed so far were of the independent. Free Spirit

variety.

LT~ - Wilks_,of New York City had been converte.d to

r- .
Swedenborgianism under the forceful preaching of B. F. Barret!lin the
J

early 1840's. Any friendly ties between he and Barrett must have been

broken early; 108 the two men spent manY.J!1Qnth~ of their lives~g
,
at..!tach other's throats. Wilks )Sympathized with basic Academy

principles f ~ t and
~ ------­
his first formal association with the

New Church was membership in the Central Convention.

r..--""
-- ----.--
.

. ~
---- .
toward Benadelrather than DeChanns. ~hQ..m he never fully trusted.
He leaned
109

108Thomas Wilks to William Benade. October 7, 1846. AA.

Thomas Wilks. Reasons.Qy the Rev. Thomas Wilkes for Renouncing
His Former Views and Embracing the Doctrines of the New Jerusalem
Church (Manchester. England: Cave and Sever, n. d.), p. 5. For
the controversy over a coat which split the two men see New Jerusalem
Magazine. XXIX. No. 1 (18·56), 37-38. The differences were much
more fundamental than would first appear.

109Wilks to Benade. December 7. 1846. April 22. 1847. AA.

 236

.and consequently he was not upset by the demise of the Central

110
Convention in 1852.
,. .
As has been noted. after 1852 Wilks was drawn into General

Convention operations in spite of his earlier antipathy; ~ch to the

-
dis~ of B. F. Barrett who was o_ut ofJavor wJJh Thomas worce~ter.

Wilks really h'!.d no more regard for Worcester than 'Barrett ._or{;;nad

for that matter.

-'-- -
He agreed that,Worcester was "underhanded and
--
deceitful" in his dedication to sustain his "papal supremacy" in the
..

New Church. III But Wilks realized that the time was not ripe fer

---
trying to oust Worcester so the only recourse was to live with him.

Wilks did manage to coexist peacefully with Thomas

Worcester but he was not so successful wit. B. F. Barrett. The

which drew Convention notice in 1867.

--------
hostile relatiC?.ns between the two finally erupted into a scandal

For brevity's sake it is only

necessary to record that both men were in the Philadelphia area, and

both had follow~in the s'!1all society whe/"'':''~S.Ewas the regUl:

pastor.
---"'""" ---
A court case ensued over the character oflThoinas Wilks and
-- ~

whether or not he should be perm.itted to continl!~..J)~hing: Barretq

-/
of course. inspir.ed the opposition. The court declared in Wilks'

-
favor in 1866 but by 1868 the animosities still had not died. 112

llOwilks to Benade, September 25. 1852, AA.

l11Wilks to Benade, February 9. 1864. AA.

112Wilks to Benade. October 13. 1865, March 29. 1866.

May 18, 1868, AA. See Barrett. Report of the Committee of Investi­
gation, 88 pp., for documents on the Wilks Case of the 1860's.
 237

Certa1nly the exhausting clash with Barrett was a traumatic

one fO~!.l1as WUks. Whether it was responsible for Wilks' change

Qf thinking is uncertain, but in 1868 ilks confided in William' Benade

that he ~as having s.?me unusual visions. These early visions stressed

the faithfulness of Academy men to Swedenborg and the Lord and indi­

cated that their future use would be to act as a "nucleus" for the

perfection of the New Church. 113 In essence this was the position

Benad
. I had ­
taken since the 1850' s, only he had come to his conclu­

s10n without visions. When he failed to display enthusiasm for Wilks'

emphasis on visions, Wilks in 1869 began to draw back. from his friend.

(iew~C~ Iungeric!jsuffered the same fate. Wilks visited

him to inform him of the visions of.~iMrs:-Burtj which d_ovetailed with

those he was having. Excitedly he told Iungerich that~spirits had

warned him against prematurely disclosing the content of the visions.

- -- <­
but he was confident that both Iungerich and Benade yvould be ~ought

into the celestial sphere. 114 I:gericg was not sure he wanted what
- ----
,r Wllk~: was experiencing, and in alarm over (Wi~ self-impo~d

isolation from other receivers he aske ~ade') to investigate the

- ~ ---­
-
matter and try to help him. 115 Less than a year lat~r he bemoaned

the fact that VYilks was beyond recovery. 116

113W ilks to Benade, April 29, 1868, AA.

114 L C. Iungerich to Benade, May 3, 1869, AA.

115Iungerich to Benade, June 8. 1869, AA.

116Iunger1ch to Benade, April 15. 1870. AA.

 238

as no longer pastor of the Delaware County

Society. He had effectively cut himself off from almost all New

Church c..?ntacts bu JBenade] ~~ose advice he sought on the publica­

-
of the Pennsylvania Association of the New Church and he adamantly

refused to step down, just as he ref~sEld t~allow

-
his writings to be

edited. The spirits had warned him not to compromise his pOSition. 1 l 8
----
----..-­
Since the Association had no provision in its constitution for ousting

a President, it dissolved and reorganized ~nder a new..!.eadership. 119

-
Once again the New Church had soundly rejected an effort to alter its
- -
~on

-
\!nder auspices which smacked of Spiritualism or were based

on a new, direct revelation.

The Thomas Wilks affair did not mean the end of Spiritualism's

influence on the New Church because Wilks' case, and in this respect

he does share common ground with the New Era movement, was rooted

far deeper in New Church tradition than Spiritualism per se. He and

others went back to Swedenborg for their example. They were all

~ught up in the dazzling popularity of M~rn Spi~lism between

117Wilks to Benade, December 23, 1869, March 16, 1870,

AA. This work on Druidism was first published in serial form in the
New Church Regository, I (1848), beginning with No. 2 (February,
1
'1848), 67. See also pp. 131, 195, 323, 387.

llBwilks to Benade, March 16, 1870, AA.

119Block. New Church, p. 217. N. C.(8urnham)was ele~ed

the new president of the Pennsylvania Association.
 o
239

./ 1845 and 1870. but ~ll of them emphasized i~al communication

with the Spirit World and downgraded the external henomena which
---- ~

excited non-Swedenborgians. The external manifestations were

remarkable evidences of spiritual reality but they had little use

spiritually.

The Wilks case merely added to the disgust with w~ ~~t

New Churchmen already regarded any effort to rely upon visions and

spirit contact for guidance in doctrine or life. The extravagant claims

~---

. ' --
Even had the movement found new leadership after(Henry
---
and meager results of the New Era Movement had left a bitter taste.

Well~s\
death any substantial progress within the New Church at that time

would have been impossible. The effort of the movement to open the
-----
New Church to new truili h..ad ended by ac.complishiD9 t~ ver 0 po~e.

In addition to the personal scars left behind. the chief remnant of the

New Era was ..;;;a:;;n;;;;e;;;v==~<:.e_r_a_n_t_a_go~~ardc han e than ~d

)
existed before.
 CHAPTER VIII

THE INTERACTION OF SPIRITUAUSM

AND SWEDENBORGIANISM

The story of the New Era Movement in the New Church reads

like the operation of a centerfuge. New Era men were forced to the

fringes of the New Church and usually out of it even though they

might remain Swedenborgians in philosophy. They were still part of

the New Church community but their effec~ss was limited once

official ties with the Convention were cut. Free Spirits also lQ§.t

-
power as a result of their independent stance, with the exception of

(G;;rge Bush of New York.

---
Bush's intellectual stature was such that

he exercised great influence on the New Church community fr..£m Ol.lt­

~e the Convention.

The New Era was composed of Free Spirits, but not all Free

Spirits embraced the New Era. lEiaJ!lin F. Barrett swallowed his

antag~nism to the Convention long enough to cooperate with Conven­

I tion men in the effort to squelch the New Era. His opposition to the

New Era was relentless. On the other hand, George Bush was a Free
r----­

Spirit who at first sympathized with the New Era even though he never

fully associated himself with the movement.

240
 241

1796. in Norwich, Vermont.

Real hardship stnick the family some four years later when George's

father died. In spite of economic difficulties George managed to

graduate from his father's alma mater. Dartmouth College. in 1B1B. 1

Abiga1 Bush. his mother. died that same x~ar. On his own/ Bush

chose to enter Princeton to prepare for the Presbyterian ministry and

the choice proved satisfying enough that he remained a year after

grad'!ation to work as a tutor in the College. 2

After his ordination Bush joined the Home Missionary Society

and in 1824 that agency sent him to Indiana as a missionary. While

there he married but his wife died in 1B27. leaving him with a young

son in Indianapolis. The death of his wife convinced Bush that he

should return to the East a~devote himself to intellectual pursuits.

a move which he made in 1828. 3 In New York he married Mary Fis~et,

to whom he had two sons and a daughter. He also accepted a post in

what J...~J!~ York University as Professor of Heprew an,d Oriental

Literature. Evidently he was still an ev~g~l.!s:al Presbyterian. for he

served a term as the superintendent of the American Bibl: Soci~y Press

and published part of a series of Old Testament commentaries which

lWoodbury Fernald. ed.• Memoirs and Reminiscences of the

--;i:> Late Professor George Bush (Boston: Otis Clapp.. 1860), p. 4. - ­

2
Ibid•• p. 5.

3 Ibid

--'
 242

drculated widely in Presbyterian circles. 4 Other publications of the

/'c 1830's include his Ufe of Mohammed (1830) and a Hebrew grammar

(1835).

About 1845 George Bush openly aCKnowledged his Sweden­

borgian faith, but the groundwork for that announcement extended back

into the 1820's.

- .
terian form of church government
-
ID Indiana Bush had refused to recognize the Presby­
~t!:e
. 5
only Scriptural pohty. This
~

ttitude
. carried over into the New Church later ancl"Bush never would
. - /

( a.-9mit that any existing church had a polity compatible with apostolic

teaching. As a professor in New York Bush continued the intellectual

search he had inaugurated in Indiana by immersing himself in the

~ fUAthOU9ht-currents of New York City. A friend described BUSh': New

York study as "the resort of inquiring and ingenious minds from most

parts of our country, as well as frequently, of visitors from abroad. ,,6

The final steps from the Old to the New Church occurred from

1842 to 1845, and can be traced through the pages of Bush's published

works of those years. j The Hierophant: or. Monthly Journal of Sacred

4 Ibid .

5 Ibid., pp. 256-258.

6Ibid., p. 189. The friend was William Hayden (1816-1893)

who as a partner with G. P. Putnam in New York moved in the same
literary and publishing circles as Bush. He became a receiver of
Swedenborg through Bush. After leaving New York about 1850 Hayden
entered the New Church ministry and served twenty-six years in
Portland, Maine. "Obituary," New Church Ufe, XIII, No. 8 (1893),
128.
 243

Symbols and Prophecy, which ran in New York for a full year, 1842­

1843, reveals Bush's growi.!.1g int.erest in mysticism and m~llennialism.

(~astasisJ1844), unleashed a direct attack on ~e orthodox view of

the resurrection of Christ. Then in 1845 Bush openly proclaimed his

reception of Swedenborg's doctrines.

"
Bush's decision to jOi~ N~w
~
Church shocked the intellec­

tual community in New York and elsewhere much more than his defec­

tion from.,2rthodox Christian~ty.

-----
One eminent New Churchman felt in

retrospect that Bush's conversion was the match that !gnited Protestant

opposition to the New Church. 7 Probably the_antipathy toward Sweden­

borgianis m had been latent for years, but until a scholar of Bush's

caliber ad converted, the New Church seem_ed.like a slight~t,.

r Two major orthodox rebuttals of New Church tenets did appear shortly
\ after Bush's conversion. He tackled one of them himself and asked

N. F. Cabell ~ Virginia to reply to the second one. 8

\2ternald, Memoirs, pp. 207-.208.

8Ibid. The four works referred to are. as follows: (:1) Leonard

Woods, Lectures on Swedienborqianism, Delivered in Andover Theo­
logical Semina in February, 1846 (Boston: Crocker and Brewster,
~846), ~p. 2 Geor e Bu~e I to Dr. Woods' ''Lectures on
Swedenl5O'i'gianism" DeIivere in U Theological Seminary, Andover,
J1 Massachusetts (New York: J. AlIen, 1847), 2?.&.Jlp. (3) Enoch Pond,
Swedenborgianism Examined (Portland, Maine:rtyde, Lord and Duren,
I[ 1846), ?~P. '"(4) athan F. Cabell, Re I to Dr. Pond's "Sweden­
borgianism Reviewe '(New YorK: onn AlIen, 1848),·195 pp. See also
Georg~ Bush to the Ban or, Maine Whig and Courier, May 25, 1846,
for Bush's reply to Dr. Pond, and George Bush to Albert Ware
Paine, April 24, 1846, SSRA for Bush's praise of Bangor's liberal spirit
w~~x~eption of the p~p~.on the "hill-.!9P."
 244

The stiffening of opposition to N~w Church inroa~s struck

11' Bush financially. Publishers cut off distribution of his earlier evan­

-----
gelical books and Bush lost hundreds...91 dQllq[s_ in royalties. 9 He
- ----.­
immediately be~~ng for the much smaller, but highly sophisti­

cated New Church audience, and he still held his teaching position.

That post he left behind in 1847 to prepare for the ministry and in 1848

he was ordained privately into the New Church ministry py Dr. Le~is

_Bee~s of Danby, New York. His first pastorate, the New York First

Society, required Bush to succeed@;... F. Barre}t in coping with the

New Era Movement. 10

By the time he assumed the New York pastorate in 1848

~e Bus I was already one of -=-;"---"~;;..~=""'-:. -=-

Church history. Without waitin to sense the various moods of the

New Church community, ~ad plunged in head first, with the

( result that in a few short years he had alienated both the Convention

\ leadership and many fellow Free Spirits. The Academy as such did

not yet exist but Bush had ~lso fallen out of favor with th_e men who

would lead that movement except for Richard DeCharms.

----::::::=
When Bush first proclaimed himself a receiver of Swedenborg

Boston New Churchmen welcomed him with exuberance. Evidently

9Fernald, Memoirs, p. 194.

101bid., pp. 10-11.

 245

Bush had engaged in serious conversations with Boston Sweden-

borgians before his conversion while on a lecture tour. 11 After

becoming a receiver Bush accepted an invitation to return to Boston

to lecture in the New Jerusalem temple during the winter of 1845-

184S. While there he heard ~h-waldo Emerson1deliver

1 __
a critical

lecture on Swedenborg to which Bush replied publicly on January 16,

1846. 12 Emersoh retorted more scathingly than before, partly to

- - ~.---

!ree himself from ~ny_a~sociati9n with the New Church or Sweden-

borg. 13

Caleb and Sampson R!:.:..d and Theophilus Parsons, among

others, praised the effects of Bush's lectures in Boston and lauded

his vigorous defense of Swedenborg. Sampson Reed even went so

far as to indulge in Bush's curiosity about Mes meris m and attend a

LaRoy Sunde~d lecture in Boston. Sunderl':l:dl~c~da group

~s and made them perform but Reed could see no relation between

these tricks and Swedenborg so he left early. 14 Naturally he was not

pleased with Bush's subsequent sympathetic treatment of Mesmerism

llIbid., pp. 292-293.

12Ibid., p. 293. For the full lecture see George Bush, ~ 1

to Ralph W. Emerson on Swedenborg (New York: J. AlIen, 1846). .J

13Clarence Hotson~ "George Bush: Teacher and' Critic of

Emerson," The Philological Quarterly, X, No. 4 (1931), 381.
J'
14Sampson Reed to George Bush, February 20, 1846, Bush
Letterbooks, 1(1846-1847). ssRA.
 246

io Mesmer and Swedenborg. By late 1846 he and the rest of the

Boston elite had ceased praising Bush and ins tead were criticizing

him for activities which they regarded as unwise and based upon
15
ig09rance of Ne_w Church doctrine.

One irritant was Bush's insistence, over Boston remon­

strances, that he was going to publish a work on the connection

between Mesmerism and Swedenborgianism.

--
He was aware of the

furor such a book would raise but the positive value of Mesmerism

for New Church development outweighed any dire consequences in

his mind.

• I am about publishing'a book on the subject

[of Mesmerism] which if I mistake not will put upon it
quite a new complexion. • . . Certain astounding
developments have recently occurred in this city which
amount to a positive miraculous attestation of the..truth
of Swed'g' s disclosures, and which are u~estionably
designe by the Divine Providence t6-b~e viewe --arid
valued in this connection. They areastounding beyond
measure, and yet so amazingly confirmed by evidence
that they cannot be withstood. 16

-- "
The recent "astounding developments" in New York of which

Bush spoke so ecstatically were the incidents surrol.i.nding young

15The first biting criticism of Bush from Boston was from

Caleb ~g. ~.e-d tCLGeorge_Ely§h, April 28, 1846; Bush Letter­
books, I (1846-1847), SSRA. See also C. Reed to G. Bush, November
I, 1847, Bush Letterbooks, XII! (1852-1854). SSRA. Otis Clapp of
Boston prove~be the excftPtiUIl to the general Boston disenchantment
with Bush. ~is Clap to e.orge Bush, February 19, 1848, Bush
Letterbooks, I (18'fb=1847), SSRA. -C-iapp to Bush, June 17, August 13,
1848, Bush Letterbooks, I! (1848), SSRA.

16George Bush to Richard DeCharms, July I, 1844 (6). AA.

 247

c.~drew ...e.CkS~. the trance speaker who helped found Modern

Spiritualism. Bush jumped to Davis' defense in lS47 ~e~is

integrity was challenged by Taylor Le"Y..t in the public press. Lewis

- ----:-- -­
was one of Bush's colleagues at New York University and the two

tangled in a ~ws aper duel over Davis. 17 Lewis claimed that Davis

could not possibly demonstrate his remarkable repertoire of learning

without human help because Davis had asserted that he lacked any

formal or informal education. Since to Lewis much of Davis' writing

and speaking was streaked with SwedE::!.nborgianism. and Bush was a

known associate of the Davis clique, his natural conclusion was that
- -
Bush was an accompltce in Davis' colossal fraud. IS
.---- ­
Bush quickly admitted that Davis' accomplishments were

remarkable, but he defended Davis' integrity and argued that such

experiences had precedent in the life of Emanuel Swedenborg. Of

course, Swedenborg had been a prophet of the Lord and not merely

a trance speaker, but the culmination of Mesmerism's development

(
i~he~';laz1ngA. J. Davis confirmed the reliability of swed:bOrg'S

teachings. 19 Bush, in lS47 and always, was not about to

--- --:-­
17 Delp, Davis, pp. 35-37. See also The New York Tribune.
January 2, 7, 14, 16, 25, lS47; A. J. Davis, Events in the Life of a
Seer (4th ed.; New York: A. J. Davis and Co., lS73 YlS6S]), pp~31-62.
18 Ibid., p. 41.

19George Bush, Mesmer and Swedenborq; 2[, the Relation of

the Developments of Mesmerism !Q the Doctrines and Disclosures of
Swedenborg (New York: John AlIen, lS47), pp. 33-34, 203.
 248

subordinate New Church truth to other claims, no matter how trust­

worthy they seemed.

If Mesmerism is true, Swedenborg is true. . . . The

rl c~e, however,we do not a~1t as holding gooct=.­
viz~ that if Mesmerism be false, Swedenborg is false.

The contrary reports of ten thousand clairvoyants would

not shake an iota of their confidence in the paramount
truth of what their illuminated teacher has affirmed on
the same subjects. 20 .

In spite of his acknowiedgment of the primacy of Swedenborg's

authority, many New Churchmen in Boston and throughout the country

J( could not accept the use of Mesmerism to verify Swedenborg. William

\ /

Benad I was one of the most vocife~s detractor!?. of Bush's apologetic.

I have nothing to say against anyone's investigating

Mesmerism on scientific grounds, --in order to obtain
an understanding of its nature and operation; but I have
' everything to say against this rofane and adulterous
yni.9n.of an infernal princiQle with the Sacred Truths of
(
the Church• • • •

... Already it is seen that the effect of this proceeding

I\ of Prof. Bush, i~to connectjtI.esmerism ~the_ New
i Church in the public mind. Does the New Church need
Mesmerism as-asupport upon-;hich to lean? Shall we
( seek to advance its"holy cau--;; by showi;- tha we....gln
L explain the power of infernal age~ies? If the New
Church is to lean upon this support, --then it will fall-­
must fall, --and let it fall. ~~hurch_££!Lstand
r upon its own basis. Divine Truth is Omnipotent, --and It )11
will prevail without any aid bei~g sought from hell. -::can
hell be brought oy man to the aid of heaven ?--Most
absurd and horrible idea! 21 ­

20 Ibid •• pp. 69, 184.

21Wllliam H. Benade to Dr. G. C. Gosewich, April 20,

1846, AA.
 249

~as Wilks.(Sampson Ree~~

-.--_/ ---- and Dr. G. C. Gosewich of

Wllmington, Delaware, who had intended to invite Bush to his city for

a series of lectures, were a few of the il)fl~tial Ne",! Churchmen who

expre.ssed their concern in-1846 over ush's 'course. 22 But many took

the opposite tack as well. They congratulat

of Mesmerism and frequently re~ounted how they and their friends had

I }------
first become interested in Swedenborg through Mesmerism. 23 Many

of these men were not members of a New Church society yet. For

example, 'a former student of Bush's at Princeton, who had also

~duate~.Jr.9.!Tl the Sem~ry and then abandoned the Presbyterian

ministry because of its sluggish stand on slavery, wrote to Bush of

----
his current enthusiasm for both Swedenborg and A. J. Davis. 24

By 184 r!3ush's own loyalty to"Davis'had begun to wane.

.--/~-­
Like T. L Harris
,
George - -----­
S muel Brittan, ( oodbury Fernal

Bush could not accept D~vis'

and others

naturalism and the scandal of

22Thomas Wilks to WUliam H. Benade, October 7, 1846, AA.

G. C. Gosewich to George Bush, May 2, 1846. Bush Letterbooks, I
(1846-1847), SSRA. Sampson Reed to George Bush, August 20, 1846,
Bush Letterbooks, I (1846-1847), SSRA.

2 Heze~Josley to George Bush. November 8, 1846.

Bush Letterbooks, I ~r8~ -1847), SSRA. John C. Holbrook to George
Bush. December 5, 1846, Bush Letterbooks, I (1846-1847), SSRA.
See also January 8, March 28, April 3. 1848 letters to Bush. Bush
Letterbooks, II (l848), SSRA.
2 4 - - - - ),
r]. Pi<;kand (1) to George Bush, December 28, 1847,

Bush Letterbooks, I (1846-1847), SSRA.

250

~ provided a convenient occasion for a complete break with Davis.

But Bush'could hot ignore Spiritualism after 1848. He downgraded

--
the "maudlin sentimentalism" of the popular wing of Spiritualism at
----
( the same time that he recognized the reality of_the present spirit

manifestati9ns.25 The fact that' men did c'ommunicate with the Spirit

World was more essential to him than the content of the communica­

tions. 26

In many respects Bush I s thinking on Spiritualism paralleled

that of H~ry We!!er and other New Era men. Good spirits could

transmit useful, but not vital truth, and the only sure test of the
------
authenticity of the communications was their compatibility with--0e
(
corpus Ef Swedenborg's works. 27 While there were dangers inherent

in Spiritualism, Bush felt that Spiritualism could lead skeptical men

----
from materialism to a belief in the spiritual side of reality, and from

that to New Church truth.

True Spiritualism does not consist in dealing with

Spirits, but in the opening of the spiritual degree of
_the mind, ~ correspooding course of life. 28

25 eorge Bush, New Church Miscellanies; or, Essays

Ecclesiastical, Doctrinal, and Ethical (New York: WilliamMcGeorge,
1855). pp. 242-243, 272, 281, 283.

26Ibid., pp. 244, 246.

27lbid., pp. 247, 251, 254.

28George Bush, Address Delivered at Hope Chapel, New

York. May li, 1857 During the Celebration of the First Centenary of
the Church of the New rerusalem (New York: n. p., 1857), p. 36.
..

251

Only submission to the Lord could lead to interior illumina­

tion and a satisfying life-style.

Such accord with New Era concepts was enough to make life

uncomfortable for Bush in either of the two conventions existing in

the New Church in the 1840' s. He confided to Richard DeCharms in

1846 that he could not conscientiously join either body even if he

were wanted.

There is, I think, exceedingly little prospect of the

fulfillment of your augury"respecting my future connexion
with t~astern_Conve tion. I should be much more apt
to join the Central if either, for I think they are much
nearer the truth. 29 .

Bush remained aloof from the Eastern and Central Conventions.

but at least in 1849, when the two annual meetings overlapped in

~hiladelPhia, he attel!d.!LQ..E~th. ~. Stuart also present at

( - --
both meetings. gives a rare personal glimpse of the Professor in a

letter to his wife. He mentioned tha 'Bushlwas there with his new

wife who was an attractive contrast to most of the Philadelphia women

he had seen so far.

The Prof. is one of the most venerable looking men in the

Convention. quite grey--with short curly hair and deep
forehead--a thick neck .strong an~ deeply marked features
J
and very_im~s~Qignifled in hi~ eecn.

• • • The Prof is a much sounder man than some others

who regard him unsourid. He is, however, a very

29George Bush to Richard DeCharms, July 1, 1844 (6), AA.

 252
.. lllde-P_endent and fearless man; and seems to have no
f J plans ~'hemes. 30 ­
.
--
;. {
After 1849 the CentraJi Convention rapidly died and the (;eneral,

Convention became increasingly less appealing to us • partly

'-.--­

because of the personal conflicts with Boston and partly due to his own

I views of the mirl1stry which contradicted. pr,e'l.ailing Conv.ention theory

11 and p~ti~e. Ever sin: ~46 his relationship with the "Boston
sphere" or "Boston cli~e," "to which I am mightily ~2u nant," had

detetlorated. 31 Bush had the unshakeable SU~Picion that in the eyes

of the Boston brethren he was the greatest curse ever to hit th~ New
(
Church. 32 For his part he could not stand the "lordly Boston airs"

that generally prevailed at New Church gatherings, 33 and consequently

he did his best to avoid direct contact with Convention leaders.

Avoidance did not mean Bush intended to forfeit the battle

for New Church allegiance.

The fact is, the body [the General Convention] in its

present sta'te is a nuisance to the Church, and as far as
I am concern~ am resolved t at ey should be made
aware of it. I shall hope not to-fOrget C ~ de;orum~
but I am in for the -war in---
'--'--'~---=-=..:;-
my. opposition
. ~ to that young
­

30 .~-?E to Mary Stuart, June IS, 1849, AA.

. 31Geor-;B~ti\to R. DeCharms, June 10, 1849, AA. George

I
I 'l3u"sh ~o J. P. -Stuart, August 18, 1853, AA.

~2Geo~g.:. BUS~~..!:...3~tuart, August 18, 1853, AA.

33Geor<;le Bush to J. P. Stuart, June 4, 1853, AA.

 253

~ylon. The Church will never have true peace or 34

'. prosperity till the mischief from this source is abated.

Bush was true to his word. On a host of issues he disregarded the

Judgments of Convention leaders and plunged into controversy.

'!lent infuriated
-
~ny_New
- r
.Bush's democratic views on the ministry and church govern­

Churchmen and. the entire debate on the

. .
subject was of major significance because it led to bickering which

had a destructive impact upon the Church as a whole. 35 The coverage

of reform in his periodical also agitated the Church and will be cori­

sidered in later chapters. A third point of irritation was Bush's

attitude toward Spiritualism. His open approach toward the move­

ment led him to publish Swedenborg's Spiritual Diary, the account of

34 eorge Bush to J. B. Niles, July 16, 1851, Photocopies

of Niles Mss., SSRA.

~
35As early as ~ ~ close friend, B. F. Barret criti­
cized him for downgrading t.he nunistry because it seeme unreasonable
to his mind, just as the··Un· salls "g 0 es Hell. Barrett felt Bush
was not ieldin to Swedenb_org's authority in the whole matter.­
Barrett to Bush, February 23, 1849, Busn -tterbooks, .Ill i849 SSRA.
He also warned him that he was beginning to sound like Silas Jone~
Barrett to Bush, January 14, lS,r9, BuSIl LetterooolZS;-m (1849), SS RA.
See als Otis Clapp' to George Bush . ril 16, 1849, Bush Letterbooks,
In (1849), SSRA. ~Clapp wrote thaUI~:s iews on the ministry were I)
hurting him in the Boston area. (. B. Niles told Bush he was tired of
seeing articles in e Re ositor on e C nve:n:um;. ancLRc.clesiasticism;
their interest value is "us-ed up." Niles to Bu h, January 2,lifs4.:-&;sh
r.etterbooks, XoJ (l855), SSRA. A year late Nile~ reflected thatf[arrett's
recent articles against the Convention were excellent. Niles to Bush,
January 18, 1855, Bush LetterbookS; XoJ (1855), SSRA. See also George
Bush, Priesthood !!ill!. ~ Unknown to Christianity; or,· The Chi:UCh
~ Community of Co-Egual Brethren (Philadelphia: J. B. Lippincott and )
_ Co., 1857), ~168 pp. The New Jerusalem Magazine carried a lengthy
series on Bush in 1850-1851. See XXIII, 164, 325, 374,458; XXIV, 200.
The author was Caleb Reed. "
 254

Swedenborg's own experiences in the Spirit World. Many New

j .

Churchmen considered the subject too delicate to be exposed at the

\ time, some felt the work was not in the same category with the works
- ~-

Sweden~o!g ~d_publish~d himself and ought never to hit the press,

I and others simQ~thought Bush was too new in the Church to handle

l'he-:;;::;;-~YPic.::y.~USh did not~"e-n; he puhHshed the Dia<v in

r-
serial form. and then in-
a-full edition. '

. ~ -----­
In spite of General Convention and Academy boycotts of )

George Bush and any of his enterprises, Bush's influence in the New

Church community could not be ~d. He ac:!ed as book ~t!l!lutor

in cooperation witrr"Otis Clap~an editor. and a pastor. He probably

I~ handled more inquiries from readers and receivers and outsiders than
~ ~ ~ ~

any other New Church personality in the 1840's and 1850's. and his

books were read and proudly circulated by Swedenborgians all over

)1 the c~untry. 37 Naturally. with this kind of influence B':!§ll's oler­

---
a~f SRiritu~lism acted as a magnet to draw to himself dozens of

3 'I'heophilus Parson 0 George Bush. March 18. 1846,

Bush Letterboo s. (1846=T847), SSRA. William Benade to G. C.
Gosewich, April 20. 1846. AA. Theophilus Parsons. "The Diary of \ \
Swedenborg. " NeON Jerusalem Magazine, XX. No. 7 (1847), 273-279. }

37Bush's received correspondence fills nineteen Letterbooks.

It clearly indicates that there were at least three sets of correspond­
e!1t~ in tl}e New Church in ~~~~i8SO's- .. Except for business
correspondence almost no letters apgear from Academy or Convention
leaders. Chauncey Giles and J. P. Stuart are two exceptions. But
Bush's cO~'pondence. more than that of any other New Church editor
or minister. r9.-J1ges over every conceivable subject and comes from
r people inside and outside the Church. . - -- ­
 255

letters relating to the interaction of Spiritualism and Swedenborgian­

ism. By far the majority of these communications are sympa~to

Spiritualism if it is"- handled within the

~ ._-
~ ~ -
context of Swedenborgianism.
- ~

W. W. Wick, a member of the National House of ~Epresen-

tatives from Indianapolis, Indiana, supported Bush's interpretations

of Mesmerism and Spiritualism. 38 ~ of Boston reported that

in 1850 the "k~gsn had hit Boston. He attended his first circle

---
late ~n that year in which all but one of the participants were readers

of Swedenborg. 39 In that same year an~elderly man from East Shel­

-~ ­
burne, Massachusetts, wrote to express his conviction that the

current s irU mani[e$jSltions were an influx from the Lord. He~ed

with Bush to write a systematic treatise on the subject from the New

Church standpoint. 40rW~rd Hinkle'~ of Baltimore confided s~p-

-!sh~y that he had a mystery which needed solving and he was thinking

of taking the matter to a clairvoyant for help. 41

One of the more interesting incidents relating to Spiritualism

to come to Bush's attention was the case of Governor and Mrs.

38. . W. wickl to George Bush, March 3. 1848, Bush Letter­

books, I (l84"b--l-ff4""7J,SSRA.

390tis Clapp to George Bush. November 2. 1850. Bush

Letterbooks, V (1850), SSRA.

4 Theophllus Pa~~to George Bush. October 18. December

31, 1850. Bush Letterb~ks, V (1850), SSRA.

4lWlllard Hinkley to George Bush. December I, 1853, Bush

Letterbooks, XII (1852-1854). SSRA.
 256

.!'erschel Io~son,of Georgi~. The Johnsons were Swedenborgians

but Mrs. Johnson was also deeply absorbed in spiritual h~n9mena.

Their eldest dau hter was a medium. 42 New Church friends from

Savannah.' Georgia. visited the Johnsons for three days and came

~ husban.:J was relaying to Bu~e

-
away convince_d of the reality and usefulness of spirit communication.

nature of their
---
revoluti~ary

-
experience. For example. the spirit who communicated regularly with

--_. --
he and his wife. and now helped.lead their little society of New
.. .. - ~ ~

Churchmen in worship. h5!d J[lformed him that the General Conv~ion

I
! rwas a disorderl~ body. This same spirit, who claimed to have

received his understanding of New Church truth from John Har~ of

Baltimore, was teaching his wife how to play the piano! The spirit
(
roused her every morning a~ five o'clock for 'p~ctice. 43

Many other examples could be recounted which would delT!on-

' strate that i~e minds of .many New Chur~"G:orge ~s -'I w~e
one_man who would try to understand their own intellectual and
(
e~onal turmoil over Spiritualism. 44 Actually. Bush himself steered

42 E. Parsons to George Bush. August ? 1854. Bush Letter-

books. XIII (1852-1854). SS RA.
43 Ibid •

44The following are only a few of the many letters to Bush

in the Letterbooks in SSRA on Spiritualism. Moses Hammond to Bush,
May 2. 1853. XII (1852-1854); Hezekiah"Joslyn to Bush, August 11,
1853. XI (1853); I. Searcy to Bush. February 22. 1854. XIV (1854); S.
Chesbro. ? 1856. XVIII (1855-1856); Abelard Reynolds to Bush,
January 24, 1855. XV (1855); Mary Hempel to Bush. January 27, 1857.
XIX (1856-1858).
 257

clear of actual contact with Spiritualism ~ 4 8 ~n ord.er to devote

his energies to more rewarding activities. But in the opinion of those

} New Churchmen who opposed Spiritualism

-
Busl) stood

( for they considered him responsible for raising the whole question of
---
~ondemned.

the relationship of the New Church and Swedenborg to Mesmerism and

Spiritualism.

A ~=---=m'-'-e.n such as Willia~~ N. C. <Burnha • and

J. R.rHibba;' had no time for Bush and rarely communicated with him.45

Richard DeCharm\ is a notable exception.

----
He and Bush carried on a

--~

-
lively intellectual repartee' from 1846 to 1854 and sustained a friend­

ship that was marked by respect and compassion. In some respects l..
.11'\

Bush and DeCharms manifested intriguing similarities. )

-
the General Convention and the Boston elite and fought them ardently;

they threv:...!hemselves into c~t.:.~versy with

-
abandon and ended their
Q
!'

lives isolated from the Church; they represented two of the keenest

and most tenacious intellects the Swedenborgian community produced

in the ante-bellum period.

r The differences between them were deeEl=ted ~:d~:~rms)

} ~_ble. On the ministry and church governme~and ~
) itOOd at opposite ends of the spectru~ the ~ne an extreme democrat.
( the other hierarchical. Spiritualism was another great divide. In fact,

45George_BUsh to Rich<Ud DeCharm April 20. 1846, AA.

------
 258

personali!l~lashed as we.ll. Both were stubborn, although DeCharms

expressed his independence ina much mor~tempermentaland tempes­

. ~ r .
tuous manner than Bushl, and tefused to
~ ..
yield ground to the other in
-~----------

a dispute .. Yet each one understood the other's nonverbal plea to be

heard and these two lonely men listened and supported one another in

their unique way.

The correspondence between George Bush and Richard DeCharms

extends back to 1844. From the outset Bush was the neophyte in New

Church doctrine· and DeCharms was the patronizing master te~er. 46

Bush had welcomed criticism and advice but in 1849 he hotly ~ed

his independence. From that point on the two men corresponded as

equals.

As to the hard constructions and imputations contained

in your letter, I have nothing to say in the way of denial
or recrimination. You have of course your own opinions
about my character and conduct, and you are welcome to
them. ILth-e~1 principles which you obviously think to
be ~e are in me, th_e.Y...Ylill. M doubt in the end ultimate
themselves in some hideous form, so tharnot only your­
serrDUCare-CI1\ircrratl~illseethe truth of your
J inward, sombre auguries. 47

A few weeks after this retort

"--' ­ ---
ush opined to DeCharms that the

two of them could probably never cooperate physically in a New Church

--

~ BUSli.t~Charms, July 1, 1844, November 3, 1845,

February 17, 1846, AA.

47 Bush to DeCharms, May 26, 1849, AA.

 259

, endeavor since Q.eCharms had "mgtally out-1~ed" any sympathy for

his views. 48 Nevertheless, they did work together at a distance,

for ~.cL~erialon certain controversial subjects from

DeCharms for the Repository and DeCharms sent other len thy contri­

-----
butions without waitin to be asked.
----- The outcome of their long-

distance cooperation was an invitation by Bush to merge the Repository

and the Newchurchman, commencing joint operations in 1854 !49

----
~ fo~unes after 1850 declined rapidly and the New­

churchman was one of his last efforts to maintain himself as a minister

in the New Church. Bush had tried to help ease the situation by

suggesting the merger of their magazines, but he contributed cash also.

I have been a good deal moved by your recent "Circular, "

J{ and as a small sum is about to come into my haiidS
unexpectedly, I cheerfully consent to share it with you.
\ • • • In return you will please send me one copy of
everything you- publish, and the deficit I will make up
t as I go along. 50

(Bush'\indicated he would send a copy of the circular to each of his

Repository subscribers.
, ---
Later he also ~e.-E?I'!~sl...l(:U)eCha~sthat B.

r;:rrett had come into considerable wealth an~ he would -

personally
F)\
~---

insist that Barretf share his munificence with{DeCharms. 51

. )
4eBusl1i to DeCharms, June 10, 1849, AA.

'\.Bush)to DeCharms, December 20, 1852, AA.

50Ibid •

51Bush to DeCharms. July 7, 1854, AA.

 260

In spite of Bush's ge~s overture to merge their two

periodicals, ~Charm could not bri~9 himself to ag~ it. Inci-

r dents in 1852 had pro~d to him t~_~ had e.een correct in ~49--

l physical cooperation or closeness was impossible for them. us

~_gned the storate..2f th~New York.Iirst Society in 1852 and

began hQ.~g meetings in his Brooklyn home. 52 Richard DeCharms

received a call from New York to come fill the pulpit on a trial basis

from May to July, 1852.

for some eighteen months, DeCharms accepted. The time was a

crttical one for the New York].J:gyJ Q.h~rch which had been convulsed

with the New Era controversy. Evidently someone felt that the only

~y to knock the heart out of a tempest is to conjure up a hurricane.

DeCharms stormed into New York to clear the air.

Church there would have to face the question of whether it wanted

-
The New

tc:Rrogress or regress ~p~ually. 53 Remaining neutral about or

tolerating the New Era and Spiritualism was no option for the ebullient

,-' --
DeCharms, especially since he believed the New Era was mer.ely a
- ---
front for a power play in New York and in the New Church as a whole.'
~

~ 5,,2 B• F. Barrett to George Bush, JanuarY 14, 1849; S,olyman

Bro~\to George Bush, January 28, 1849, Bush Letterbooks, rriTf849).
SS~
';)
53 chard DeCharms, An Introduction to Sermons Against
S iritualism, Presenting Reasons for Their Delivery in New
hiladelphia: New Jerusalem Press, 1853), pp. 4, 7.
 261
""

He contended that a number of '<1n.bitious laymen"'/ bent on ecclesiasti­

- -----
- -
~ -----­
c~.c:>..lihad gathered into a "circle,,'in 1841 to seek direct revela­
---- . - - .--­
lion which would Justify their position. 54 This co~spiratorial con­
-\'4
~ e ~espaired of gaining power and prestige through regular channels

and the New Era concept of immediate, direct revelation provided a

r­
democratic short-cut. 55

For~~ the New Era was more than an ex ression of

de~cy. The movement was an effort to bypass freedom and

rationality ill order to obt~in self-gratification. 56 Irnmedi~~~ela--

~ supplanted the hard exegetical work required to interpret the

Word and Swedenborg;' immediate ordination catapaulted the candidate

into the riesthood with no need for the slow torturous climb up the

ladder of spiritual maturity and ecclesiastical experience. 57 DeCharms

conceded direct revelation had been normal for the ancient, celestial

church, and would someday be possible again. In the meantime,

only Swedenborg had been vouchsafed such a privilege. 58

54Ibid., p. 37. The reference to~1 is the earliest date

given in any New Church literature to the founding of the New Era
movement in New York.

55Ibid., pp. 37-38.

56Ibid •• p. 57.

57 Ibid.• pp. 40-41.

58Ibid., p. 39.

 262

While contact with the Spirit World seemed possible in a

Mesmerist trance DeCharms argued that this abnormal psychological

state cO-lll-c:l.Rroduce onl dangerous or misleading results. 59 The New

Church was not yet perfected externally or internally and consequently

was not ready for the opening of its celestial sense.CDe~arms)had

- - ----'
been trying his best to reform the external order of the Church to

pr~re for i~l

--- ~ -­
development, but by 1852 !!!s efforts had been

rejected by the New Church. In DeCharms' mind the New Church had

to travel some rutted, mudd roads before it would reach macadam

paving. He saw no smooth short-cuts.

alread
--
rDeCharm~entg ed New York prepared for a struggle.

determine.d who his most .!.ormidable opponents would be.

He had

The

first was a Brooklyn "astrologer" who had enabled the New York

Society's lay leader t<2.-communicate with his deceased wife. 60 DeCharms

probably meant A.
~ .-­
J. Davi. The second culprit was "'George BusiL who
- - ~ --"=--"
since he was a member of the New Church bore even more responsibility

for Spiritualism's inroads into the Church than Davis.

- ~ .
( . • • our churct> was destined t~ suffer more from his J1\
[e;.. <?J~
) infestation than from that of any other man who had ever -J
" _m e profession of her faith. . . . 61 __­

59Ibid., pp. 40, 77.

60Ibid., p. 41.

61 Ibid., p. 43.

 263

(Bus!) had committed a serious error in brashly st~pping to the public

(
Givenhis belief that'~e the
--
spotlight as a spokesman for the New Church to the world. 62

New Era concept impeded

New Church progress, and that New York was the. fulcrum of the

heresy, and that his mission in the New Church was to perfect its

external order, DeCharms could not have refused to take the New York

pulpit in 1852. The previous twenty years of dedicated, zealous

campaigning for his ideals would have been nullified. The only sur­

. prise about the affair is that DeCh~waited for an official invitation

before storming th.!. New Era citadel.

DeCharms' strategy called for him to lay a foundation for his

specific attack on Spiritualism by asserting his own right to be heard .

.....
To establish his authority he' leaned hard on the infallibility of

Swedenborg. 63 Then he proceeded to take the wind out of his oPPQ!!.~!!.ts'

sails QY bold!}' accepting the spirit manifestations as real. 64 Next he

interpreted the phenomena as an "infestation" from the Spirit World

permitted by the Lord t~_~.eve" the New Church.

-- ~Thid., pp. 60, 63-64. Bush never declared himself a

( spokesman for the New Church, but his scholarly reputation and

63 Ibid •• p. 37. ----

reno~nb~()ught attentio;:;-u)his words and actions. - .

64Richard DeCherms, Three Sermons Preached to the New

York Society of the New krusalem Against the Pseudo-Spiritualism of
Modern Times (Philadelphia: New Jerusalem Press, 1853), p. iv.
 264

It seems quite evident to our minds. that he has

permitted prophets and dreamers of dreams to arise,
• • • with the powers of natural rational confirma­
tion of the doctrinal truths of the new dispensation
(on lowe~gro.!:1nd than that on which the revelation of
. them has been made through Swedenborg--that is to
say. on the ground of natural science and sensuous
perception. instead of the ground of spiritual science
an~ituous insight, --for the purpose of proving

' whether the professing members of the new-church

societies are receiving those truths, so revealed by
1( Swedenborg. in mere persuasive faith or in true
spiritual faith. • . . 65- ­

The heat generated by DeCharms in 1852 must have matched

the summer sun in New York. D~rms was not asked to ref!l.ain

after July as the regular pastor of the New York Society. If the

--
Society made the decision to progress rather than regress. it took the
---
step without DeCharms. He must_have b§!_en bitterly 9 sa..Qpointed.

- -
While he no doubt felt rejected personally and representatively,

DeChar~
(
. -
was not alone in the battle against the New Era and
- ---- -- -­
S~ua1ism. Others who warned of the danger ranged across the

whole spread of New C~actions.

---
In the West where Henry Wellen had shaken New Churchmen

with his endorsement of the New Era. ~ orge Field B. F. Barrett and

JI,. R. _Hi~led the opposition. Hibbard. as pastor of the Chicago

Society. lectured frequently and strongly on the evils of Spiritualism

and printed a pamphlet on the subject which circulated widely. His

65 Ibid .• p. 33.
 265

position paralleled that of DeCharms. He did not d.eny the possibility

of spirit communication, but the only useful spirit contacts would be

provided by the Lord without man's seeking for them. The experiences

stimulated by Mesmerism anti Spiritualism violated man's rational

freedom and could never be reconciled with Swedenborg's teaching. 66

In Hibbard's opinion the whole Spiritualist movement was "an out­

birth from the lower parts of the spiritual world. ,,67

Orthodox Convention men were not slack in their opposition

to Spiritualism either. Theophilus Parsons, a Harvard Law School

professor and one of Boston's leading Swedenborgians, treated the

problem by comparing A. J. Davis and Swedenborg. Since no New

Churchman was willing to deny that Swedenborg had communicated

with spirits, Parsons had to concede that Davis could have had such

an experience. But Davis could not command the respect Swedenborg

deserved because he was intellectually and educationally inferior to

the founder of the New Church. Davis had been used as a conductor

for the transmission of knowledge; unlike Swedenborg he did not

understand and contribute to the information received. Swedenborg

never lost his highly developed critical faculties in the course of his

66 John R. Hibbard, Necromancy; or, Pseudo-S·piritualism

Viewed in the Light Q! the Sa.cred Scriptures, and the Teachings of the
New Church (Chicago: Whitemarsh, Fulton and Co., 1853). pp. 15,
25.

67Ibid •• p. 33.
 266

spirit contacts and in his writing he was able to analytically assess

the content of the communications. 6B

Parsons' intention was to expose Davis as unworthy of

serious attention by Swedenborgians. Davis had simply claimed too

much for Mesmerism.

We hope its [Mesmerism's] unquestionable influence

upon disease and pain will one day be hallowed by rela­
tions which will leave that .power [of good] undiminished
while they make it safe. And as a science, as disclosing
. facts and laws relating to the laws of vitality and the
intercourse of the soul with the body, and the nature of
spirit, we believe it may prove itself a valuable instructor. 69

Because of his stature, the view of Parsons on Mesmerism

and Spiritualism.carried great weight in the Convention. But the

Massachusetts Association of the New Church, convinced that the

issues raised by Spiritualism directly affected the entire Church,

decided to study the movement and submit an official statement to

the Church and the public. The result of the work 0 . ~a~Goddar~

and his committee ...;~ The Pythonism of the Present Day;" The
~

Response of the Ministers of the Massachusetts Association of the

New Jerusalem to ~ Resolution of That As socia tion Regues ting Their

Consideration of What Is Usually Known as Modern Spiritualism.

6BThe Nineteenth Century, or the New Dispensation (New

York: tohn AlIen, IB51), pp. 311-31B. -Theophilus Parsons, "Review
of Mesmer and Swedenborg, " New Ierusalem Magazine, Xx, No. 5
(lB47), IB3-201.

69The Nineteenth Century, p. 31B.

 267

The report took the standard New Church approach of

allowing room for the reality of spirit contact, but it condemned

efforts to deliberately probe the mysteries of life beyond the grave. 70

In essence the study classed spirit communications as those which

came from the Lord unsought and those which were disorderly. The

latter variety might be sought or unsought. In short the committee.

was saying that man is so constituted that he can have intercourse

with spirits if the Lord so chooses. 7 r Such orderly communications

rarely were permitted because of the dangers involved, for example,

confusion with false or evil spirits and man's loss of freedom, and

because of the fact that spiritual knowledge came "mediately" through

the Word in this age rather than directly from the Lord. 72

In regard to the remarkable outburst of phenomena which

marked the 1850's, the Massachusetts Association advocated a

cautious, critical attitude. If the phenomena were really from the

Lord, time and the fruit of the manifestations would confirm their

sacred origin. The present chaos was not conducive to positive

73
results. Actually, the Massachusetts report was more open-minded

70Massachusetts Association of the New Jerusalem, The

Pythonism of the Present Day (Boston: George Phinney, 1858), p. 8.

71Ibid. , pp. 32-33.

72 Ibid • , pp. 14-15, 17, 19, 44.

73 Ibid • , pp. 41-42.

 268

toward Spiritualism than many New Churchmen were willing to be.

Sabin Hough, a New Church minister and Free Spirit; had closed his

mind to Spiritualism because of Andrew Jackson Davis. navis'

denial of the inspiration of the Scriptures, his ridicule of Christ's

divinity, his belief that man was innately good, and his refusal to
. 74
acknowledge the Lord as the creator of the world grated on Hough.

At best Davis was only refurbishing a shop-worn Deism, and Hough

wanted no part of a re-run.

Most of the New Church analyses of Spiritualism followed

the same .general line with minor variations. But one attack was

couched in novel form and reached a different audience than any of

the others. The Angel and the Demon was written by Timothy Shay

Arthur, one of the most prolific and popular fiction writers of the ante

bellum period, and a man immortalized in his most famous creation,

Ten Nights in ~ Bar-room. Arthur was also a prominent member of the

Philadelphia First New Church Society.

Like his other novels, Th~ Angel and the Demon bubbled over

with moralistic advice and offered a simplistic critique of nineteenth­

century urban society. In this particular story the fashionable Mrs.

Dainty was seeking a sophisticated governess for her daughter. She

74Sa bin Hough, Remarks on ~ "Revelations" of li. L Davis,

Clairvoyant (Columbus, Ohio; William Siebert, 1850), pp. 5, 7, 12,
24.
 ,"

269

dismissed an upstart American girl·with "vulgar" language and

7S

-democratic" airs and employed an English woman. The more urbane

Mrs. Jeckyll excelled in music. sewing. and languages. but the rest

of the family except for Mrs. Dainty felt uncomfortable in her presence,

Finally Mrs. Jeckyll was dismissed. Sh.ortly after her

departure the Dainty'syoung daughter. Madeline. fell ill. The

attending physician could not pinpoint any physical cause and suspected

Mesmerist influence. He warned the family about the numerous half­

"insane people who were experimenting at the present time with the

natural. rational balance of men's minds. 76 He left young Madeline

unimproved. Then suddenly one day she disappeared. The family

launched a frantic search through the boarding-houses of the city in a

search for Mrs. Jeckyll. clinging to the thread of suspicion which the

doctor had cast upon her and Mesmerism.

The trail led to a dingy house which proved to be the meeting

place for a disreputable circle of Spiritualists and Mesmerists, but

Madel1ne had been removed from there. 77 The search had no further

leads and just when hope had dimmed to the point of despair Madeline

returned home in the company of a poor young girl. The girl was a

75Timothy Shay Arthur, The Angel and the Demon (Philadelphia:

J. W. Bradley. 1861 [l858]). pp. 37-38. 51. 66-67.

76Ibid •• pp. 118. 133-134.

77Ibid••
. pp. 186. 191-192.
 270

daughter of one of the Spiritualist kidnappers. She personal-ly had

never condoned the evil deeds perpetrated by her mother and others

and at the first opportunity she had fled with MadeHne before harm

came to her. 7 8

In the end of the story the American governess returns,

Madeline is de-tranced, Spiritualism is discredited, and democracy

and morality are vindicated. The Angel had whipped the Demon again!

However, fiction is fiction. In realit"y the Demon survived all the

darts of reason, religion, and ridicule which New Churchmen could

huc!. Spiritualists refused to capitulate without a struggle; they

were as capable of criticizing Swedenborg and his followers as New

Churchmen had been in assessing A. J. Davis and company.

Swedenborg was a favorite for Spiritualists of all types.

A. J. Davis had been handed his "Magic Staff" of life by Swedenborg

and Galens, and Swedenborg remained a prime example for Davis of

how valuable spirit communications could be in promoting man's total

79
development. Many other Spiritualists claimed regular contact with

Swedenborg also. A former New Churchman who had operated as a

Spiritualist medium for three years was one that conversed frequen:ly

7 8 Ibtd •• p. 214 •

. 79De lp , "Davis," p. 55.

 271

with Swedenborg. 80 A. E. Newton. editor of'.he ~ England Spiritu­

alist. commended Swedenborg without hesitation. 81

In spite of their general enthusiasm for Swedenborg. Newton

and many other leading Spiritualists could not endorse New Church

efforts to life Swedenborg to a pedestal of infallibility. 82 He did­

concede that the spirits communicated in general accord with Sweden­

borg's teachings on fact. But Swedenborg's interpretations of the

facts had to be rejected in some cases and could never be regarded

as more authoritative than interpretations placed upon the same facts

by other eminent thinkers. 83

A few Spiritualists refused to even grant Swedenborg the

exalted role Davis and Newton accorded him LaRoy Sunderlan J

followed his colleagues in rejecting the two extreme opinions of

Swedenborg: first, that of lo~n W~WhiCh dismissed him as

deranged, and second. the view of men like Richard DeCharms who

saw Swedenborg as "supernaturally inspired. ,,84 If Swedenborg's

80A• E. Newton.- "Swedenborg and His Writings, " New

England Spiritualist; I, No. 8 (1855), 3.

81Samuel B. Brittan and A. E. Newton, eds .• Spiritual Age,

I, No. 9 (1859), 4.

82New England Spiritualist, 1, No. 8 (1855), 3.

83Ibid .• II, No. 21 (I856), 2. Spiritual Age, 1, No. 9

(1859), 4.

~underland. Pathetism, p. 279.

 272

mental development had been perfect then both the content of his

revelations and his inte PLe_t~ion of them in his writings would have

been perfect also. But Sunderland attributed Swedenborg's concepts

,. ~
to his remarkable phrenological advancement, not to divine inspira­

tion.

Hence, if Swedenborg's organs of Causality were suffi­

ciently developed, it was perfectly natural for him to
have intuitive knowledge of the relations between causes
and their effects. And if his organs of Marvelousness
were sufficiently developed, they would naturally put his
mind in communication with the Ideal world. And if
either of his mental faculties were at any time overtaxed,
or exercised beyond the healthy degree of their develop­
ment, he would naturally misconceive the nature of his
own case, and give, as it may be, true ac ounts of hiS)
own erroneous conceptions. 85 ,

Since even Swedenborg admitted, to Sunderland's satisfaction,

that he was plagued by bodily affliction and mental instability, S~r-

lan_d concluded that Swedenborg's claims to special authority were

simply invalid.

And now, while I do not here attempt the expression of

any opinion in respect to the merits of Swedenborg's theo­
logical views, which I do not profess to comprehend, it
is perhaps in place for me to say, that his own account of
his career of visions abundantly confirms the views here
suggested as to their nervous origin. There is no case of
visions more wonderful, perhaps, than his, which, as he
himself tells us, commenced in a disordered stomach. 86

85Ibid., p. 281.

86Ibid., pp. 283-284.

 273

LaRoy Sunderland provided good reason for many New Church­

men to fiercely fight the infiltration of their community by Spiritualism.

-----_.-/
Even New Era men could not stomach Sun<;lerland's na turalistic appraisal

6f Swedenborg. But Spiritualism and the New Era had jointly raised the

question of Swedenborg's authority to a place of preeminence in New

Church debates in the years 1845 to 1870. Academy men argued that

no new truth could be found outside Swedenborg since his work was

the final revelation of the Lord to men. Orthodox Convention men

refused to admit that any new truth could be directly revealed 2.! this

time. The Free Spirits tottered on the edge of the Convention and New

Era positions and some fell into each camp. The New Era men con­

tended that new. direct revelations from the Lord were possible now

and were actually being provided by the Lord for the renewal of the

New Church. Spiritualists simply carried the whole question beyond

the confines of the New Church community and insisted that the dis­

closure of new truth could not be confined to that body or to Sweden­

borg. Enter a new apostle of truth--Andrew Jackson Davis!

The New Church view of heophilus Parso~ was practically

- --../
indefensible vis ~ vis'both Spiritualists and New Era men. He argued

on the basis of the relative superiority of Swedenborg over Davis as a

human instrument. and on the grounds of timing. But if such revela­

lion.s were a logical possibility why was Parsons' choice of timing any
 274

more valid than that of the New Era. and who was he to say what type

instrument the Lord might use for his purposes.

The New Era contention that new revelations were occurring

internally and in accord with the Word and the teachings of Sweden­

borg was also qUicksand. especially in regard to Spiritualism. New

Era men were in fact granting all Spiritualist premises but one.

namely, the nature of the test of what was good and useful. The New

Era put little stock in any external manifestations. Fortunately the

Spiritualists themselves were not able to exploit this weakness in the

New Era position; they could not agree among themselves upon any

standard for judging the phenomena. The New Era had a standard in

Swedenborg but why was that standard any more valid than any other.

such as reason. A. J. Davis. or some favorite spirit.

Given the common assumption among New Churchmen in the

1840's and 1850's that the spirit communications and manifestations

were real. even if the work of eV_il rather than good spirits. the only

defensible position to arise before 1870 was that of the Academy. or

more properly, Richard DeCharms. DeCharms refused to recognize

any other source of truth than Swedenborg and he re'ected an effort

to lower Swedenborg's work from the divinely-inspired. infallible

level. Unlike Parsons he accepted all of Swedenborg's writings on

an equal basis.
 275

Actually, New Churchmen with a finn belief in spiritual

reality were at a loss in the 1840's and 1850's when confronted with

the outburst of Modern Spiritualism. The thought never dawned upon

them to challenge the reality of the phenomena. However, there is

no good reason for thinking that such a challenge, on scientific or

religious grounds, would have spared the New.Church the anguish

of its exposure to Spiritualism. Ot);ers did try to deny the reality

of the manifestations but they had little impact. Spiritualism r~n

its co~s~M~ay. And the New Church was philosophically and

religic ·~sly constructed in such a way that once Spiritualism surfaced

the New Church community was bound to be ripped by an explosion.

The_emphasis on individual freedom of thought in the New Church

. preventec{I);Charms: view ~f Swedenborg from prevailing, and that

high view could have served as a shield against New Era and Spiritu­

alist tendencies. Even a high view of Swedenborg was not an

infa1l1ble check as the case of Thoma~ ~ilksJiemonstrates.

Of the three major segments in the New Church in this period

/the Academy was perhaps the smallest and the least palatable. Its

.. ­
views of Swedenborg. and external churcnor e were repugnant to many.

But the Academy movement was also the element least b~ge~y the

New Era and Spiritualism because it categorically denied the validity

of any new, direct revelation. A New Era man wrote to DeCharms

during his 1852 crusade in New York.l~ e~pres~ his dissatisfaction

 276

with_DeCharms' un elding st~d on the usefulness of spirit corrimuni­

cations. The writer believed the New Era, withits acceptance of the

communications, could counteract a strong sectarian tendency in the

New Church.

My object in writing these remarks is to call your atten­

tion to theGectarianiSmj which eXi.sts !£1 the "Sweden­
bocgian Society, " which is a great impediment to its
progress. I;lad Swedenborg desir.ed to found a sect. he
would have labored towards that end when dwelling in
the external.. -But his principles are to be univ~sal; not
partial--to be claimed by a few to build themselves
upon. 87
~
The letter shows that the New Era was not just a manifesta­

tion of Spiritualism in the New Church. It was an anti-sec_t~

reform movement also. Consequently. the death of the New Era by

1870 was an impetus to the tendenc'y against which it was struggling.

The New Era probably killed itself with its excesses ,and its failure

to show how such abuses could be avoided. But by 1860 it was

obvious to increasing numbers of New Churchmen that the only

effective curb on extravagant claims to personal. direct revelation

"

from the~d~ infallible Swedenborg. Thus the deba~~his ~

---
infallibility in the. 1860's must be understood in the light of the turbu­

lence of the 1850' s over Spiritualism and the New Era .. Certainly men

were more willing to consider an Academy position on Swedenborg and

87DeCharms. Introduction to Spiritualism. pp. 53-54. The

letter to DeCharms from New York was dated June IS. 1852.
 277

the Church after the New Era than they had been before. In this

sense Spiritualism acted as a major stimulant to the growth of New

--
Church sectarianism.
 CHAPTER IX

THE APPEAL OF SPIRITUAUSM

AND SWEDENBORGIANISM

Spiritualism did have a destructive impact upon the New

Church•. It deepened the divisions in the Church by stimulatin the

formulati?~ o! a sectarian position and adding to the general confusion

in the New Church which puzzled and paralyzed the Orthodox Conven­

tion party. Spiritualism was also one more of a long series of con­

troversies which festered in the New Church and left behind scars of

bitterness. But in the years 1845-1855 the da'!l9ging~qual~~s of

Spiritualism were not as apparent as after 1860. The New Church in

general was extremely optimistic about its future in the late 1840's

and early 1850's, a~smerism and PiritualiS~ t that time seemed

.-/" ­
to be adding new adherents to the Church and stimulating interest in

Swedenborg.

Spiritualism and Swedenborgianism did generally appeal to

the same type ~people. At least this was true of those people who

became Christian or Philosophical Spiritualists rather than Phenomenal

Spiritualists. Consequently, a look at the appeal which these groups

had for nineteenth century Americans will be an instructive part of the

278
 279

effort to understand the interaction of the two movements in the 1840' s

and 1850's. Fortunately, both Spiritualists and Swedenborgians were

prone to introspection and many kept personal accounts of the crisis

moments in their lives.

An autobiography is both the history of one's interaction with

society and a philosophical reflection of one's relation to the world.

Unlike the diary, which relates life day by day and has no concept of

long-range significance, the autobiography reviews experience from

one time spot and one philosophical perspective. In short, the auto­

biography presents a bold, coherent overview of the significance of

the subject's life. Even though it is generally more consistent than

life, and even though the autobiography is a deliberate "shaping of

the. past" and "more the revelation of the present than the uncovering
I
of the past," it is a revealing source material. Dozens of Spiritu­

aUsts and Swedenborgians used the autobiography or an autobiographi­

cal account of one event to express themselves.

Special care must be exercised in looking for the distortions

common to all autobiographical accounts and in analyzing the motives

behind the writing and publishing of the piece. The first distortion,

that of factual error, frequently occurs because of faulty recollection.

A second is the tendency to exaggerate or understate the circumstances

l Roy Pascal, Design an<:i TI"ll_th in Autobiography (Cambridge:

Harvard University Press, 1960). pp. 9, 11. .
 280

2Ibid•• p. 98.
 .'

281

was a satisfying mode of expression for Swedenborgians, Spiritualists,

and many others. Biography of any type was one of the most popular

litera;-y forms of the eriod~ as the records of the sale of lives of

Napoleon and George Washington would show. _ __--'

Also, in.. this
.. Romantic

Era personal experience carried great ~rity. The published auto­

biography had a very good chance of reaching a wide and varied

audience and of carrying a significant impact, for prevailing social

and religious values still placed great emphasi~on the indiv~ual and

his inward exper~nces.

The leading proponent of Modern Spiritualism in the ante

bellum era ndrew Jackson Davi', was one of the numerous Spiritu­

alists and Swedenborgians to take advantage of the suitability of the

autobiography. Our study has already utilized Davis' personal account

but no effort was made to determine why Davis composed it. That 't

is~aSicallY an apologia is_rJl~Y.-9p.par.ent.4 In striking out into

frontier areas of science, religion and reform Davis came under

intense criticism and the two volume autobiography is an attempt to

set the record straight about himself. The piece was intended for the

Phenomenal Spiritualists, with whom he was in serious conflict in the

late 1850's and early 1860's, as well as his detractors outside the

Spiritualist movement.

3Robert Sayre, The. Ex.a.mined Self (Princeton: Princeton )

University Press,,- 1964), J~..__ 150.
__ 4Davis, Magic Staff. p. 21.
 282

In addition to defending himself Davis endeavors to present

{ in entertaining fashion the positive side of his world-view, which he

feels will greatly advance men's understanding of themselves. 5 This

interest in psychology was a prominent part of Davis' theory and

practice. But Davis had at least a third reason for composing his

autobiography. He was certain that his exalting experience could be

repeated by others, and he even described his pilgrimage as a "climb"

up the mountains and down into the valleys of life. Each time he

ascended he reached a new plateau until at last he attained the

"Mountain of Harmony" and was permanently "Beyond the Valley. ,,6

A final motive for composing€autobiograPh Y ·s coinci-

dental with one of his main reasons for becoming a Spiritualist--to

establish his identity and realize the potential of that autonomous

position. Such a motive was also characteristic of many Sweden-

borgians in this era and related to the social conditions prevalent in

the ante bellum United States.

In periods of rapid social change and large-scale social

mobility, th on i. uti n pf reli ion to identity may
( become greatly enhanced. ---

5Ibid., p. 9.

6Ibid., p. 527.

7Thomas O'Dea, The Sociology of Religion (Englewood Cliffs,

New Jersey: Prentice-HaU, Inc., 1966), p. 15.
 283

.The United States has probably had an entire history of rapid socia.l

change and a high degree of social mobility compared to Europe, but

the mid-nineteenth century marks a conjunction of the two forces.

------------
In this turbulent period many people d}d elln

past or identify with the pot~ntial

to the stable

of the future in socially acceptable

ways. Davis was one of the many who felt alienated from the status

qtlo of society but one of the few to seek new meaning in a socially

unacceptable manner. He made himself an integral part of a religious

and reform movement which had univers'al aspirations but unorthodox

~- ",,----'­
beliefs. Of course, the same was true of I oseph Smith, ohn Humphrey

--
Noyes. ane;! other leaders of n~w
------­
sQcial and religious movements in
-.

ante bellum years, but each group had to develop something di~t!nc-

tive out of common attitudes. In the process they immediately limited

their appeal to certain personality types and groups. Without realizing

what was happening they circumscribed their universal aspirations.

A. J. Davis was only one of the Spiritualists who published

his autobiography, and his motives, both for becoming a Spiritualist

and writing the story of his life. were not exactly the same as those

of his supporters or of Spiritualists of other types. The accounts of

arren Chase. Elijah Farrington,

' . / /
Achsa Sprague~~
and Frank Chas
, .--'­
will illustrate other reasons for embracing Spiritualism.

Warren Chase was born into poverty and scorn in 1813, for

-he was an illegitimate child and his mother died shortly after the War
 284

of 1812. After being raised on a New England farm which Chase

characterized as a sl~ labor camp, he .ran away at age fourteen

with nothing more than the vague feeling that his mother's sp.irit

accompanied him. The first real affection he could remember came

from a Universalist family with whom he lived for two years. 8 In his

early twenties he fell in love. As a lowly clerk he d~d he was

too_poor to marry and fled to the Wisconsin territory, although he

9
admitted he yearned for a home.

On the frontier Chase did marry but the match was far short

of the ideal he had cherished for years. He carried on a clande,;;tine )

correspondence with a woman whom he claimed was more spiritually

advanced than his wife. When the relationship was exposed the

public branded him "licentious" and acc~ed him ot P[,tcti2.~~"free

love, ,,10 an enconium he shared with many other Spiritualists and

some Swedenborgians. The fact that Chas~worked assiduously to

have Wisconsin ·admitted as a state with liberal divorce laws 11 was

-------------
-
not due just to his marital stress; he promoted land reform, women's

rights, temperance, and

-
ab~on as well.

I
Bwarren Chase, The Life-Line of the Lone One, (3rd ed.;
J Boston: Bela Marsh, 1865 [1857]), p. 33. .
I
\..
9 Ibid., p. 46.

10Ibid., pp. 148-149.

11Ibid. , p. 142.

 285

._.__0-
Chase'S interests really were boundless. ­ One of his reasons

for. becoming a Spiritualist was his hope t!Jat it would prove to be an

anti-sectarian reforming force in the field of religion. Chase had

---- - -- -
imbibed a distrust of Calvinism in particular and s...=::ta_rian ~~nity
,...- - ­
in.J!.eneral, and he was strongly anti-cle£ica'l and. anti-sectarian. 12
~----- '
Another appeal in Spiritualism for Chase was its democratic premise

that anyone, regardless of age, heritage, or education, could share

in the benefits of spirit communica lion. For this reason he supported

workingmen's movem.=nts and other attempts to instill justice into the

economic system.

T~e conviction that the competitive capitalism of the ante

bellum years was unjust eventually led Chase to actively promote

Fourierism. He helped found the Wisconsin Phalanx and articulated

his convictions about needed economic and social changes in an

important book called The American Crisis. 13 He acknowledged that

his sympathies economically had been shaped by his own labor

12 Ibid., pp. 1 9, 58.

13ror Chase's relationship to the Wisconsin Phalanx see

John Humphrey Noyes, History of American Socialisms (Dover ed. ;
New York:Do~p;ililications,Inc., 1966 [1870ll, pp. 411-448.
Warren Chase, ~ American Crisis (Boston: Bela Mi;rsh,"l862l, 82
pp. Chase argues that the Civil War was the struggle of democracy
against aristocracy. He feels the future ·of the nation lies in the
hands of Union workin men who are struggling for the three basic
rights of all men and women: (1) the right to land, (2J the right to
1abor, anln3) tfie rig~..!£-<in educa-tion. - _.- - -­
 286

experiences in New England, an area noted for "selling orphans and

imprisoning infidels. ,,14

In most respects Warren Chase held views similar to Andrew

Jac~son Davis. Like Davis he interpreted Spiritualism as a co~e­

hensive religious and philosophical system which would alter man's

total environment and his inner spiritual awareness. Spiritu~lism

was the highest of the three levels of mankind's religious systems.

Idolatry, devotion to a single object or being, made up the ground

level and was no more than religious childhood. When adults insisted

on clinging tenaciously to such childhood religion all civilization

suffered. The middle level was P':l_~m or the religion of the

intellect. The third was Spiritual~sm. where man "harmonizes" with

or is absorbed into the Divine Mind, a concept of deity which embodied

similarities to the Transcendentalist Oversoul. IS

Davis and Chase represent one school of Spiritualist thinking.

EliJah~a~i~exemPlifiesthe many exhibitioni~who b~e

mediums for fun, money, or ~th. Farrington sp!n~ty ~in

th,,=-.inovement as a working ~e~m before making the decision to

expose the ffaud rampant in Modern Spiritualism. But his expos: did

not entail a sweeping condemnation of all Spiritualists because he

14Chase, Life-Line, p. 23.

lSIbid., pp. 296-301.

 287

-----
knew some were as sincere and honest as the adherents of any other

religious group.
-'

He hoped capable men would devote the energy and

time necessary to examine the Spiritualist phenomena on a scientific

. basis. 16

Other Spiritualists found themselves attracted by the move­

ment's emphasis on~a.ling. One of the most outstanding

personalities drawn this way was a Vermont schoolmarm name Achsa

'­
W. Sprague. She had been crippled by a painful disease of the joints
~

in 1848 and from that date her,.Diary and Iourn::.JthrobS ~ith psycho­
logical and phys~ suffering. On July ID, 1849 she entered the

following:

_ _ _J.~aan!.!.~hingas I am now. I cannot look back

upon the past, for the present seems more gloomy by
contrast, neither can I look forward to the future for
'tis shrouded still darker than the present, and I can
but shut my eyes to everything in life and try to forget.
In vain. Thought after thought of all I wish to be and
to do, come back again and again, until I forget evelY.­
thing save that which I try to forget--my own misery. 17

The first ray of hope pierced her gloom in 1850 when she

visited a traveling "psychologist" named Gordon. Convince'd that she

could be aided by his magnetism, Achsa Sprague permitted Dr. Gordon

t~?.!)ler over an ~xtended period of time. By 1854 she was fully

16Elijah Farrington, Revelations of 2. Spirit-Medium (St. Paul:

Farrington and Co., 1891), pp. 319. 323.

17 hsa W. Sprague, "Selections from Achsa W. sprague's))

Diary and Iournal, " Vermont Historical Proceedings, IX (1841), 133.
 288

healed. She embarked on lecture tours in her search for an "active"

IJ .
~. "useful" life and ~ickly bec~me a .<?pular speaker. 18 By this

news of her cure and the corresponding

---
time she was also cl Spiritualist medium who exuberantly spread the
-----
i~er strength she derived from

her new faith. On November 21, 1855. she tried to summarize and

capture her feeling of joy.

But the interior evidence I have. the living inspiration

( welling up in my own soul, the consciousness of their
(;Pints or
deceased) presence not only around me. but
within 'Jl.S-e.ll._my inner self keeps a com;;u~or;-;.ithin

that satisfies the soul beyond a1l9the.r communings.

This is the most beautiful part of my mediumship, that
which others do not see, that which is never spok.en, but
which is felt in every fibre of my SOUl. giVing a richness
to life which it never had before, . . . 19

In addition to the exhibitionist, and those attracted by the

healing potential of Spiritualism, others were drawn by its possible

~
role in opening up new frontiers for science. obert Har • long-time

professor of chemistry at the University of Pennsylvania, is a prime

-- -------
example. 20 Untold numbers joined the Spiritualist ranks because the
-
18 Ibid .• p. 151.

19Ibid•• p. 152•.

~obert Hare (1781-1858) retired from the University of

Pennsylvania in 1847. When Spiritualism aroused public interest
( Hare began to inve~tigate it scientifically and .ended_u.p ag~ting
the system he set out to disprove. He published his findings in
Experimental Investigations of the· Spirit Manifestations (1855). For
the next three years Hare became the scourge of the American Associa-
1\ti~f;;the Advancemen~ Science, and the Episcopal Chur~h.
See New England Spiritualist, r. No. 9 (1855); I, No. 10 (1855); 1I.
No. 24 (1856).
 289

esteem.
~ -- ..:-.

""
. ...-, ---
movement offered them a sense of identity and a measure of self­

Frank Chase. would-be inventor. offers an interesting illus­

tration of the latter.

~--

Chase was a persecuted Spiritualist living in Sut~on, New

Hampshire. His family and community had rejected his deviation

and made him the local laughJng-stock. To compound his misery the

town aiso had a slick "pseudo-spiritualist" clique_ which postulated

that Frank Chas~as~entirelyused up. ,,21 Chase was not the type

to ta-ke ridicule lightly. He lamented that the whole town was out to

------ --
"triumph over one individual. • . because they were jealous of
-
poor me. religiously. politically. and socially. ,,22 Nevertheless,

------
Chase was sure the angels would hand him the ultimate victory, and
- -
-
under spirit direction he secured the aid of the prominent Spiritualist

medium and abolitionist. m ma Hardinge Miss Hardinge agreed to

-~

--
the prestige of the "Pressey Clique. "
-
-
lecture in Sutton under Chase's sponsorship in order to deal a blow to

---- "
Her visit allowed Chase to triumph in the internecine Spiritu­
",
alist warfare in Sutton. but it did not satiate Chase's desire for popu­

larity or greatly advance the cause of Spiritualism. However. while

in Sutton Miss Hardinge conveniently communicated with Frank's

. 21~k~a~. The Spiritual Invention; Qr.. Autobiographic

Scenes and Sket~1i s (Boston:-Wn lam White and Co•• 186S). p. 12.

22Ibid•• p. 7.
 290

-------
dead uncle, who gave her the basic idea for a mechanical device

which.-eo]dd-.QEen and close shutters from the inside of a house. She

passed the idea on to Chase and he invented a workable model, won

over an enterprising capitalist, and secured a patent.

~ --
-
He had now

dQ..ne something espe<2lally note~rthy in an age when p.ractical science

was held in awe and in the process had demonstrated the practicality
23
of Spiritualism. To cap the episode he crowed,

" ~ow, wasn't there some squirming in the kennel! Had

( not God caused me to triumph nobly. and· in a manner

thatWaS"lTi"Iraculous, according to the old notions of

miracles. 24 .

The descriptions oftrank Chas • Achsa Sprag e. lijah

Farringscin. vyarren ~;--.u and ARdrew Jackson Davis) illum~nate the

Spiritualist appeal and the types of men attracted to Spiritualism. A

contemporary attempt to create a fictional stereotype of the Spiritualist

r ­
il The Spirit-Rapper by Orestes Brownso~ Even though fiction, the
- - ~

work is intriguing because it was synthesized from Brownson's own

experience. He was born in Stockbridge. Vermont. and raised outside

of his own family because of his father's death and his mother's

indifference. Religiously he moved from Presbyterian. to Universalist.

and then on to an independent liberal position. In 1832 he became a

23 Ibid ., pp. 22, 35.

24 Ibid ., p. 31.

 291

J,1n1tarian after helping t.5> organiz~the ~ew York Wo~kingman' s Partyj

in aSSOCi~tiO~ with~i:3 an~""Robert Dale Owe;;)

Until the 1840' s Biownson pursued the reformist path,

-----
adhering persistently to an anti-sectarian religious course, but he
..-­
was ripe for the injection of a new basis of authority for his life. The

unusual twist injli.s--.e.xperience occurs in J~42 as.h_is writings_become

more orthodox in tone. 1In 1844 he embraced the rigid authoritarianism

of nineteenth century Catholicism, and his published works in the

1850' s. including The Spirit-Rapper, are c~ns~nsa.li.ve in cont~nt and

polemic~.!.~ne. The thesis of The Spirit-Rapper is that Spiritualism

is a thing of the Devil.

The hero of Brownson's fictional autobiography passes

through a Mesmerist phase in which he ~loits a young Philadelphia

Spiritualist reformer named Priscilla. and tries to reform the world

----
- --
through a plot that would replace Christianity with a new religion. 25

Brownson allows his imagination to run away with the plot of the

story. ~ut some insight breaks through in Priscilla' ~ ~ngs. For

.......
- - -- -
example. she outlines the social matrix re"sponsible for people like
-
herself. It is "unhappiness, discontent. uneasiness. want" that

lead men and women to become world-reformers. 26

250restes Brownson. The Spirit-Rapper (Boston: Little and

Co., 1854), pp. 66-67, 223-224, 229.

Th "d
26_1_,. p. 80.
 292

One evening a meeting of these humanitarian friends of hers

de enerated into chaos as each tried to assert the priority of his own

pet panacea. Some o-':"':he reforming schem~ represented were

Mesmerism, Women's Rights. Anti-Sectarianism. Dietetic Reform

and Anarchy! One of the reformers present. Thomas l~lf~n Andrew

Jackson Hobbs was depicted vividly.

• • • a thorough-going radical. with an unshaved and

unwashen face. long, lack. uncombed hair: ancragray.
patched frock coat, leather pantaloons, a red waistcoat.
"and a red bandana handkerchief tied round his neck for
a c~v~t. Z

The Spirit-Rapper presented a reason~bly accurate stereo­

type of ~he typical Philosophical Spiritua list of ante bellum America.

1
The brief runs as follows: Born in New York of New England stock;

educated at a small. rural, religiously-oriented college where he

showed a distinct preference for the sciences; and prone to dabble

in Phrenology, Transcendentalism, and Mesmerism before arriving at

Spiritualism as a resting place. To fit the Christian Spiritualist the

stereotype needs to be altered slightly. In ,.S£.llege he would show

a p'reference for t~nistry and on the way to Spiritualism he would

pass through any number of liberal or novel religious groups.

Z7Ibid •• pp. 105-106. A careful reading of Giles Stebbins'

autobiography, Upward Steps of Seventy Year_s (New York: U. S.
Book Co•• 1890), pp. 73, 91, 94, 108. 145, 222, will show Just
how ~nY91ve9 rpany _Spiritualists w..!;!"el:..n the reforms Brownson
mention:" - ­
 293

Brownson erroneously assumed he was dissecting typical

Spiritualists in The Spirit-Rapper. But from its inception Spiritualism

was a pluralistic movement in motive, belief, and action. And despite

Brownson's debunking style and conclusions, Spiritualism was not just

a fanatical, fantastic cult, but a highlY-!!,naginative, sophisticated

effort to remake an environment and retool religion in light of the

rapid changes of life. It provided a compact, comprehensive world­

view which seemed to bring its adherents' lofty goals within reach in

their lifetime. But Spiritualism had a fatal fl~w. The source and

standard of authorityJor S iri!u~lism could nevElr be_ defined to the

satisfaction of the membership and Spiritualism tore itself~part. For

many seekers it provided only a temporary resting place.

(
-Sweden~rgia;;:tsm,
-- ---'-----'
in contrast to Spiritualism, offered a more

clearly-defined authority for its life and practice. Consequently it

a~cted men of the Brownson type who were drifting but looking for

security, or men willing to trade one standard of authority for another.

The personal accounts of Swedenborgians show that the receive~s of

Swedenborg were like the Spiritualists in their craving for'com~~e-

hensive religious and social reform and their dissatisfaction with

orthodox Christianity, but they tended to be more specific and p~opo-

sitlonal in their faith, past and present, than the intuitional Spiritu­

al1sts. Although both were anti-sectarian the Spiritualists were more

anti-institutional, but both g'roups insisted in typical sectarian fashion

 294

that their faith would be the one, the only one, to revolutionize

Christ~ty or replace H.

The personal accounts of Swedenborgians were g~ally

apolO<1etic and evangelistic in tone. Swedenborgians placed ~at

fai~ in the efficacy of the printed page and each published work was

intended to serve as a missionary. For this reason a large number

o~~ <;..utobiographical acco.~ts are explanat~s for leaving the Old

28

----
Church in favor of the New. The most important of this type was

G eorge Bush's ,Statement of Reasons for Embracing the Doctrines and

-' -

Disclosures of Emanuel Swedenborg.

/- ,

( BU5admHs that even when he began to have serious intel­

lectual difficulties with the traditional Christian interpretation of

Christ's resurrection he could not accept Swedenborg. His impression

of him was that of a "well-meaning mystic" who had been subject to

delusions. 29 The suggestion of a friend that he might find interesting

'28(;; s;u~~Reasons for Leaving the Presbyterian Ministry

and Adopting th-e nnciples of,the ~ erusalem Church (Cincinnati:
A. Peabody, 1845), 48 pp. _rs~lliam_r1,!rne9, The True Church;
or, Principal Points of Difference Between the Old and ~ Christian
Churches (New York: John Allen, 1846), 29 pp. In 1856 this work was
published in an expanded third edition of 186 pa~¥_Ticknorand
Fields, one of Boston I s leading publishers. Mrs.
Caroline V. 1."
Stettinius, Papers Relating to the Excommunicatibn-ofMrs. Ca(oline
Y.. 1.. Stettinius from the Second Presbyterian Church, in the City of
Peoria (Peoria, Illinois: Nason and HilL 1858), 14 pp.

29George Bush, Statemcent of Reasons for Embracing the

Doctrines and Disclosures of Emanuel Swedenborg (Boston: Otis Clapp,
L1860), p. 2.
 295

-
a comparison of his present view of the resurrection with that of
--
Swedenborg brought Bush to attention, and he began to read New

Church collateral works as well as Swedenborg. In due time his

misconception of Swedenborg faded away and he came to see that

ke to Scriptural truth. 30
--
Swedenborg's science of corres'pondences was not "fanciful" but the

---..
--
The lever that shifted Bush from doubt to belief in regard to

Swedenborg was Mesmerism.

• • • in all human probability I should never have come

to the position I now occupy. had it not been for the over­
~he.!m.l!!9 evidence of truth derived from this source. 31

But the most impressive aspect of Swedenborg's thought fof B~/was

his u~derstanding Qf man's nature. Man was "a spirit clothed with

a body. ,,32 Swedenborg's teachings were "a system of verities,

found~ upon th~onstituent elements of man's nature, ,,33 and with

this correct view of man Swedenborgi~ produced a pi~Y IT':2£e

"~nial and cheerful" than the morbidity characteristic of orthodox

Chr1~tianity. 34

30 Ibid., p. 3.

31 Ibid •

32 Ibid •• p. 13.

33Ibid~. p. 18.

~•• p. 28.
 296

In another pamphlet Bush systematically outlined the f~

main differences between the doctrinal systems of the Old and New

Churches. (First, Swedenborgianism avoided the violations of reason

and the conflicts with science which marked Old Church doctrines

such as predestination. 3S Second, and more positively, Bush argued

that the New Church was blessed with a unity of doc..?'..:ne that the Old

Church, with its many creeds and.sects. could never hope to match. 36

ird\ while the New Church recognized the necessity of upholding its

doctrinal essentials, the Church stressed" life" rather than doctrinal

~

conformity.
_.
This life was one of love and use in a practical rather
-...... ~-

than a theoretical sense. 37

­
ush's ourth point delineated the
,
superiority of the New Church concept of Christ and the Trinity. 38

The lucidity of Bush's arguments, coupled with his .scholarly

. .!:.ep~~n, convinced a significant number of men that they should at

least give Swedenborg a hearing. Naturally not all of these ende~

their search with Swedenborg. One man raked Bush for wasting hiS.

time with Swedenborg and the Repository. His soul was not satisfied

36 Ibid ., p. 7.

37 Ibid., pp. 8-9.

38 Ibid ., p. 10.

 297

with Sw~denborg's revelations or Bush's "system" so he would remain

a liberal Calvinist proud to continue preaching the old Gospel of

Jesus. 39 Still others questioned Bush's contention that the "New

Church produced a superIor piety and generosity than the Old Church.

Joseph B. GOIT of the New York Orphan Asylum challenged

Bush in 1856 ~ give evidence for his claim oJ superior charity.

The object I have in view is to show the effects produced

--by your doctrines--on the lives of a large number that
have embraced them. While a few have renounced them
and united with orthodox "churches--several have become
Deists--and AtheisJs. A large number are openly immoral,
quoting Swedenborg as one who permitted certain species
of immorality. I am not aware that any 'good--other than
0l..2 speculative sort--has ever resulted from emoracfrig
New Church octrines. The fruits of a religion are the
best evidences of its quality. What has yours accomplished?
What have you done for the heathen world? What has it
accomplished for the poor, -misera~d degraded in this'
great city?40

George Bush excelled in provoking his friends and opponents

to reply; ,apathy or neutrality could not co-exist with,h!m. He was

not greatly surprised or disturbed by the tenor or scope of his corre­

spondence. Some of the Swedenborgian personal accounts appear

,
quite meek after reading Bush, but they were not intended to be
-
deliberately antagonistic to the Old Church. Rather than conveying

39 enry Lobdell;to George Bush, September 23, 1851, Bush

Letterbooks. VII (1851), SSRA.

40Joseph B. GOIT to George Bush, April 16, 1856, Bush Letter­

books, xvm (1855-1856), SSRA.
 298

the aggressive, proselyting air of Bush's works, these autobiographies

followed a more traditional path.

(
the Autobiography of'David Powe
-- Two of the more important ones are

and The Autobiography of ~ New

Churchman.

David Powel! was born into a New Church family near Steuben­

ville, Ohio, in 1805. Since the family lacked the support of an

organized New Church society David felt the sting of ridicule early

in life. UlfU~ces~h}1.erians who ran the local school refused ~weden­

borgian children s~id_P~well, Sr. opened his own. 41 Youn9_David

stru~gled al~ng i~ thitlashion until at age eighteen he was sent to

Wheeling, West Virginia, to learn the tanning trade. His father died

that same year and David returned home to help care for the rest of

his large family. 42

Almost immediately David began to fill his father's place

in New Church activities. He became a la reader in the small

society which now existed in Steubenville. The longing to preach

burned within him but David believed he had to first establish himself

in a career which would support his preaching efforts. 43 For a period

of !Cl,.ur yea~s he wrestled wit)1law, medicine, tanning, and teaching

41William H. Benade, ed., Auto!:Jiography of the Rev. pavid

Powell (Philadelphia: A Committee of the Darby Society of the N. C.,
1856). p. 8.
42Ibid., p. 10.

43 Ibid ., p. 16.
 299

to no avail. 44 Finally in 1833 he awoke to the fact that he would

never begin preaching if he waited until he could afford to do so

financially. The Western Convention licensed him to preach and

- -
until 1840 he both taught and preached. 45
.

From 1840 Powell waged war on the Old Church full-time.

He pastored the Danby, New York, Society from 1840 to 1844 and

battled the Baptists. From 1844 to 1847 as a missionary in Ohio he

t5!.ckll'ld the Presbyterians that had discriminated against him in his

youth, then in 1847 he invaded one of their strongholds, Pittsburg,

to lead a small society there. 116 Powell left Pittsburg in 1850 to

return to missionary work, but in 1853 he moved east to take his

last pastoratein Darby, Pennsylvania. A cancerous sore on his hand

forced him to New York for treatment and eventual amputation. Later

his whole arm was taken but Powell never recovered. After intense

suffering for months he died in New York in July, 1854. 47

44 Ibid., pp. 16-18, 22. Powell summed up his sentiments

toward law in the rhyme. • . "If I'm a lawyer, I must lie and cheat;
For an honest lawyer will get no bread to eat." (p. 16.)

45 Ibid ., pp. 23, 27-29, 33.

46 Ibid ., pp. 51, 56-57, 62.

47Ibid., pp. 66-69. Powell was in general sympathy with

a
the Academy position but he was also friend of George Bush's.
Powell may even have stayed with the Bush family while in New York
being treated for his disease, for Bush was at his bedside frequently
during the amputations. Bush commelited that the first amputation
only took five minutes, but the process of tying off blood vessels
 300

PoweU's autobiography yields little information about any

experience that could be classified a conversion. or about reasons

for becoming a receiver of Swed~borg. But this fact alone makes it

important. for Powell's autobiography is one of the few published

accounts in the years 1840-1870 describing the life of someone born

, - -
into a New Church family and raised a New _Churchman. In Powell's

eyes he was never anything but a Swedenborgian. In New Church

circles this kind of religious nurturing was accepted without question

about the validity of Powell's faith. wherea s in the Old Church the

acceptance of such an idea had to await the pioneering work of

Horace Bushnell.

Another significant New Church autobiography was one

. ~ )
written under the pseudonym John A. ~~. The real author may

have been' awyer A. J. Clive. of western Pennsylvania. John U ttle' s

birthplace was Philadelphia, where he spent the bulk of his life until

his migration west in 1~25. His parents were illiterate German

immigrants. but after an apprenticeship in printing and work as a

---
clerk in Columbia, South Carolina. Uttle had successfully completed

lasted two and one-half hours. See George Bush to Richard DeCharms,
March 2. and June, 15. 1854. AA. Bush a'lso published a running
account 'on Powell's condition in the monthly Repository.
 301

a course of legal preparation. He was admitted to the Philadelphia

bar in 1824 or 1825. 48

Until he moved west as a mature young man in his early

thirties, John Little had not found a Aome religiously. He had for­

saken his parents' heritage, both Lutheran faith and German language,
-- _. 1-'­

49 ­
with some bitterness, and after exposure to the Presbyterian and

Episcopalian churches he was still dissatisfied. 50 In western

Pennsylvania Little heard of the New Church for the first time when

a former acquaintance nameQ~Lam r from a Philadelphia printing­

office, now a New Church minister, vis!!e~im. 51 Evidently Little

had settled near Bedford, Pennsylvania. and his friend must have

been Richard DeC~arms.

DeLamar exposed orthodox Christianity as devoid of reason.

- .­
justice, and ~irtue, and explained how the New Church was destined

to restore Christianity. Little spent several years in extensive study

--
of Swedenborg and found his description of the life of charity irresist-

Jble.

! 48 John A. Little [Pseud.], The Autobiography of ~ New

{ Churchman;.Q[, Incidents and Observations Connected with the Life
of Iohn b.. Little (Philadelphia: Lippincott, Grambo and Co., 1852),
pp. 71. 87.

49 Ibid • , pp. 16, 19-20.

50Ibid. , pp. 60-61, 77, 118-119.

51Ibid •• pp. 100, 124.

 302

I had long desired to free myself from the annoyance

of presumptions and contradictory advisers, many of
whom could not agree on the subject of the.....fu_ill!~,,!!!~ptal
conditions of salvation, and all of whom involved these
condItions in terms that were painful and repugnant to
my intellect and affections. 52

Convinced that the "New Church was not just another sect, and drawn

by its life of charity and emphasis on the essentials of religion,

Little became a receiver but remained in the Presbyterian Church. S3

The first shock to Little's ideal arrived in the post in the

form of a circular from his friend DeLamar who was now back in

Philadelphia. IDeLamar invited him to attend a meeting of New Church­

men in that city for the purpose of establishing a new convention in

the Church. Little could not comprehend the reasoning behind it and

refused to participate. 54 He interpreted the move as the product of

. ­
human frailty and man's propensity to bicker over the non-essentials

of life, but he did not allow his disillusionment ~~l hi5.-ardor for

Swedenborgianism. From 1840 to 1845 he resided in Pittsburg and

-.
helped organize a New Church society in the town he described as

-the blackest and dirtiest place in the world... 55

52Ibid. , pp. 139-149.

53Ibid•• p. 165.

54Ibid•• pp. 166-167.

55Ibi d•• pp. 177, 183.

 303

. After leaving Pittsburg in 1845 Little had trouble finding a

pennanent home. He settled in two new county seats between 1845

and 1852, the year the autobiography was published. in an attempt to

establish himself, but he had difficulty supporting his large family

comfortably. 56 The fault did not lie completely with Little because

everywhere he went his Swedenborgian faith aroused antago~ism.

Probably his proclivity for reform did not endear him either in the

communities where he settled, for Little aggressively promoted total

abstinence. 57 And then he had to cope with the public tendency to

associate Spiritualism and Swedenborgianism, a problem which

prompted him to warn in his autobiography that people not be frightened

away from Swedenborg because of his spirit communications. 58

In Little's mind too much emphasis on the means by which

Swedenborg obtained his insights was ~me against more essential

matters. His essentials were the PE.0!!:otion of a life of charity,

development of man's internal moral sensitivity, and the realization

of man's full potential as a free and rational moral agent. 59 And to

guarantee against the overshadowing of the core of his mess~ge by

56 Ibid • , pp. 222, 229. 235.

57Ibid. , pp. 48-49. 226-227.

58 Ibid • , pp. 255-256.

59 Ibid • , pp. 253-254, 256.

 304

the detalls of his autobiography, UttIe pinpointed his purpose in

writing it.

Do not, I beseech you, mistake its meaning and its

object. That object, let me assure you at once, was
not simply to tell the story of a personage so humble
and insignificant as myself. Such an object would not
have been worth writing about. But if I know myself
I had a better purpose in view. . . .

• • • The whole narrative is intended rather as a

picture of the inner man than of the world without-­
of the feelings and operations of the mind, rather ·than
of the external acts by which these feelings were
known and understood. But if this was one of the
objects to be accomplished, it was not the only one.
For- with however little interest we may regard the pre­
ceeding incidents, they are not without force sufficient
to illustrate the wonders· and designs of Providence.
This is a lesson which we ought to be learning at all
times and under all circumstances. 60

The self-conscious, didactic approach of John Little's auto­

biography is typical of autobiographies of this p~d.· Spiritualists

~
and SWedenborgians spoke of the need of inner consciousness and

"
accentuated the importance of inward motivation as opposed to external

act, yet because their personal accounts were intended for publication

anaura of artificiality pervades the pieces. Actually, Spiritualist and

Swedenborgian autobiographies escaped the faults common to a~-

--
biographies to a greater extent than most of their companion pieces of

the time, but they still allow the feeling to linger that the soul has

not been bared.

60 Ibid ., pp. 240-241.

 305

In revivalistic· literature of the ante bellum era'the intense

emotional conversion experiences appear to exhibit the candor the

researcher longs for, but much of that is superficial also. At any rate

that tYRe of vivid emotional experience was not part of Swedenborgian

totality. Like life itself, the reception of Swedenborg's teachings

was a rational process. The conversion of John Bigelow, a notable

New York literary and political figure, comes as close to a sudden

spiritual commitment as Swedenborgians were likely to get. His "con­

version" took about two_weeks filled with intensive reading and

discussion of Swedenborg's writings. 61

Given the nature of religious change as interpreted by a

Swedenborgian, the guard placed upon emotion in the autobiographies

is understandable. So is the self-consciousness when one realizes

the great value which Swedenborgians placed upon the printed page.

The self-a~eness, coupled with the s~tiVity to_a ~i'yine mission,

created a tone which is reminiscent of Puritan diaries. although the

specific content of the two types of literature varies drastically.

61~arg~ret A. Clapp, Forgotten First Citizen:! John Bigelow

(Boston: Little, Brown and Co.. 1947), pp. 86-93. Bigelow's
spiritual search was triggered by the accidental death of his two year
old son in February-:-r853~and the death of his mother the following
September. Before leaving on a trip to Haiti in November, 1853,
Bigelow had even consulted with a medium to gain some assy.r.ance
of life after death. On the trip he met a Danish man named 'Kierulffi
who gave him some of Swedenborg's writings. Long before his-return
to New York Bigelow was a Swedenborgian.
 306

The only Swedenborgian autobIography62 that appears to be

relatively candid is one tha t definitely was not composed for publlca­

tion in toto, although parts of it do bear the marks of self-conscIous

l~t to publish. -
This is the voluminous, rambling autobiography of
-.,.- _.
(S mon Snyder Rathvon, a minor_figure in the overall New Church scene,

but a leader of the Lancaster New Church Society for many years. His

revealing "Loose Sheets" span the years 1852 to 1860.

Rathvon's life began in April, 1812, in Marietta, Pennsyl­

vania. His father was a g_un~th in this small river town of Lancaster

County. The family ~poor and after a few sporadic bursts of formal

schooling ten year old Simon was hired out to a local farmer. 63 For

the better part of three years Simon ~ored ~: the fiery-te"2Ee'red

McGinness and endured the separation from his family. He was

working at~e McGinness farm when word came to him of his mother's

death, and throughout the rest of his life that farm symbolized the

r 62This statement is open to correction, but this writer has

not seen any Swedenborgian autobiography more candid.

. ~on Snyder Rathvo • "Autobiography" (unpublished Ms.,

Lancaster GoUonty-Historrcal-Soctety, 1852-1860), pp. 296-297.
(Rathvon fondly called his document his "Loose Sheets." Technically
they were neither a diary nor an autobiography. There is a general
chronological order, but usually Rathvon entered pages in his "Loose
Sheets" once a week at most. The entries are generally essays or
long reflections on a single theme which may go beyond the immediate
present. Occasionally he inserted copies of important correspondence.
( Frequent references to the past in poetry and prose also create an
autobiographical flavor.
 307

quilt he felt in regard to his mother. 64 He had failed her and she had
- --
left him just as he felt most Inten~elY the need for a h~ so e

alternately loved and deplored her. 65 The resentment toward his

father vacillated also, but even in good moments he never again felt

comfortable at home because it was not a home. The only reason he

returned was for the sake of his five brothers and sisters. 66

death ~effort
­
(Rathvon wandered during the two years after. his mother's
-----./
!£. find jobs which could supplement his father's

income. He worked as a field ~nd, sheep-driver, and any other

reasonable occupation which presented itself, befo..£.e_e~ng '::I

apprenticeship as a tailor in 1827. Here in the shop of John Bell in

Marietta Rathvon met the German immigrant who would mean so much
- I ._
in his life. Frederic John Kra'!P~' These days of apprenticeship were

some of the happiest of his life. 67

For slightly more than a year in 1832-1833 Rathvon tri~d to

establish himself in business in Marietta, then gave up to enter the

employ of
-'
Thomas McGratfijn Philadelphia. 68 Six months later he

was back in Marietta. The chief attraction must have been Catherine

64Ibid. , pp. 299, 301.

65 Ibid . , pp.' 300, 302.

66 Ibid •• p. 303.

67 Ibid.,' pp. 101, 609.

68Ibid . , pp. 425-428.

 308

--- -
remained in Marietta until November. 1848. whe ,;---­
Freyberger, for in May, 1834, he and Catherine were married, They

F. J. Kram
a successful merchant-tailor in Lancaster, invited Rathvon to move
• now

---- . 69
to that city to become his foreman and bookkeeper. By the time

he resettled in Lancaster Rathvon had already begun to cultivate some

of his life-long interests such as entomology and writing. but he was

---
still not a full receiver of Swedenborg.

( Rathvon's' early religiQus training had been as sparse as his

formal education. His parents had no specific religious convictions,

the farme McGinness was primarily superstitious rather than religious.

and the only Sunday school he had ever attended left no positive

impressions. ~ut he di~ink seriously about religion and this thought

prepared him for the strange interpretations offered by his friend

Kramph. About 1850 Rathvon was baptized into the New Church, and

until his death in 1891 he served in various responsible positions in

---
the Lancaster Society. including lay leader, secretary, Sabbath­

school superintendent, and President. 70

- -
The New Church reigned supreme in Rathvon's life from at

least 1850 on, but he devoted himself to many other personal and

69Harris, History of Lancaster County, p. 468. This

standard biographical sketch of Rathvon was written by Rathvon him­
self.

70Ibid .• p. 470. Rathvon, "Autobiography," p. 238.

 309

community Interests with equal vigor. En1Qm~ogy fascinated and

inspired him for its ow.n merits as well as for its ability to elevate

him to a sphere of usefulness far above the drudgery of tailoring. 71

-- ---- - .

In ~ddition to his own sizeable collection of insects from all over the

world, ~thvon' s excitement worked itself out in community p~ects

such as the Lancaster Horticultural Society, the Linnean Society,

,..,. the

periodical Lancaster Farmer. the American Entomological Society,

and the Philadelphia Academy of Natural Sciences. 72

Rathvon's attention was also attracted and held by education:

He had a large brood of children himself and was naturally concerned

that they receive the educational opportunitie:..-deriied him. Sweden­

-
borgian precepts needed to be injected into developing concepts of

education and Rathvon did his part. He served on the Lancaster

school board and took a keen interest in the expansion and enrich­

ment of the libraries of Franklin and Mar~hall College and the Normal

-
School at Millersville, Pennsylvania.
--
For many years he nursed along

the libr~~e Mechanics Society of Lancaster and encouraged the

~rklngmen of the c~ty to contribute to their own enlightenment. 73

7 Rathvon, "Autobiography," pp. 20-21, 59, 127-128, 295.

381.

72Harris, History of Lancaster County, p. 470.

73Ibid • Rathvon, "Autobiography." pp. 136, 251, 402, 711,

731, 760.
 310

In spite of his varied exertlons!to sei'ze the elusive go~f

---
usefulness, Rathvon did not achieve his aim by the time he ceased

writing his autobiography in 1860. His occupation and his marriage

thwartedfis efforts to find personal satisfaction, and his increasing

deafness hampered him in the New Church activities which offered the

hope of redemption from uselessness. 74 But a paradoxical feature

emerges in an ~mination of Rathvon's Swedenb<;>rgian faith; that

faith which comforted him in some respects tormented him in others.

H~...3omplicatedhis m~rriage because his wife never sympathized

and refused to encourage the children to adopt their father's beliefs. 7 =-J
Even.J.1}~el~gious activities were complicated by the Swedenborgian

emphasis on a r~tional, critical approach to life. He constantly

scrutinized his own thought and practice, and that of the local New

Church Society, in an endeavor to align them with Swedenborgian

-
standards. 76 The resulting anguish and depression tortured him.
--
Rathvon rarely speaks directly in his autobiography of the

appeal which Swedenborgianism held for him, but the pervasi~~ss

of his faith throughout the w.3rk suggests an interpretation. Becoming

74Rathvon, "Autobiography," pp. 50, 465, 698-699.

75Ibid., pp. 71, 73-74, 154, 160, 284, 630.

76Ibid., pp. 49-50, 64, 70.,71, 78, 100, 116, 185, 452,

698. These frequent references show Rathvon was hardest on himself,

but he was occasionally critical of the New Church also. See pp. 83,
486, 506-509, 659-661.
 311

a receiver of Swedenborg revolutionized the meaningless eXiste~ce

of Slmon Rathvon. The experience may not have been sudden and

emotional but it was total. Rathvon's entire life-style was reordered

--
so that where nope of his actions had conveyed purpose, now all of
-- -
his thoughts and activities were pregnant wi_th meaning, even his

dreams as shall be noted in a later chapter. Life was now a process

of regeneration, a progressive actualization of one's God-given

potential. and even though the process was frequently painful the

personal rewards more than compensated for the mental suffering, or

at least they were supposed to do so.

All the specific reasons for joining the New Church, and

Spiritualism for that matter, whether doctrinal. personal, social or

f Psy~log_ical ultimately boil down to the crucial importance of a

'/ world~. Nineteenth century Americans longed for a philosophy of

life capable of encompassing all o~ life, not just the physical, the

material. the visible and the verifiable but the spiritual, mystical,

ethereal. and unjustifiable also. Since in the ante bellum period

Spiritualism and Swedenborgianism were young movements drawing

adherents from other persuasions or from e...u.rn.oseles~ss, t?eir hopes

of success laY~in th;"degree to which their world-views satisfied the

/
needs of those people looking for a new orientation to life.

The history of the New Church reveals that in the years 1840,...

1870 the Swedenborgian world-view did prove satisfying for many

 312

intelligent men and Women 'who sensed the turbulent undercurrents of

the intellectual life of the period. The appeal of a world-view that

~~
seemed capable of reconciling religion, science, and spiritual e.al1ty

was not powerful enough to compensate for the destructive forces at

work in the Chucch. Swedenborgianism found itself wracked by

-
internal strife which proved to many interested people that the New
~

Church was no more competent than the Old in achieving harmony. It

could not demons~e to the satisfaction of others that its concept of

sp~l reality was any more valid than that of Spiritualism or

orthodox Christianity because within its own ranks men struggled to

assert their own particula~~s on spirit contact. 77

77 In addition to Harris, Weller, Jones and others who

developed theories on spirit contact, see the following literature on

-
John S. Williams, one of the relatively few Swedenborgians who
aligned hims"el fully with Spiritualism. Hliam Elder, Minority
Report, or Protest Against the Proceedings of- the Western New Church
Convention, in the Case of the Acting Committee vs. John.§.. Williams
(Chillicothe, Ohio: John White,l841), 80 pp. Before becoming a
Spiritualist 'yvilliams align~elf with the extreme anti-clerical
wi~ of the New Church and in a dispute was expelled from the
Western convention in 1841. John S. Williams:-~OOl09iCaJ. Test;
0;, Five Charts of the Same·Faculties, Qy as Man_y DiStinguish~
Professors (n. p., n. p., n. d.), 15 pp. Between 1849 and 1851
Williams) had himself analyzed five times by leading Phrenologists
such as arson Fowler. To Williams Phrenology was a true science.
___-'. !1 Synopsis of the Spiritual Manifestations of John .§..
Williams, Medium (New York: Partridge and Brittan, 1853; Boston:
Bela Marsh, 1853), 16 pp. In 1851 Williams had his first spirit
communication from his mother; later his deceased daughter Eliza
became his regular spirit contact. , To All Whom nMay Con­
~(Bagor, Maine: n. p., 1853), 5 pp. Williams published letters
of Thomas Worcester which Worcester had forbidden him to make public.
The purpose was to rebuke Worcester for his "scurrility and abuse, " but
W1IT.1ams intend~d it as a barb for all Swedenborgian clergymen.
 313

. Another problem which acted to nullify the positive appeal

of the Swedenborgian world-view was that of developing an a~ua.te

theo of social change. In the ante bellum period this question

naturally manifested itself in terms of a debate over social reform.

The New Church had an evolutionary theory of social change which

did not mix with the radical reform ideas of the years 1840 to 1860.

But the ~ew Church did desire a fu_ndamental alteration of society

and that emphasis drew into the Swedenborgian community many

reformers, some of whom could not readily acc~pt slow-motion~rm.

The clash of ideas convulsed the New Church at the same time it

was confronted withSpiritualis and sectarianism, and the resolution

of the reform question occurred in that highly-charged context.

 o

CHAPTER X

SWEDENBORGIANISM AND SIAVERY

Swedenborgianism and Spiritualism interacted with one

another from 1845 to 1860 with serious repercussions for New Church

development. The public identification of the two discredited the

New Church just at the time when opportunities seemed open for

unparalleled expansion of Swedenborgianism. Internally the New

Church suffered also because of its encounter with Spiritualism. The

exaggerated claims of New Churchmen enamored with Spiritualist

concepts, and the attempt to enlist Swedenborg in their behalf, were

as obnoxious to the majority of New Churchmen as Spiritualist

opinions of Swedenborg had been.

The immediate result of the interaction was controversy and

infighting which by 1855 had seriously eroded earlier New Church

optimism about the future and had drained off zeal vital to the susten­
1
ance of expansion. Another by-product was the debate within the

lBy the mid 1850's the New Church had experienced almost
thirty years of unabated controversy over personal, social, and
ecclesiastical problems such as the conjugial heresy, the trinal order
of the priesthood. Fourierism. SpiritualiSm. and slavery to mention a
few. Strong sentiment began to build up outside New England for an
end to public controversy since it was hindering the spread of their

314
 315

New Church in the 1860' s over authority. Spiritualism and the New

Era had challenged the authority of Swedenborg and prepared the way

for a sizeable segment of the New Church to accept a definition of

Swedenborg which posited him as the unique, infallible, final

interpreter of the Word. This high view did not originate in the

1860' 5, but the controversy over Spiritualism made a discussion of

Swedenborg's authority both unavoidable and indispensible, and pre­

disposed many to accept the high view of Swedenborg as the only

acceptable position for the New Church.

The study of the interaction of Spiritualism and Sweden­

borgianism naturally accentuates the differences between the two

groups and slurs over the similarities. While the two were not as

. intimately connected as outsiders believed them to be, the two did

share in the creation of a unified concept of reality which cha l~enged

the dichotomy between spirit and matter recognized by most Christians,

and the materialism of contemporary science. Both Spiritualism and

Swedenborgianism can be interpreted as efforts to re-orient science

and religion and effect a reconciliation. 2 Religion would become

faith.. In New England the bottle of public controversy had been

capped in the 1820's. See J. B. Niles to George Bush, September 10,
1855, Bush Letterbooks, XIII (1852-1854). SSRA; Sylvester Chesbro to
George Bush, March 14, 1857, Bush Letterbooks, XIX (1856-1858).
SSRA; New Jerusalem Messenger, I, No. 48 (1856). 191; Repository,
VI, No. 11 (l853), 494-499.

2.The relationship of the New Church to the scientific

developments of the years 1840 to 1870 is a specialized topic which

needs serious consideratIon by itself. William Holcombe and

 316

truly scientific, by which many seemed to mean verifiable and

indisputable, and science would become "true" science in that it

now incorporated all of reality in its understanding of the universe. 3

In short, the uncertainity and confusion were bei.ng drawn out of

contemporary religion and science.

With a·working phllo'sophy that encompassed all reality

Swedenborgians scrutinized every phase of American life, not only

religion and science. The New Church and individual Swedenborgians

. ., ,
·existed in a state of tension in the mid-nineteenth century vis a vis

established cultural norms. But at least to 1870 very little pressure

existed in the New Church for a geographically isolationist attitude.

Dominant opinion sanctioned separation from the Old Church and

adherence to a new institutional form, but New Churchmen did not

genera lly withdraw into a "micro-world" of their own. They remained

prominent men of the world who mingled with ease in polite society.

The separation was an ideological one.

WUliam Hayden need to be interpreted in a scientific context. For

example, see William Hayden, ~ the Human Race One g[ Many?
(Boston: Otis Clapp, 1855), 24 pp. for a brief discussion of the
anthropological problems spotlighted in William Stanton's, The
Leopard's Spots: Scientific At.titudes Toward Race in Americ~1815­
1859 (Phoenix ed.; Chicago: University of Chicago, 1960), 245 pp.

3Because of this scientific emphasis Robert Hare could

investigate spiritualism with the same techniques that he used to
probe electricity, and New Churchmen could speak of their theological
system as a science, especially the framework of interpretation known
as the "Science of Correspondences. "
 317

Obviously Swedenborgians did not re:ject America per se, but

they did repudiate the dominant Christian and materialistic world­

views which had been clashing in Europe and America since the onset
4
of the Enlightenment. The frequency of war from 1757 to 1815, the

challenges of orthodox Christianity. the outbursts of political republ1­

canism. and the revolutionary advances in science and technology all

reinforced the Swedenborgian belief that the world was in a state of

moral confusion and explosive potential. The take-off for progress

had arrived, but progress needed an atmosphere of harmony and order.

Swedenborgianism could eliminate the personal antagonisms of the

period by helping man subordinate his selfishness to the good of the

whole society. and it could strangle the sectarianism of the era with

its superior world-view. 5

Because of these comprehensive, exclusivist claims the New

Church constantly faced the suspicion from within and the certainty

from without that it was just another Christian or religious sect. In

the early nineteenth century the term sect was an odious one meaning

that the group involved had broken away from an established religious

4 The year 1757 according to Swedenborg was the date of

the Lord's Last Judgment and the inauguration of the New Church.

5The all-encompassing nature of the Swedenborgian world-­

view can be seen in J. P. Stuart. et al., Principles of the New
Church (Cincinnat1: Wrightson and Co.. 1859), 72 pp.
 318

body. Generally Swedenborgians "adamantly disclaimed the "sect"

designation. for the Ne"':' Chur~h maintaIned that it was genuinely

• 6 - "
new. The .New Church was part of a wider anti-sectarian movement

which characte"rized the ante bellum period and expressed disgust with

sectarianism in all forms. but especially in religion and politics.

In spite of vociferous disclaimers at the time, the New

Church and many other anti-sectarian groups did exhibit traits which

sociologists of religion now would not hesitate to call sectarian. 7 In

fact. from the origin of the New Church in England and America a

sectarian tradition occupied a prominent spot in the life of the Church.

and slowly grew in strength throughout the nineteenth century. This

sectarian tradition served the functional role of enabling men to cope

with the internal and external tensions facing the New Church. tensions

which developed due to the ideological separation between Sweden-

borgianism and the complex of values and mores called American

6"The New Jerusalem Not a Sect, but a New Dispensation, "

New Jerusalem Messenger. I. No. 3 (l855), 9. Henry James. The
Church of Christ Not an Ecclesiasticism: 11 ~ to ~ Sectarian (New
York: Redfield, 1854), 72 pp. Repository, IV. No. 1 (1851), 35-36;
VI. No. 12 (1853), 570-574.

7Yet Swedenborgianism defies simple classification as a sect

if one follows the traditional list of sect characteristics set down by
Liston Pope in Millhands and Preachers (Yale. 1842), pp. 142-144.
As Calvin Redekop suggests in his articles in the Mennonite Quarterly
Revi~w "pure" sects are few in number. Probably the term "established
sect" best fits the New Church if it must be labeled. SwedenborgiaiJ.-
ism was a protest movement but its theology and world-view were
almost full-blown from the outset. unlike most protest movements.
 319

culture. Swedenborgians were fundamentally at odds with the dominant

thought-patterns of nineteenth century America, yet at the same time

they were products of American culture.

Since Swedenborgians were protesting the status quo on the

basis of an image of the future rather than the past, they can be con­

sidered reformers. The scope and nature of their reform efforts were

determined by their world-view and they supported those means and

movements most likely to lead to a victorious implementation of their

philosophy throughout society. Consequently, they were much more

likely to support broad efforts such as educational reform or medical

reform than specific piecemeal reforms like temperance. Concentrated

attacks on specific injustices such as slavery were good, but they

failed to drive to the ideological core of society which permitted

slavery to survive.

Swedenborgians in the twentieth century carry an image of

staid conservatism, but before 1860 the image does not wear well even

though most New Churchmen were probably upper middle class in

status. However, they clearly were not radicals on the whole, for

their vision of progress as slow and orderly and their loyalty to

government dampened the radical tendencies which croppec! up fre­

quently in the ante bellum era. Swedenborgiaris wanted a radical

change in the social order, but not by disorderly means. But these
 320

limits were not clearly defined in 1840 and Swedenborgians can be

found in nearly every reform movement of the pre-Civil War period.

With its devotion to individual freedom of conscience. the

New Church would never have tried to officially limit Swedenborgian

involvement only to those reforms acceptable to the hierarchy. But

from 1840 informal sanctions emerged from experience so that after

1870 a commonly accepted attitude did prevail. As with Swedenborg's

authority the New Church had to first undergo a time of vigorous

debate before any semblance of consensus could be reached. Once

again the years 1840 to 1870 were crucial. Simultaneously with

ecclesiastical disputations and the furor over Spiritualism. the New

Church endured a series of controversies over reform. These related

to specific reforms, means. and the question of reform in general.

One of the most significant issues to face the New Church before the

Civil War was, of course, slavery.

New Church history in regard to antislavery ref?rm commences

in Sweden with the writings of Swedenborg. Swedenborg wrote of a

celestial church hidden in the interior of Africa which was the world's

last remnant of the ancient celestial church. and he predicted a

glorious future for Africans because they bore the "remains" of this

celestial sense of spiritual understanding. 8 Followers in Sweden

8James John Garth Wilkinson. The African and the True Chris­
tian Religion: His Magna Carta (London: James Speirs. 1892), 245 pp.
Wllkinson discusses the passages from Swedenborg's writings which
pertain to the African.
 a 321

quickly grasped the implications of Swedenborg's thinking under the

inspiration of Carl Bemard Wadstr~m, a Swedish scientist who became

a receiver of Swedenborg in l779.and immediately shifted his interests

from scientific to humanitarian pursuits. 9

Wadstrom and his fellow New Churchmen soon laid plans

for a colony in Africa based on Swedenborg's teachings, 10 but they

came to the realization that the slave trade would have to be halted

before their colony could flourish economically. Wadstrom's group

became the first organized movement in Scandanavia to oppose the

African slave trade. 11 In 1781 the King of Sweden granted the rights

to establish the colony, but after initial difficulty in securing

settlers Wadstr~m decided to make an exploratory trip, probably to

try to locate the celestial African church. On the trip Wadstr~m had

ample opportunity to observe the horrors of the slave trade in person. 12

He returned to Sweden in 1788 to find that early government

tolerance of Swedenborgianism had dissipated, largely due to the

popularity of the reading circle which Wadstrom had helped establish

9Alfred Acton, '·'Garl Bernard Wadstrom" (unpublished Ms. ,

1943, AA), p. 5.

10Ibid., p. 9.

llIbid., p. 10.

12 Ibid. , p. 26. See Wadstrom's Otservations on the ~

Trade (london, 1789).
 322

in 1786. The king's Deist advisers were especially alarmed at the

interest shown in Swedenborg by the king's brother, and in the Circle' 5

investigation of Mesmerism and Spiritualism. A smear campaign

discredited Swedenborgiamsm to the extent that Wadstrom found It

necessary to make London his base of operations. 13 In England he

began to lay new plans to fulfill his African dream. The key to those

plans was an African Wadstrom had brought back with him to be edu­

cated. Wadstrom proposed that his colony establish a benevolent

servitude over the Africans from the outset to ~ow for an or~~!'y

transition to civ ·li~~<! free m. His educated black would introduce

his own people to New Church teaching and serve as the link between

the white colony and the native population. 14

••r "
Unfortunately for ~dstrom is African pupil died in 1790.

Acutely disappointed Wadstrom abandoned his scheme and entered

cotton manufacturing in Manchester. England. But he never lost his

vision of a new world. and in 1795 he eagerly ran to France to enlist

in the social and political reconstruction of that great nation. While

in France he helped to revive the moribund Society of the Friends of

the Negro in 1798. but he died in the following year before resurrecting

his New Church colonization plan. 15

13Acton. "Wadstrom." pp. 14, 17-18. 33.

14 Ibid•• pp. 37. 39.

15 Ibid•• pp. 52-54. 56. .See Wadstr~m' s Essay on Coloniza­

2 vols. (London. 1795).

 323

Wadstrom was not the only European New Churchman in the

antislavery ranks. In Russia General Alexander Mouravieff, an early

proponent of the abolition of serfdom, was one of the first New

Churchmen in that country. 16 In England Thomas Goyder, pastor of

the Waterloo Road Society, Lambeth, Surrey, made the point clearly

to his congregation that slave and Christianit '!'Y_er~~co31patible.

One hundred ninety-two members signed his petition to Parliament

demanding an end to slavery in the English colonies. 17

The first antislavery man in America with New Church

sympathies was also the first New Churchman in the Western Hemi­

sphere--James Glen. Glen demonstrated that Swedenborgians

practlced_their ~onvi~s by emancipating his slaves in South

America. 18 A comparable act was performed by a New Church slave­

owner in the United States. About 1790 Robert Carter of Nomini Hall,

Virginia, became a receiver and in the next three years he manumitted

his hundreds of slaves and moved to Baltimore to find companionship

with other Swedenborgians. He died in that city in 1804. 19

16 Block , New Church, p. 60.

17Thomas Goyder, Christianity and c"olonia( Slavery Con­

trasted: A Lecture (London: T. Goyder, n. d.), pp. 7, 16.
laThe Intellectual B2,pository (London), I, No. 6 (1813), 338­
341.

19Lewis Morton, Robert Carter of Nomini Hall (Williamsburg,

Virginia: Colonial Williamsburg, Inc., 1941), pp. lOO, 246-247.
 ~24

Carter had been a Baptist before 1790 and the Baptists

subsequently contended th?lt he had come to the conviction that

slavery was evil while under their"influence. Since he did not

actually free his slaves until 1791 the New Church could also claim

credit for the noble act. 20 However. Carter's biographer argues that

no written evidence supports either contention and he concludes that

Carter probably s?ld out and freed his slaves for economic reasons.

In the years before the implementation of the cotton gin and the

revival of cotton planting in Virginia, the value of slaves was at the

lowest point in Carter's career as a planter and still declining. 21

In the New Church in the United States the whole slavery

question nearly drops out of sight for the first half of the nineteenth

century. A curious silence reigned until 1850 when the issue reared

its head suddenly and with effect. The hiatus may have been in

deference to the small but significant New Church following in the

South since New Churchmen there were frequently slave owners. At

any rate. once the question was raised the entire New Church commu­

nity, North and South, jumped to attention and released pent-up

emotion on the subject. As might be anticipated, one of the first to

break the silence was the irrepressible Richard DeCharms. Both he

and Solyman Brown published pamphlets on slavery in 1851.

20Bl ock. New Church. pp. 85-86.

21Morton. Robert 9arter, pp. 260 ff.

 325

Solyman Brown was a: dentist and New Church preacher who

earlier in his career had helped launch the Central Convention. He

was decidedly anti-General Convention and anti-clerical. ·Brown's

starting premise for his treatise on slavery was that before true

spiritual freedom could be enjoyed by all men, the New Church had

to promote the enlargement of civil liberty. He could not comprehend

how any New Churchman of charity could enslave another man given

New Church teaching on individual liberty. 22 Along with the teaching

of Swedenborg on the c.elestial nature of the Africans, this stress on

individual freedom, spiritually and politically, seems to have been a

major impetus in the New Church for an antislavery position.

Brown took his stand against slavery unequivocally, but he

did not favor immediate abolition. Brown criticized the "Surgeons

of fanaticism" who longed for war and disunion, and pleaded for

endurance of the present evil until more "proper" means could be

agreed upon for the eradication of slavery in an orderly fashion. 23

The bases for his plea were distinctly New Church: (1) The blacks

now enslaved were to be the carriers of civilization for Africa and

would be the instruments for the awakening of the celestial African

22Solyman Brown, Union of Extremes: !:l Discourse on

Liberty and Slavery (New York: n. p., 1851?), pp. 8, 13.

23Ibid., pp. IS, 24.

 326

church. 24 (2) Time was needed to prepare the slaves for their role

as civilizing agents. If the issue were forced the resulting dishar­

many would retard civil progress and spiritual development for all

men. Brown still hoped Southerners would voluntarily take the lead

in abolishing slavery once the New Church reasons for it were known

and accepted. 25

The second pa~phlet on slavery to appear in 1851 was

Richard DeCharms' Some Views of Freedom and Slavery. While

DeCharms' piece was basically in agreement with Solyman Brown's.

the name DeCharms guaranteed that his tract would gain a wider

hearing than Brown could command. It had a greater impact also. 26

For example, the recently formed St. Louis Society adopted DeCharms'

pamphlet as the basis for their own position on slavery. 27 That view

in turn influenced the German Swedenborgian colony in Jasper. Iowa.

The immigrants who founded Jasper had entered the United States

through New Orleans and settled in St. Louis before finally rooting

themselves in the rich soil of Iowa. They had been appalled by the

24 Ibid ., pp. 5, 16.

25 Ibid •• p. 20.

26

Medium, III, No. 22 (1851), 344-346.

27 Charles A. Hawley, "The Historical Background of the

Attitude of the Jasper Colony Toward Slavery and the Civil War, "
Iowa Iournal of History and Politics. XXXIV, No. 2 (1936), 191.
 327

New Orleans slave sales because they hoped for better things of

America, and needed no prodding to adopt an antislavery stance•.

DeCharms conveniently placed their antislavery sentiments in a New

28
Church context.

DeCharms' work on slavery was also more significant than

Brown's in its more explicit development of New Church thinking on

the subject. DeCharms articulated the belief that slavery was a

hereditary evil, a "politically constitutional disease, " that could not

be cured by "quacks." If the "quacks" and their strong remedies

had their way the patient would surely die. Only time, reason, and

patience could uproot such an entrenched evil. In this respect he

and Brown agreed, but DeCharms' lacked Brown's optimism about

the South ever being convinced by reason that slavery should be

abolished. After all, he h<ld learned that even New Churchmen were

impervious to reason on matters that he held dear. Reasoning for

truth and justice would have no more success in the South than

any other plan "which does not contemplate radical changes in the

manners, customs, and entire social economy of the whites. ,,29

28 Ibid ., pp. 191, 197.

29Richard DeCharms, Some Views of Fri:ledom and Slavery in

the Light.Q!. the New Ierusalem (Philadelphia: George Charles, 1851),
pp. 73-4, 83. DeCharms by 1851 was a strong advocate of Homeopathy
which administered drugs in small or diluted doses.
 o
328

Just how all these -radical changes" were to be accomplished

DeCharms' does not say, but he does indicate that the entire educa­

tlonal system of the South needs re-orientation. New Churchmen

were quick to realize the importance of education in achieving funda­

mental social change. For DeCharms education was the only way to

plow under the feudal remnants of Southern civilization which were

anti-Christian and anti-republican. 30 But DeCharms did not limit

character changes to whites; the same process had to be applied to

blacks. With the black men DeCharms even proceeded one more step,

for he saw the need of the regulation of breeding.

We must yield to the awards of common sense, and

improve the african race as the races of animals are

improved. 31

Ultimately. as blacks rose to a self-sufficient level through

careful breeding and proper educa tion, they should be permitted to

return to Africa to elevate their fellow blacks. 32 DeCharms was

essentially a colonizer on the slavery question, as was Brown. This

was probably the most popular antislavery sentiment among New

Churchmen. but Swedenborgianism had its abolitionists. The most

301bid., pp. 84. 88-89, 101-102.

31 Ibid., p. 87. Heredity was extremely important in New

Church thinking, for one's family carried propensities for good or evil
which were inheritable.
32 Ibid •• p. 90.
 329

prominent of these was George Bush, the controversial New York pro­

fessor and editor. However, Bush was not a radical of the Garrisonian

stamp but a reformer. 33

About the time DeCharms and Brown broke a long New Church

silence on the slavery question, George Bush was planning a full

airing of New Church sentiments on slavery in his Repository. First

he sent out trial balloons in the form of letters asking for opinions on

the proposed project. He soon learned what he probably knew anyway,

namely, that on any controversial subject there were nearly as many

different viewpoints as New Churchmen.

A planter named Kjerulff from St. Thomas in the West Indies,

the man who later would introduce John Bigelow to Swedenborg' s

writings, enthusiastically endorsed Bush's plan. More needed to be

said quickly ori slavery than DeCharms had dared say, for his treatise

"proves a great want of knowledge on the subject" and Kjerulff was

afraid Americans would soon not be in a mood to listen to anything

33Aileen Kraditor, Means and Ends in American ~bolitionism:

Garrison and His Critics on Strategy and Tactics, 1834-1850 (New
York: Pq.ntheon Books, 1969), pp. 8-9, 242-243. Miss Kraditor
separates abolition from anti-slavery on the basis that the former
favored immediate action whereas the latter was gradualist in philos­
ophy. She further distinguishes two groups in abolitionism: (1) the
radicals of Garrison stamp who wanted a radical restructuring of
American society and were strongly anti-institutional, and (2) the
majority of abolitionists who aimed to purify American society and
favored reform of and through institutions.
 330

the New Church had to offer. 34 Evidently Bush held a similar

opinion. He had planned his series before he heard from Kjerulff.

pmbably in an effort to elicit more satisfactory antislavery sentiment

from his fellow New Churchmen than that of DeCharms.

The opposite opinion was expressed by N. F. Cabell of

Virginia, a slave owner and long-time friend of Bush, but in a reply

early in 1852 Bush revealed the fact that he had determined to publish

his series on slavery regardless of opposition. He needed to prove

to himself, and to "fellow antislavery men like Gerrit Smith, 35 that the

New Church was not just another religious haven for proslavery

sympathizers. 36 He assured Cabell that he was "not a very femcious

abolitionist" and in the series he would be careful to handle the con­

troversy with Christian charity. 37

There will be so much of the nightingale in my roaring

that they will find it hard to think hard of me. 38

34woodbury M. Fernald, Memoirs and Reminiscences of the

Late Prof. George Bush (Boston: OHs Clapp, 1860), pp. 362-364.

. 35George Bush and Gerrit Smith were old friends. In the

1830's they helped edit an anti-slavery paper called The Cabinet of
Freedom. Smith was interested in the New Church, for he was a
regular subscriber to Bush's Repository.

36Femald, ed., .Memoirs, p. 230.

37 Ibid ., p. 231.

38 Ibid •
 331

Many other letters opposed Bush's course and warned of -_

personal and ecclesiastical consequences. 39 They were ineffective

because George Bush had a ~oubled conscience which required a

hearing. He did not believe that the New Church could-continue to

ignore such a blatant injustice as slavery and still progress spiritu­

ally.

The verbal concession, indeed, that slavery is intrinsi­

_cally an evil is very easily, as it is very generally.
made--as it is also in thousands of instances at the
South; but we find, on a little closer examination, that­
the concession is of no practical moment. inasmuch as
it is also very widely held in the same quarters that
there is no prospect of getting rid of it for some genera­
tions to come, and that our duty as Christians is to
submit to it as a mysterious but wise and beneficent
dispensation of the Divine PrOVidence, des"igned for the
ultimate good of all parties concerned, but more especially
of the African race. So far as our acquaintance extends
this is the prevailing sentiment of Newchurchmen in every
part of our land. We know not that we have. ever con­
versed with half a dozen individuals of that Church who
did not occupy this ground--who apparently felt the least
painful solicitude in view of the existence of the institu­
tion--and who would not cordially side with the protesting
purport of the above letters and wonder "at the temerity of
the discussion which these letters so kindly but so pointedly
rebuke. This appears to be the general posture of the New
Church mind in this country, and as we regard it as a
species of practical fatalism we cannot of cours"e but aim
to break it up, wherever our feeble voi"ce may penetrate.

• We believe the New Church can never be fully faith­

ful to its mission without entering into direct collision
with every form of evi-l that exists among men. We have no
faith in mere abstract and general deprecations or denuncia­
tions of what is to absolute truth and good. There must be

39Repository, V. No. 6 (1852), 273-276.

 332

a hand tohand encounter. • It is, in our view.

a very grea t fallacy to expect tha t needed reforms
will take care of and accomplish themselves. and
that the simple preaching of love to the Lord. and
love to the neighbor, will renovate society without
the positive putting the finger upon the diseased
parts of the body politic. and actually grappling
with the crooked things that are to be maQe straight.
and the rough places that are to be made smooth. 40

George Bush was willing to lay his magazine on the sacrifi­

cial altar of antislavery. He hoped tha t truth spoken in love would

not alienate Southern New Churchmen but he knew he would lose

subscribers and he did. To his surprise he also learned that the New

Church had more than six others who felt as he did. One Northern

abolitionist from a New Church background even entered a new sub­

scription to the Repository with the comment that the chief obstacle

to his joining the New Church had been its silence on slavery. 41

Hezekiah Joslyn of Syracuse. New York. wrote of his delight

at Bush's series on slavery. To him Bush sounded like Gerrit Smith

and the Liberty Party.

I am sorry to say I have not yet found the first New

Church man who approves your discussion of the Slavery
question. They are all of them without exception apolo­
gists for slaveh~lding. Our friend Wilder 42 came here

40Ibid., pp. 280-281.

4lRepository, V. No. 9 (1852), 420-421.

42Alexander Wilder must have been one of the most reform­

minded Swedenborgians in the ante bellum era. He spent a period of
time in Adin Ballou's Hopedale community in the late 1850' s. He was
 333

a professed abolitionist. He has lately got a chance

to write for the Star, one of the most ultry [sic] bare
faced pros lavery and antitemperancepapers in the North
and he says expressly a man is justified in doing any­
thing for his support. 43

Joslyn obviously was not as delighted with the New Church as he was

with Bush, and he longed for a reformation in the Church. The series

in the Repository did smoke out a few rare New Church abolitionists,

but it did not change his conviction that the New Church generally

was proslavery. 44

Others of the rare breed echoed Joslyn's sentiments.

I do not know of one New Church minister except your­

self that has opened his mouth for the poor bond man.
You will not call me ultra when I say that I am an
abolitionist, and for speedy abolition. . . . I enter
into no compromise with slavery. I am for justice in
the name of humanity, and according to the law of the
liVing God 45

Chauncey Giles, another New Church minister besides Bush with anti­

slavery views, praised the series. Some o(the receivers in and near

also an advocate of abolition, feminism, and non-resistance. See

Alexander Wilder to George Bush. October 8, 1847, and February 28,
1848. Bush Letterbooks. I (1846-1847); June 19 and November 11,
1848. September 1, 1849, Bush Letterbooks, II (1848-1849), SSRA.
After the Civii War he concentrated on a study of world mysticism and
healing w~ich resulted in a series of books.

43Hezekiah Joslyn to George Bush, August 24, 1852, Bush

Letterbooks. IX (1852), SSRA.

44Joslyn to Bush, March 12, 1853, Bush Letterbooks, X

(1853). SSRA.

45Repository. V, No. 9 (1852). 422.

 334

Pomeroy. Ohio. where Giles was teaching and preaching. are "very

warm abolitionists" but even the more lukewarm had no grounds for

refuting Bush' s ~rguments. 46

This correspondence to Geof<Je Bush in 1852 demonstrates

that the New Church did have a coterie of abolitionists. but they were

clearly in the minority. Unquestionably more New Chun;h.abolitionists

existed than responded to Bush's prodding, but by 1852 they probably

had despaired of evet arousing the New Church. If they had not been

" pressured out of the Church by then they existed on the fringe of it.

Some. like Lydia Maria Child. incorporated much Swedenborgianism

into their personal philosophies but never joined the New Church.

Lydia Child admitted that she admired Swedenborgianism as .much as

any system of religious thought she had ever encountered, but she

could not reconcile it with her reforms. 47 To her the New Church and

reform were not compatible and she chose the latter. All her life she

experienced a longing for spiritual roots. In· the 1860's and 1870's

she tried to find a religious foundation in Spiritualism rather than

Swedenborgianism. 48

46Chauncey Giles to George Bush, October 26. 1852, Bush

Letterbooks, IX (1852), SSRA.

47John G. Whittler, ed.. Letters of Lydia Maria Child

(Boston: Houghton, Mifflin and Co., 1883), pp. 43-44.

48Ibid•• pp. 75. 92, 139. 167.

 335

The New Church contained more supporters of colonization

than abolition because of the Swedenborgian interpretation of the role

Africa would play in the regeneration of mankind, and the New Church

emphasis on evolutionary progress. But George Bush had correctly

assessed the tenor of New Church feeling on slavery when he noted

that most New Churchmen consigned the whole problem to the workings

of Providence. For a group so critical of Calvinism, the New Church

tended to take a hyper-Calvinistic, fatalistic approach to reform.

W. W. Wick of Indianapolis, Indiana, a Congressional friend of

Bush's and a Swedenborgian, expressed this fatalistic attitude to

Bush in 1848.

I. • . accommodate my views of policy on slavery to

the existing state of things under the providence of God,
without however denying or multiplying any crime. You
look at moral rules as they ought to be acknowledged and
obeyed. 49

The great divergence of opinion in the New Church on slavery

resulted from a lack of direct teaching on the subject in Swedenborg's

writings. George Bush expressed it as follows:

• it 1s clear from the tenor of the article that the

fullness of the announcement is greatly out of proportion
with the meagreness of the material. Swedenborg on
Domestic Slavery, especially as it exists in the United
States, is like a splendid gilt-lettered sign board over

49w. W. Wick to George Bush, June 4, 1848, Bush Letter­

books, II (1848), SSRA.
 336

the door of a miserable hovel, where the interior

has nothing to correspond with the dashing insignia
of the outside. SO .

After the 1852 debates in the Repository the magazine con-

Unued· to flourish, but Bush did not make the slave~y issue a hobby

horse. He returned to the subject occasionally in news items or to

answer a particularly stinging criticism. One such barb came in the

Thirteenth Annual Report of the ,American and Foreign Anti-Slavery

Society where the New Church was cited for doing nothing for the

antislavery cause except to "let it alone with all their might." Bush

was the only exception the reporter had been able to discover. He

concluded that the New Church did not favor "associated action" of

any kind. 51

Bush retorted brilliantly·.

\ It is the very genius of the New Jerusalem to develop

the individual, and set him upon an independent course
of action. In contending with evil he does not wait for
cooperation, which is usually a license to inertness, but
he enters at once single-handed into the work, according
~tilerrgfitlle p~se~ leaning uponthe ~ alone: S2

This answer, as well as any other single comment, s~p th~

philosophy of George Bush and other New Church Free Spirits. They
.­
did not want to be hamstrung by an organization. Bush admitted that
 337

he distrusted any efforts toward organization which extended beyond

the minimum needed for one's s piri tual welfare. Organiza tions too

easily fell into the hands of those with sectarian designs. 53

That anti-institutional position was no more popular with

most New Churchmen than his opinions on Mesmerism. Even other

antislavery Swedenborgians departed from Bush on the matter of

cooperation. 54 One man accused him of being pro"'slavery because

he refused to commend organized political opposition to slavery,

and canceled his subscription. 55 Bush clarified his own p05ition.

Political action was fine but not for him. His task in regard to

slavery was to raise the moral issue involved in silence in order to

challenge those New Churchmen ~ho had never had their own tepid.

---
views questioned by another Swedenborgian. 56

53 Ibid .

S4 Kraditor. Means and~, p. 9. Kraditor sees the split

in abolition ranks as primarily ideological rather than personal. This
difference in social philosophy precluded cooperation. See also
John L. Thomas, IM Uberator: William Uoyd Garrison (Boston: Little,
Brown and Co., 1963), pp. 144 ff., 175, 211, 244 ff., 293. These
pages describe Garrison's sectarian approach to abolition even though
he was virulently anti-sectariaJ:1 in philosophy. See also Bertram
Wyatt-Brown, Lewis T2£pan and the Evangelical War Against Slavery
(Cleveland: Case Western Reserve University, 1969), pp.. 189-191,
199, 289, 310 H., for a discussion of the anti-Garrisonian wing of
abolition. Wyatt-Brown feels the split in abolition ranks was
advantageous to the overall cause.

SS"I.etter from an Anti-Slavery Correspondent, .. Repository,

VII, No. 1 (1854), 42-43.

S6Ibid., p. 45.
 338

As far as Bush was concerned he had fulfIlled his obligation

to the New Church on slavery with hIs provocative airIng of the

problem In 1852. It was the first and last systematic treatment of

slavery in a major New Church periodical. The subject lay dormant

until the CivIl War resurrected it. with the exception of one pro­

slavery rebuttal by N. F. Cabell. Cabell's The Black Race In North

America: Why W.as Their Introduction PermItted? was a reprint of an

article which appeared in the Southern Literary Messenger in November.

1855.

NathanIel Francis Cabell. born in 1807 in Nelson County.

Virginia. and reared by a strict Presbyterian mother. received his

college education at Hampden-Sidney. He was not impressed with

the Calvinistic outlook of that Presbyterian institution and with a

questioning mind he began to read widely and voraciously. cultivating

a habit which carried him through the Harvard raw School and the

_Presbyterian Church into Swedenborgianism. 57 Cabell had returned

to Virginia after law school and since all his friends and relatives

were Presbyterians he joined that church with reservations. After all.

people would "doubt my sincerity. or be alarmed for my stability" if

he were to remain unattached. 58

57 "Biography of N. F. Cabell" (unpublished Ms .• n. d ••

SSRA) • p. 5 1/2.

58Ibid ., p. 8.
'.
339

In Cambridge Cabell had picked up a copy of Sampson

Reed's Observations on the Growth of the Mind. He was impressed

enough with the book to read it several tim~s. Back in Virginia

Gabell learned that one of his relatives in Lynchburg. Dr. John J.

Gabell, was derisively called a "Swedenburger, " a follower of the

Swedish "opium eater. ,,59 Dr. John Cabell's son-in-law, Richard K.

Cralle~ also was a receiver of Swedenborg and this young man made

a profound impression on Nathaniel. Finally he secured some New

Church literature from the Lynchburg Swedenborgians. By 1837. or

shortly after, N. F. Cabell joined his relatives' new faith and severed'

all ties with the Presbyterian Church. 60

Sometime during 1838 Cabell visited Philadelphia where he

made contact with Richard DeCharms. In the ensuing years their

relationship deepened into a friendship that continued through the

1850' s when DeCharms was alienated from the New Church community.61

DeCharms came south to Virginia to baptize Cabell's family in 1842;

Gabell in turn loyally supported tne Central Convention and cohtributed

articles to the Newchurchman. 62 But Cabell did not limit his New

59Ibid ., pp. 11-12.

60Ibid., p. 15.

61Regularly from 1852 through 1855 Cabell sent small sums

of money ($5-10) to DeCharms with no strings attached.

62Ibid., p. 17.
 340

Church contacts to members of the Central Convention. In fact, he

hoped the Central Convention would not try to duplicate what the

General Convention did well lest it destroy all chance to future

reconciliation. In 1856 Cabell joined the General Convention and

later served as a trustee of Urbana University. 63

CabelI also cultivated a steady correspondence with the

learned Professor Bush. He had heard of Bush when he still moved in

Presbyterian circles, so he secured a copy of Bush's Anastasis and

then began to correspond. Because of the similar religious back­

grounds and their sophisticated intellectual tastes, the two men

quickly established rapport. Bush naturally turned to Cabell when he

needed someone to respond to Enoch Pond's attack on the New

Church, 64 but on the question of slavery the two men stood far apart.

These two intellectual giants of the New Church exercised their logic

on e.ach other over slavery. Cabell also considered Bush too loose on

his treatment of "spiritism. ';65

For a southern slave owner Cabell was not ovedy sensitive

to discussion of the slavery issue. He did not object to the moderate

63 Ibid., p.2l. N. F. Cabell to William Benade, February

22. 1846, AA.

64"Biography of N. F. Cabell," p. 18.

65Fernald, ed., Memoirs of Bush, pp. 213-214. N. F.

Cabell to George Bush, October, 1855, Bush Letterbooks, XIII (1852­
1854). SSAA.
 approach of Richard DeCharms in Freedom and Slav_ery because he

felt it would have a softening effect on those Southerners who were

convinced that no Northerner could speak sensibly on the subject. 66

Bush, however, was another story altogether. He definitely required

straightening out on slavery and in 1855 Cabell attempted to do Just

that. In The Black Race in North America Cabe!ll analyzed three basic

positions on slavery: (1) slavery as a positive good, (2) slavery as

an absolute evil, and (3) slavery as evil that must be tolerated until

it could be ended with mutual benefit to whites and blacks. 67 He

then suggested his own fourth alternative.

, Cabell maintained that slavery was permitted by Providence

for a greater good, namely, to provide the basis for a land of political

and religious liberty in the United States. In his mind the United

{ States had to develop and expand rapidly to prevent French and

Spanish despots from gaining stronger footholds in North America. To

accomplish that expansion in the face of imminent European threats

the United States had to resort to slavery. 68 A greater good was also

intended for the blacks themselves. According to Cabell they were by

66N. F. Cabell to Richard DeCharms, September IS, 1850,

AA. Cabeli to William Benade, October 13, 1850, AA.

67N. F. CabeH, The Black Race in North America: Why Was

Their Introduction Permitted? (n. p., n. p., 1855), pp. 1-5.

68Ibid., pp. 11-12, 14, 30.

 342

nature "the very nadir of humanity, "listless, hateful, docile," and

-repulsive in outward appearance." Slavery was thus an "apprentice­

ship" for them, a benevolent system of discipline to prepare them for

the return to Africa. 69

Liberation and colonization comprised Cabell's ultimate

solution to the problem of slavery. This view was based on the

premise that "two races so essentially different in character, intellect,

habits, tastes, cannot occupy the same territory as equals. ,,70 Cabell

was not worried about the economic consequences of a mass exodus

of blacks due to his' confidence that the South could adapt to another

labor system, but he did not want mass colonization for another

reason. Most colonizers thought in terms of Africa in general and

Liberia in particular. Cqbell feared that progressive little country

might revert to barbarism if inundated with former American slaves.

He proposed a national effort to purchase the Amazon River Valley in

South America as the site for an ex-slave colony! 71

Cabell failed to see slavery as anything more than an economic

system superimposed on the South. He. would not defend it as a "good"

but at present it was the best arrangement possible for both blacks and

69 Ibid • , pp. 16, 18-20, 43.

70Ibid•• p. 36.

71 Ibid •• pp. 40. 43-44.

 343

whites. In his mind there was no doubt that slavery was doomed.

Because he believed that the system could be eradicated in time he

grew increasingly exasperated with Northern impatience. In 1859 he

confided in William Benade tha t unless a reversal of attitude was

manifested quickly in the North "the days of our Union are numbered:,72

The intriguing aspect of Cabell's trea tment of slavery is his

substitution of the Amazon River Valley for Africa, for he completely

ignored the traditional New Church attitude that a celestial African

church was waiting to be awakened. William Holcombe, a physician

in New Orleans, in his Suggestions as to the Spiritual Philosophy of

African Slavery (1861), incorporated his pro-slavery viewpoint into a

more familiar New Church theme than the one Cabell had played upon.

Holcombe began by stressing the lineage of Africans from

th~irst celestial men on e':..rth to the barbarians of the present. The

sin and degeneration of the years had taken such a toll that the scars

of sin were revealed in outward features such as "• • • the black

skin, the woolly hair, the thick lips, the shallow skull, the fla t nose,

the offensive smell, and other peculiarities approaching the animal

tribes • • • • " Regardless of their current state of degradation the

Africans still have "celestial remains, " Holcombe insisted. 73

72N. F. CabeU to William Benade, December 23, 1849, AA.

73William H. Holcombe, Suggestions as to the Spiritual

Philosophy of African Slavery (New York: Mason Brothers, 1861), The
term "remains" refers to the accumulated good and truth passed on to
 344

The key to rejuvenation of the Africans was the;awakenlng of

their "celestial remains." Neither the Africans or the external forces

of civilization could do the Job. Providence had provided a period of

subordination to the white man in order to allow for the installation of

new motives which would enable the Africans to shake loose their

hereditary shackles.
-
Eventually the black race would be "the most
-
beautiful and lovely of all the r.aces in the world. ,,74 Holcombe was

in no hurry to complete the process. Whites had been working for

centuries to eliminate their hereditary faults· and blacks could not

expect the effects of centuries. on them to vanish overnight.

Abolition, of course, was a "retrograde step, " and immediate

colonization was equivalent to murder, for to toss hapless blacks into

a competitive world of white nations would mean their destruction. 75

The world and the slave would have to wait until the New Church pre­

vailed so that it coald oversee the liberating process. In that millen­

nium ". • • all things will be reduced to order. There will be no sin,

no disease, no oppression. All social and political enigmas will have

"been solved... 76

man by the Lord from infancy, and stored up in man. Without these
"remains" man could not experience regeneration. Bogg, Glossary,
p. 125. In nineteenth century writings the term "remains" aiso seems
to apply at times to hereditary accumulations of good and evil passed
on by parents. "

7 4Ibid., p. 7. 75Ibid•• pp. 8-9. 76Ibid., p. 6.

 345

Both Holcombe and Ca be 11 were expressing in extreme terms

the basic Swedenborgian attitude toward slavery. The New Church

called for patience while Providence worked out the destiny of all

men. This optimistic view of the future was voiced by William Hayden,

the Portland, Maine, New Church minister whom Bush introduced to

Swedenborgianism, as late as March 17, 1861. In a lecture given in

Portland City Hall and later printed as The Institution of Slavery

Hayden compared slavery to an iceberg. Some people would frantically

assault the mountain of ice with their little picks, but until the tem­

perature warmed all their chopping would be in vain. The Divine

method was to float the entire iceberg to a warmer climate where it

would melt. 77

In other words, the means for dealing with any social problem

was"• • • not demolition, from without, but rather through regenera­

tion from within, by the silent influences of His love and truth.

• • • "78 In the case of slavery the warmer climate was the United

States, the arena of political liberty in the world. Time and the heat

of freedom would eventually evaporate the iceberg. Hayden did not

oppose reform, for moral persuasion in love was vital to a free society,

but force was not an alternative. He even ruled out legal force and

77W illiam Hayden, The Institution of Slavery (New York:

D. Appleton and Co•• 1861), p. 16.

78 Ibid ., p. 17.
 346

argued that as one man ought not impose his conscience upon

another, so one community should not impress its will upon another

community. 79

Hayden was not deaf and blind, nor ignorant. He fully

realized the gravity of the political situation at that juncture in

history. He was prepared to fight for his country if need be, in spite

of his ideal that the use of force was wrong. Like most Swedenborg­

ians Hayden was not a pacifist in principle and he believed that

sometimes evil was necessary in order that greater good might result.

Good and evil were rarely regarded in the moral absolutist terms of

the reformers, and the loudest vituperations were vented on internal

evils rather than external evils like slavery. 80

Hayden's theory of change represented the feeling of the

majority of New Churchmen in the United States. The result was

more talk than action in regard to slavery. Even George Bush, who

was an immediatist of sorts, 81 felt called to write rather than support

other antislavery activities through participation. But New Church

abolitionists did exist. One of the reasons little is known of them is

79Ibid., pp. 23-24.

801. P. Stuart to William Campbell, November 24, 1851, AA.

81George Bush, New Church Miscellanies; or, Essays

Ecc1esJastical, Doctrinal, and Ethical (New York: William McGeorge,
1855), pp. 207-208. The section "Aphorisms on Slavery and Aboli­
tion" is a reprinting of Bush's series on slavery in the Repository in
1852.
 347

that they did not broadcast their participation in such activities as

the Underground Railroad, as the following letter from Cyrus Elder to

Edwin Vickroy indicates.

Is there a station ·or Depot of the Q. Q. R. R. in Johnstown

and if so who is conductor? I have a very likely passenger
in charge that the human bloodhounds are after with the
incentive of a large reward. He is safe for the present but
I desire to get him to Pittsburg into the hands of friends.
The misfortune is tha t I do not know the ropes either in
Johnstown or Pittsburg.

I shaH be careful to compromise no one. Write to me by

the Monday's mail. I know no one it would be safe to
write to except you, and depend upon your advice and dis­
cretion. 82

In Cincinnati in 1854 a New Churchman made public head­

lines for his stand on slavery, but the case was a unique one that

tells very little about overall New Church attitudes toward slavery.

The situation that was highlighted was Samuel Sangston Carpenter's

public denunciation of the Fugitive Slave Law, and the significance

of the stand lay in Carpenter's appointed position as a United States

Commissioner.

Carpenter, a native of Lancaster, Pennsylvania, and friend

of Joseph Ehrenfried, 83 migrated west in 1843 as a young lawyer. He

82Cyrus Elder to E. A. Vickroy, July 31, 1858, AA.

83S. S. Carpenter to Emanuel Carpenter, November 4, 1844;

December 20, 1844; September IS, 1846; April 13, 1847; AA. Joseph
Ehrenfried to S. S. Carpenter, September 4, 1846; October 24, 1850;
February 11, 1851; August 16, 1858, AA.
 348

settled in Cincinnati only to find the town abounding in eager young

lawyers, and he almost returned home. The decision to stay was

rewarded in s'everal ways. carpenter established a successful prac­

lice and in 1849 received the appointment as a United States Com­

missioner. He also found a satisfying faith in Swedenborgianism. 84

In 1850 a new Fugitive Slave Law was passed which bestowed

Judicial powers on the United States Commissioners. A slave owneJ:

could claim by affadavit that a slave was his property, and the

Commissioner had the right to decide the case without a trial or jury

and consign the accused to a destiny of slavery. Carpenter gradually

came to see this judicial power as a breach of constitutionality. In

1854 he refused to continue to execute the law. 85 While he was no

doubt troubled by the possible abuses inherent in his position, for

example the danger of handing a free Negro over to the slave system,

carpenter was no great benefactor of blacks. 86 His chief problem

seems to have been with the constitutionality of the Fugitive Slave

Law.

84S. S. Carpenter to Emanuel Carpenter, April 13. 1847, AA.

85 New Church Life, IX, No. 10 (1889). 167.

86Carpenter probably had the same paradoxical attitude

toward the Negro as most moderate anti-slavery Northerners. They
disliked slavery and the Negro. In a letter to his parents, April 12,
1846. Carpenter tells of an insult to him involving his young lady
friend, Rebecca. In his mind the insult was worse than that of being
kicked by a ·"nigger. "
 349

Even if Carpenter could be considered one of the New­

Church activists on slavery his case would not belie the fact that

the majority of Swedenborgians held themselves aloof from the entire

controversy which convulsed the nation. New Church periodicals

lacked any incentive to report and analyze the political scene be­

cause of their editors' conviction that their magazines should con­

fine themselves to spiritual use. With many religious groups such

an editorial stance indicated that the constituency of the group had no

interest in political matters, for members might not read beyond their

own brand of religious fare. Swedenborgians were much more sophis­

ticated. These well-educated men of affairs were interested and

active in politics. In fact, as shall be noted later, during the Civil

War inhibitions broke down and even the Boston New Churchmen

entered the lists of political debate.

The pervasive silence in the New Church on slavery, which

reigned until the 18 50's, was due largely"to the intellectual confusion

of the New Church from 1840 to 1860. Lacking any uniformity on the

nature of social change, but moving steadily to a theory of evolu­

tionary change, great divergence of opinion existed on how slavery

should be handled. In the confusion the safest position was silence.

The next best was to hold on to moderate antislavery opinions but

manifest them inoffensively.

 350

The New Church never has taken corporate stands on social

problems so the siience on slavery in the ante bellum period is not

surprising. But certain types of reform did at least get a more sub­

stantial and systematic airing in individual New Church periodicals

than slavery received. Many New Churchmen considered the slavery

question a piecemeal reform, an attack on the visible part of the

iceberg rather than the bulk of the ice under the water. In short, it

was an attack on a social effect of an undisturbed cause. For this

reason Swedenborgians supported more sweeping reforms than anti­

slavery, reforms such as educational, medical, or marital reform.

These efforts would help to re-orient social attitudes and prepare the

way for the diffusion and triumph of a Swedenborgian philosophy of

life.
 CHAPTER XI

SWEDENBORGIANISM AND COMMUNITARIANISM

Slavery became a torrid issue in the New Church in the early

1850's, just when meaningful exchange on that subject had abated

outside the New Church. Some New Churchmen feared that the public

ear would be plugged before. Swedenborgians ever shared their insights

on slavery. Their fears were realized.

Social conservatism was not the reason for New Church

tardiness in debating the slavery question, for the majority of New

Churchmen were at least moderately antislavery in sentiment. Defer­

ence to the pro-slavery element in the Church may have delayed the

initiation of the discussion but New Churchmen could never be

muzzled for long on matters of conscience. The fact that slavery was

considered to be a symptom of deeper social ills, and antislavery a

piecemeal reform, certainly was a crucial factor. Even more decisive,

New Churchmen were wary of raising non-ecclesiastical or non­

doctrinal issues in their periodicals because they had previously been

burned.

In the early 1840's a significant number of New. Churchmen

had precipitously promoted a comprehensive social reform called

351
 352

Fourierism. The system was the work of the French utopian socialist,

Charles Fourier, and his chief American populizer, Albert Brisbane.

Fourier's Swedenborgian followers hoped that Fourierism wo~l<:l prove

to be the social agency for the implementation of the Swedenborgian

world-view on a massive scale. They were as confident as other

communitarians that all the world needed as proof of the efficacy of

Fourier's scheme was a working model.

The communitarian ideal is usually attributed to the view of

the Christian Church which came into vogue in the "left wing" of the

Protestant Reforma~ion of the sixteenth century. I Anabaptists and

related groups defined the church as a body or community of believers

which needed to separate itself from the world for the sake of purity.

Their aim was to gather a "true church" based on primitive, apostolic

concepts as a substitute for a state church. 2 However, since com­

munitarianism in the nineteenth century was both secular and religious,

and stressed the formation of colonies, influences other than those

emanating from Anabaptism must have been operative. 3

lArthur Bestor, Backwoods Utopias: Th~ Sectarian and

Owenite Phases of Communitarian Socialism in America, 1663-1829
(Philadelphia: University of Pennsylvania Press, 1950). pp. 4-5,

2Frankliri H.Littell, The Origins of Sectarian Protestantism

(paper ed.; New York: The Macmillan ~o., 1964 [1952]), p. xvii.

3Walter H. Armytage, Reav~ns ReJpw: Utopian Experiments

in England, 1560-1960 (London: Routledge and Kegan, 1961). pp.
3-18.
 353
The great heyday of communitarianism in modern history was

the nineteenth century, and the colonies which were formed were

located primarily in the United States and England. Arthur Bestor, in

Backwoods Utopias, suggests that the communities in America had

diverse goals but one common means of reform, namely, reform through

cl communitarian model. This means appealed to nineteenth century

---
men who saw the bankruptcy of alternative ·avenues of reform such as

individualism, revolution, and collective action to deal with specific

4
problems. After the War of 1812 an outburst
.
of secular and religious
~

utopianism swept America like a wave. Fourierism was the high water

mark of this utopian inundation. 5

Communitariariism had suffered a setback with the failure of

the experiments ofobert Owe ~nd(Fanny Wright and the public

" -..-/
identification of communitarianism with free thought. Religious

colonies such as the Shakers continued to thrive into the 1830' s but

~!lnite communitarianism was d.ead by 1827. 6 Secular communitarian­

ism revived in 1840 with the publication of Albert Brisbane's So6ial

4Bestor, Backwoods Utopias, pp. 4, 7.

SBetween 1663 and 1860 in America 13...Q..£ommunities were

founded. Fifty-four of these were formed between 1840 and 1849 and
of these fifty-four, twent}'-five were Fourierist. Nineteen of the ))
Fourierist colonies were founded between 1840-1844 (Bestor, Back­
woods Utopias, p. 243).

6Ibid., pp. 228-229.

 354

Destiny of Man. an American interpretation of the associationist

. ~

principle of dharles Fouri .

Fourier (1772-1837) had first presented his concept of

society in 1808 but the work was published anonymously and attracted

little attention in France. A second work in 1822 went unnoticed also.

The breakthrough came with a small work in 1831 attacking the thought
. ~(- - . ­
of both! t. Simop)an Robert o.ven. Subsequently the work of disciple
<: --... -­
("

V~c~r Considera~and the publication of a Fourierist newspaper in

Paris brought Fourier' s ideas to the attention of the Atlantic community.

Fourierism contained strains of Mesmerist thinking and was

one expression of the early nineteenth century craving for ha::monious

social relations. The key to happiness and virtue indiVidually was

the unrestrained development of one's natural passions. 7 To insure

--- ----~
harmony socially with this potentiallY,SL!archist psychological premise

F~r called for a voluntary restructuring of society. Society was to

be divided into p~.:s of approximately 1.600 persons each which

. ~ to.beeconomiC-p'jly self-~cient. Man could vary his work to

make it more attractive; ~ge would be ab~d; education

would be practical; social class barriers would be leveled; and the

~trtTQil\ f labg!.~'pital eliminated. 8

7 Nicholas V. Riasanovsky. The Teaching of Charles Fourier

(Berkeley and Los Angeles: University of California Press. 1969), pp.
40-42.
8. .
Ibld•• pp. 55-81.
 o
355

Traditionally Charles Fourier has been recognized as a

utopian
-----C-" socialist,
_ but one point of clarification of that designation

needs to be made. Fourier, and his followers in America, believed

that the reordering of society would take place peacefully by volun­

~s::_li..on, not by revolution or state initiative, and would s~

allow for the ownership of private property. The antagonism between

-- "

labor and capital would be soothed by men who were part of both

labor and capital. T~ inequity of wealth would be dissolved and

with that achievement the bulk of the social injustices which plagued

man would disappear also.

-­
Most Fourierists believed that evil was

not rooted in man's nature but in faulty social organization. 9

Albert Brisbane translated Charles Fourier into language

Americans could grasp. In simple terms he stated that Harmony was

the basic law of the universe as well as the chief passion in man's

psychological makeup. The present discord in society could be

eliminated by the ~~nization of scx<-iety along associationi t lines;

in fact, associationism was the only true principle of social organi­

zation and its triumph was the "destiny" of all men throughout the

world. 10

9A1bert Brisbane, Social Destiny of Man; or, Association

and Reorganization or Industry (Philadelphia: C. F. Stollmeyer, 1840),
pp. vi, vii, 2, 209.

10Ibid ., pp. 8, 243.

 356

The active passional principle in man is also a full

and indivisible Harmony; capable of vast develop­
ments, associations, and combinations, commencing
with sympathies between individuals, and extending to
an association of the entire race on the globe. Man
therefore in another and high sphere, may be charac­
terized as a progressive being; he can raise himself
from a rude and savage state . . . to a de"gree of·
perfection
..
-_.~ ­
of which civilized man has no idea-:-:' . . 11

Brisbane's exclusivist claims were not incompatible with

the mood of many Americans in 1840 and a Fourierist revival was the

result. 12 In spite of the tendency in their philosophy to shun

immediatist solutions to any question, numerous Swedenborgians

enthusia.stically endorsed Fourierism. But even the most ardent

Swedenborgian Fourierists had reservations which non-Swedenborgian

disciples such as Horace Greely and Parke Godwin did not ·share.

The Swedenborgian attitude toward communitarianism began

to form in the eighteenth century. The effort of Carl Wadstrom and

friends to establish a Swedenborgian colony i~_~a was probably

the first of a long line of New Church attempts to set up a utopian

colony. 13(( Several New Churchm:n supported the ventures of Robert

llIbid., p. 208.

120ne of the best accounts of this revival is found in John

Humphrey Noyes, History of American Socialisms (Dover ed.; New

-13RO~;-
York: Dover Publications, Inc., 1966 [1870]), 200-563 •
.
Htne, Caltforni;';-Utopian Colonies/(San
Marino, Ca Hornia: The Huntington Library, 1953). p. 5. Hine
defines a utopian colony as follows: "A utopian colony, thus, con­
sists of a group of people who are attempting to establish a new
 357

Owen, amo~g them two minister~ and '"'::'

a lay
.
p=--ea~,!:er.I!Dan1el Roe,
one of several lay preachers for the CincinnaU Society of the New

Jerusalem, was a key figure in the Owenite community at Yellow

._-----
Sp~ngs, Ohio. In Philadelphia the Revs. Maskell M. Carl.! and

Manning B. Roche heard Owen l~c1-ure anj were impressed to such an

extent that Roche tried to launch an Owenite 'colony in Bucks County,

Pennsylvania, some thirty miles from Philadelphia. W~n sufficient

capital failed to materialize the scheme was dropped. 14

Other non-Fourierist Swadenborgian communities were formed

-
after the Owenite enthusiasm passed.
--
The Jasper Colony of Iowa was
---
one of the most successful but its success was due to its homogeneity

(German ethnically and Swedenborgian religiously) and to the colony's

decision to. revert to ~te ow~hip after a two year communal

experiment. 15 About 1870 a New Church colony was formed in Olivet,

K~s, 16 and of course from 1860's through the rest of the nineteenth

social pattern based upon a visi.QJJ. of tb_e ideaLsoij.~ty and who have
wiJhdr.awn themselves from the community. at large to embody that
vision in experimental form. The purpose is usually to create a model
which other colonies and eventually mankind in general will follow."

14Daniel Iammot to C. J. Doughty, December 28, 1843, SSRA.

15C harles A. Hawley, "A Communistic Swedenborgian

Colony in Iowa, " Iowa Journal of History and Politics., XXXIII, No. 1
(1935), 19-20.

16 New Church Independent, XVIII. No. 6 (1870), 143.

 358

century Thomas Lake Hams was promoting communitarian ventures. 17

Even though Harris was no longer recognized by the New Church as

one of its own, he was basically Swedenborgian in philosophy.

While evidence is meager that Swedenborgians participated fn.

colonies dominated by philosophies other than their own, it does

exisL Some Swedenborgians found the Hopedale Community in Milford,

Massachusetts, attractive. James Stetson remarked that Hopedale

did operate on the concept of Christian brotherhood, and that the Rev.

Mm Ballou was a "humane" and "practical" man. but the colony as a

whole lacked an understanding of the internal sense of the Word. He

longed to hear New Church preaching again. 18

Ballou himself was not adverse to Swedenborgianism. His

magazine, the Practical Christian, was open to Swedenborgia~rs

of a liberaLpersuasion, especially George Bush. He and Bush sub­

scribed to~other's periodicals, reviewed each other's books with

generosity, and traded articles' on subjects of mutual interest-. 19 n

17T. L. Harris helped promote three communitarian experi­

ments: Mountain Cove, Brocton, and Fourtain Grove. Robert Hine
claims that Harris was the only California utopian strongly influenced
by Fourierism.(Hine, California's Utopian Colonies, p. 161.)

@James o. Stetson to George Bush, June 3, 1855, Bush

Letterbooks, XVI (1855), SSRA.

<.!9Adin,Ac:illou to George Bush. June 20, 1855, Bush Letter­

books, XVI (l855), SSRA. - - ' May ~9, 1857, Bush Letterbooks.
XIX (l856-1858), SSRA. Bush was not the only Swedenborgian to con­
tribute to Ballou I s periodical. See Practical Christian, XIV, No. 22,
23, 26 and XV, No. 3, 4 for a series on Swedenborgian Restorationism.
 359

1854 Ballou had published a new work entitled PracticaJ Christian

SQCiaJism and he asked Bus,h to review it because he valued the pro­

fessoc' s Judgment.

I hope you will make as extended a notice of my "Social­

ism" as you can afford without detriment to your own
-cause. You can. appreciate such a Work as few can. 20

Such interest in Swedenborg and friendship with Bush does not mean,

however, that Ballou can be designated a Swedenborgian. His

interests were catholic and extended to Spiritualism, Non-Resistance,

and dress reform among others. 21

Ballou's religious sympathies were rooted in Universalism;

in'fact, the Ballou family may be regarded as the royal family of

Un!verS~lism as the Channings were for Unitarianism. 22 But this did

not prevent him from d~ing from all 0 jliberal ChriStianit?J and he

was friendly to Shakers, Quakers, and Spiritualists as well as

:-.
2 Adin Ballou to GeorgeBush, January 31, 1855, Bush
Letterbooks, XV (l855), SSRA.

21 Fcir a scholarly treatment of Ballou's Non-Resistant

activities see Peter Brock, Radical Pacifists in Antebellum America
(Princeton University Press, 1968). passim. On Spiritualism see the
series of articles in Practical Christian beginning with volume XII,
No. 11 (1851), 42. For a sampling of articles on various reforms see
Practical Christian,!, No. 5 (1840), 18; I, No. IS (1840); 60; 1,
No. 14 (l840), SS; II, No. 13 (1841), 52.

22Ernest Cassara, Hosea Ballou: The Challenge to Ortho­

~ (Boston: Universalist Historical Society and Beacon Press,
1961), p. 139.
 360

Swedenborgians. The same anti-sectarian attitude prevailed at

. -~--

another renowned community in Massachusetts-tBrook Farm; The

Transcendentalists of this intellectually-oriented experiment were

generally not"Swedenborgians and were opposed to the New Church as

an institution, but they were open to liberal Swedenborgians such as

Henry James.

[BrOOk Farm

abruptly ended the experiment in 1847. --

egan in 1841 and lasted until a disastrous fire

About 1843, under the leader­

ship of William H. Channing and George Ripley, Brook Farm embraced

FourieriSm and eventually changed its name to the Brook Farm

Phalanx. 23 The relationship between Brook Farm and Swedenborgian­

ism was less official, and while the community regarded Swedenborg

as one of the gr~a test thinkers of modern times 24 its basic anti­

sectarian stance prevented any close association with the New

Church. Charles Dana's review of Swedenborg's The Apocalypse

Explained in the!Harbin~reveaIs Dana' s opinion of Swedenborg.

No man of sincere and unsophisticated mind can read

Swedenborg without feeling his life elevatec! into a
higher lane, and his intellect excited into new and
more re~rent action on some of the sublimest questions
which the human mind can approach. Whatever may be

23 Edith R. Curus, 6. Season in Utopia: The.£!my of Brook

Farm (New York: Thomas Nelson and Sons, i961), pp. 75, ISO-IS!.
Noyes, American Socialisms, pp. 512-536.

(24'1 urtis, Season, pp. 171, 186, 254. 320. Noyes, American
SociaUsms, pp. 546-549.
 361

thought of the doctrines of Swedenborg or of his visions,

the spirit which breathes from his works, of which the
present is generally regarded as one of the most valuable,
is pure and heavenly. 25

John Humphrey Noyes, in his History of American Socialism,

- --.... -------- -­
exaggerates the intensity of Brook Farm sentiment for Swedenborgian­

ism.. They read Swedenborg, allowed his liberal spirit to influence

them, and praised him, so his appeal in a general sense cannot be

disputed. But Brook Farmers accepted the spirit of Swedenborg's

--- -- ---
thought, n9t the content of his writings. Their unauthoritative

approach to Swedenborg offended all but the most liberal Swedenborg­

ians and would not have drawn men toward the New Church. If, as

l1io~fcontends, the only "lastin.g work" oUrook Farm was the "pro­

mulgation of SW~bor~anism," then that experiment was a more

dismal failure than even Noyes was willing to concede. 26

The Swedenborgian world-view was quite compatible with

moderate socialism and even communitarianism, but most institutional

New Churchmen refused to exercise this particular option.

trusted any project that was not dominated completely by a --

They dis­

25Harbinger, n, No. 20 (1846). 315.

~oyes exaggerated view stems from his identification of

Swedenborgianism and Spiritualism. He assumed that one had
merged into the other, and since in 1870 Spiritualism was more
evident in its impact than Swedenborgianism, his conclusion is under­
standable. Noyes also made no distinction between men of Sweden­
borgian sympathy and New Churchmen. Noyes, American Boci~i1ism,
( pp. 538, 5 O-;-S-SO:--­
 " 362

Swedenborgian philosophy. Brook Farm had a Swedenborgian veneer

in their minds an'! Fourierism by itself was suspect. Otis Clapp,

the New Church publisher and prominent Boston druggist, expressed

interest in Fourierism if it were properly rooted in a religious base.

To guarantee the proper foundation Clapp participated in an effort to

establish an association near Boston, but the group could not obtain
27
sufficient funds. When that attempt failed Clapp must have drawn

in his wings, for after 1845 he no longer appears on the list of con­

tributors to the Harbinger.

Even though cautious, Clapp must have been one of the more

adventurous New Churchmen in the Boston area in regard to Fourier­

ism. 28 The ' Orthodox Convention party as represented in the New

Jerusalem MagaZine barely paid Fourierism the respect of mention in

its pages. the editorial position of the Magazine on Fourierism was

stated indirectly in a letter from J. J. Garth Wilkinson, probably the

most learned New Churchman in England. Wilkinson was a friend of

27Harbinger, I, No. 5 (1845), 70.

28while a member of the Boston Society, Clapp has to be

classified as a Free Spirit on the basis of his alignment with George
Bush against the Convention on many issues, and his own writings.
Otis CIa pp, !1 Letter to the Receivers of the Heavenly Doctrines on
the Want of Union Among Those Who Profess to ~ "The Faithful Who
ConstituJe the Body of the Lord" (n. p., n. p., n. d.), 23 pp. Otis
Clapp to George Bush, May?, 1851, Bush Letterbooks. VII (1851).
SSRA. , May 7, 1857, Bush Letterbooks, XIX (1856-1858),
SSRA.
 363

Hugh Doherty who in turn was the chief disciple of Charles Fourier in

England.. Doherty was also"a Swedenborgian. 29

Wilkinson eVidently respected Fourierism as he did any other

scientific system. but he was disturbed by its lack of a theology. To

support his position he quotes from a friend in Antwerp. Belgium. who

has studied Fourier, a Mr. Elwell. Elwell's conclusions are as

follows:

As a system. therefore, I think Fourierism quite false;

'. • • The system throughout is thorough-paced French
skepticism, boasting itself quite up to all high and
spiritual truths: for the mischief of skepticism consists,
not in disbelieving certain things, but in not believing
the moral consequences of faiths and actions, and con-
sequently leaving you to arrange about truths just as you
like. Fourier. however. ought to be read by all the learned,
because he is at the head of all men of this class. 30

The Magazine accepted this judgment of Fourier in spite of the protests

of some of its readers and refused to open "its pages to a Fourierist

debate. 31

As with many other New Church matters, the Magazine's

censorship did not squelch the spread of Fourierism in the New Church.

In the minds of many New Churchmen the Magazine was wrong as often

29Noyes. American Socialisms. pp. 542-543. Armytage.

Heavens Below. pp. 192-195.

30New Ierusalem Magazine. XVII. No. 4 (1843-1844), 156.

31Caleb Reed to Hugh Doherty. March 28. 1844. SSRA. New

Jerusalem Magazine. XVII, No. 6 (1844). 240.
 364

as it was right, so its opinion was treated a6 just that. Within the

Orthodox Convention party the Magazine did bear great weight and

General Convention people rarely supported Fourierist experiments.

Free Spirits and the Central Convention reacted in opposite fashion;

the Magazine's tacit condemnation spurred them on to more serious

investigation of a subject which had already caught their attention.

But even the Free Spirits and Central Convention men could not accept

Fourierism as a comprehensive system of theory and practice. At best

they would accept Fourier's plan for economic organization.

The fullest airing of Fourierism in New Church periodicals

appeared in the~, an Ohio journal edited by Free Spirit William

C. Howells. If William Dean Howells' portrait of his father in Years

of .MY Youth is accurate the appearance of Fourierism in his magazine

is understandable. Howells describes his father as a Swedenborgian

who wore his faith loosely.

Safe in the philosophy of Swedenborg, which taught him

that even those who ended in hell chose it their portion
because they were happiest in it, he viewed with kindly
amusement the religious tumults of the frequent revivals
about him. The question of salvation was far below that
of the annexation of Texas, 05
the ensuing war against
Mexico, in his regard; . . • 2

Naturally Howells did not have the reluctance of many New Church

editors to deal with social issues; for him social concerns were his

32William Dean Howells, Years of.MY. Yo_uth (New York:

Harper and Brothers, 1916), p. 22.
 365

life and his bread and butter. At. times he eve~ saorificed the bread
33
and butter for some cause. ­

The Retina launched its career in September, 1843, and

almost immediately was drawn into the controversy over Fourierism.

Most of the writers were sympathetic but cautious, chiefly because

they felt Brisbane and Fourier erred in their basic assumption that man

was good and evil was rooted oniy in man's social and economic

organization. George Field, the well-known New Church missionary

in the West, was one that felt evil was centered in man's selfishness,

yet he admitted that he might be more receptive to a Fourierist trial

. 34
which would be conducted by Swedenborglans. He had hardly

spoken when the Retina carried a notice that New Churchme~ere

f~ng a phalanx of their own. Land and capital had been secured

for the new LeRaysville Phalanx in western Pennsylvania and the

community was waiting for people. 35

The fulfillment of Field's remarks in such a short time was

coincidental. The idea of LeRaysville had been conceived much

earlier in the minds of the Rev. Lemuel C. Belding, Richard McCabe.

and Solyman Brown. The first public announcement of the idea appeared

33Ibid., pp. 11, 28, 66, 115, 117, 119.

34 Retine!., 1, No. 14 (1843). 117.

35 Ibid ., I, No. 19 (1844), 160.

 366
in a letter by McCabe in May, 1843, to the Central Convention.

McCabe indicated that he has been a student of Fourier for many years

and feels the time has now come for the New Church to do something

concrete about implementing Fourier's science of association. He

was thinking specifically in terms of an educational institution, but

if the school could be connected to an associationist community so

much the better. 36

The Central Convention took the letter serio'usly and estab­

lished a committee composed of Rev. Charles Doughty, Timothy Shay

Arthur, Solyman Brown, and Lemuel C. Belding to consider the

feasibility of 'founding an industrial school community on a Fourieri st

basis. The committee's preliminary report recommended that such a

project be attempted if approximately eighty families (400 people)

could be enlisted for its support. 37 Even if a practical number of

settlers could not be secured the committee favored the establishment

of the institution on another basis.

The committee's action indicated a vital interest in the

Central Convention in associationism, but the committee did not

36Iournal of the Central Conventio'n, V, Appendix I, pp. 16­

18. McCabe also wrote to the New Ierusalem Magazine, XVI, No. 12
(1843). 504-507, but encouragement was not forthcoming from this
direction.

37Iournal of the Central Convention, V, Appendix I, No. Ill,

pp. 16-18.
 367

represent all mempers of the Central Convention. Daniel Lammot,

the prominent Wilmington New Churchman, challenged the wisdom of

New Church endorsement of Fourierism. Lammot doubted that any

self-respecting capitalist would risk his capital in a venture that

would remove the money from his control, and he failed to see how a

system of self-gratification could produce anything but disharmony.

In addition, Lammot felt the communitarian ideal, which involved

separation from the world, was antithetical to the regeneration process

Swedenborgianism tried to encourage in men.

My own impression is that our regeneration is promoted

by intercourse with the world where our evils may be
called out, for they cannot be removed until they are
manifested. 38

Lammot's "dread" and grief over New Church leadership in

"schemes" that were at best doubtful, and were directed toward

improving temporal conditions, 39 drew a cautious reply from Charles

Doughty.

I begin then by saying that I am no disciple of Fourier,

but the system of association which he has proposed
'and which his disciples denominate a discovery, has I
think, in many of its aspects a close affinity to what I
think should be, and I am persuaded will ultimately be,
a development of the practical results of New Church
principles. 40

38Daniel Lammot to C. J. Doughty, December 28, 1843, SSRA.

39Ibid• Daniel Lammot to Dr. S. Seymour, January 2, 1844,

SS RA.

40 C . J. Doughty to Daniel Lammot, February 6, 1844, SSRA.

 368

Doughty placed great faith in Dr. Belding's judgment about the

experiment and was willing to allow him to try, even though he would

not support it personally. 41

42
The IaRaysville Phalanx lasted eight months of 1844. In

theory and on paper the community sounded ideal. While the leader­

ship and philosophy of the, phalanx were unashamedly New Church,

sincere men of all creeds were invited.

The New Jerusalem fears none of the creeds of men; and

those of other creeds have no occasion to fear the New
Jerusalem. Let them therefore, if they Will, unite with
us in the endeavor to re-organize the social system, and
cause justice and charity to reign upon the earth. 43

According to Solyman Brown, who served as the community's general

agent and dentist as well as one of its preachers, the principles of

association which LeRaysville was demonstrating would usher in

social liberty for men just as the American Revolution had inaugurated

political liberty and the New Church religious liberty. 44

In practice something went wrong. Deep in the mountains of

Pennsylvania the zeal of sincere men smashed on the rocks of human

41Ibid • C. J. Doughty to Daniel Iammot, March 21, 1844,

SSRA.

42Retina, I, No. 26 (1844). 206-207; I, No. 27 (1844). 215.

Noyes. American Socialisms, 259-266.

43Retina, I No. 30 (l844). 237.

441!ili!•• I. No. 49 (l844). 385-387.

 369

frailty. The phalanx never attracted 'the eighty families which had

. been suggested as a minimum for a Fourierist arrangement, and the

small group which did gather at LeRaysville rapidly grew discontented

with the management of the community. The enterprise dissolved

without even erecting the buildings necessary to maintain the

associative emphasis. 45 Another New Chur~h phalanx at Canton,

Illinois, in 1845 fared even worse than LeRaysville. After a few

months of operation the Rev. John Randolph, the New Church minister

who had founded the community on his own farm, died and the phalanx

soon followed his example: 46

In 1843 C. J. Hempel had prophesied a glorious future for

Fourierism in the United States; that prediction sounded hollow in

1845.

It is evident that the Phalanx is the Sabbath, the reign

of Peace. The Phalanx utilizes all the noble passions of
the soul; it leaves no legitimate desire unsatisfied; it
does away with all causes of envy, jealousy, hatred,
vengeance; it banishes vice from the society of men; it
establishes the empire of justice and truth; it makes
theft impossible; it creates a social Providence, different
from the lunatic asylum and the alms-house; a social
Providence which will give man raiment when he is naked
and food when he is hungry; it surrounds ~
veneration, and the sick with the 11'\1st watchful and
inexhaustible solicitude; it sanctifies human nature and
makes man the image of his Maker. Whatever is noble,
good, and true. is fostered by the Phalanx; Heaven

45Noyes, American Socialisms, p. 263.

46Block, New Church. p. 151.

 370

descends upon earth; care is annihilated; plenty smiles

upon the fields, in the gardens, in the storehouses of
man; man has a home; he is no longer camped upon the
globe, or like a beast; chased about by want; man lives;
he lives a,life of holiness; there is no longer the
unhallowed curse, the beastly intoxication, the triumph
of falsehood, the gloom of despair, the throbbings of
anguish, the filth of idleness, the wretchedness of
prostitution, the false semblance of affection, the dis­
cords of families, the strife of passion; of! there is a
different globe, a different humanity; humanity is no
longer a chaos of discordant elements; it is a brotherhood
of angels, a concert of impulses and interests, a'living
hallelujah of God's glorious and eternal Providence. 47

Such claims had not been taken seriously by most New

Churchmen even in 1843,48 and certainly in the late 1840' s they were

not going to be any more receptive to efforts to align the New Church

and Fourieris m. Hempel had been planning a major exposi tion on

that touchy theme since 1843, but when he finally published it in

1848 he did so anonymously. The work was entitled The True Organ­

ization of the New Church. New Church reviewers condemned it

soundly.

Charles
,. Julius Hempel was a native Prussian, born in

Solingen in September, 18ll. He had studied in Paris where he lived

his famous history of France.

-
six months in the home of Michelet while helping the historian write

Then in 1835 the young Prussian sailed

47 C. J. Hempel, "The }>halanx, " Newthurchman, H, No. 4

(1843), 369-370.

48Newchurchman, H, No. 5 (1844), 421-434.

 371

for New York where he entered medical studies. But Hempel never

practiced the type of medicine he was taught. He accepted instead

the Homeopathic system of medicine which had originated in his

native country and entered into an active life of translating Homeo­

pathic writings into English. Later he became a professor at the

Homeopathic "Medical College in Philadelphia. 49

This medical conversion was not the first intellectual

rebellion for Hempel. By his own admission the drive for intellectual

independence began in the rigid Prussian school system.

That first resistance to my teacher's Judgment was the

beginning of my spiritual regeneration. Ever before, I
had suffered myself to be led by his Wisdom; God willed
that I should be guided by my own experience and judg­
ment. 50

By the time he went on to Paris for his higher education Hempel took

along an unsettled mind, a distrust of science, and an abhorence of

man's obvious bigotry. 51

Hempel probably first became acquaInted with the writings

of Charles rourier while in Paris and the system must have had an

~9Cleave's Biographical Cyclopedia of Homeopathic Physi­

cians and Surgeons (Philadelphia: Galaxy Publishing Company, 1873),
:)p. 300-301.

S°Anon. [Charles Julius Hempel], The True Organization of

~ New Church As Indicated in the Writings of Emmanuel Swedenborg
and Demonstrated Qy Charles rourier (New York: William Radde,
1848), p. 6.

S1Ibid., pp. 7-8.

 ...

372

immediate appeal. By 1843 at least he was an extremely zealous

disciple. Hempel neglects to mention in the True Organization of the

New Church how or when he. became a receiver of Swedenhorg. but

most likely Swedenborgianism was a later discovery for him than ..

Fourierism. If Hempel felt that Fourierism had prepared him for the

reception o( Swedenborg's teachings. his ardor about fusing the two

systems would be understandable.

A prime contention of Hempel's book was God's plan to

restore harmony In the universe by reducing man's self-made chaos

to order and peace. Christ's mission initiated the process whereby

all men would eventually be united in a universal brotherhood.

Swedenborg and Fourier were special servants of the Lord in that the

former provided the speculative framework to guide mankind and the

latter contributed "the means which will and must lead to the uni­

versa I realization of the Christian law of love in all the social

relations of mankind. ,,52 Once this Divine World Order was established

it would be a fixed. perfect system. In Hempel's words. "an order

which is not absolutely stable and fix~d has no claim to respect. ,,53
Hempel's chief premise illustrates the type of thinking which

characterized many nineteenth century men Of intellect. They were not

52Ibid •• pp. 99-100.

S3 Ibid .• p. 83.

:
 373

pluralistlcally oriented and had no appreciation for the fact that God

might- not even have intended uniformity of thought to be part of His

order of things. Hempel believed that progress was inevitable and

perfection was an obtainable goal. His air-tight, fixed, universally

valid world-view would triumph because it was the only vehicle

moving with the inexorable pull of progress.

The perfect society as envisioned by Hempel had eight main

characteristics: (1) a harmony of interests arranged by balancing

interests rather than homogenizing them, 54 (2) a guaranteed subsist­

ence level for everyone to eliminate the cut-throat competition of

laissez-faire capitalism, 55 (3) the glorification of labor by allowing

men to vary their work and make it attractive, 56 (4) the emancipation

of women by permitting them to regulate their own lives, 57 (5)

revolutionizing the education of children, 58 (6) abolishing all domestic

servitude which presently degrades men, 59 (7) the purification of man's

environment, 60 (8) the realization of the utilitarian ideal of every

5 4 Ibid•• p. 195.

55 Ibid •• pp. 199, 203-204.

56Ibid•• p. 208.

57 Ibid•• p. 211.

58Ibid•• pp. 215. 223-226.

59Ibld•• p. 226.

60Ibid•• p. 227.

 ".­

374

member" of society performing a use which benefits the whole society,

thus eliminating social parasites and human waste. 61

The end result of this perfect social order would be the

ultimate happiness of each individual.

Happiness is the supreme end of all human endeavors;

to attain this end, man has been endowed with reason.
The destination of reason is not to restrain man's
faculties and passions; the destination of reason is
to arrange the form of society correspondingly to the
impulses of human nature, and thus to place every
individual man in relations in which all the impulses
and demands of his nature will appear equally authori­
tative before the tribunal of conscience. When reason
shall have fulfilled this destination, then the fearful
struggle which is now raging in man's nature between
passion and conscience, will resolve itself into one
harmonious vibration of love and celestial bliss. 62

Hempel clearly made the point that he was not merely

suggesting an attractive option for the structure of society. As far

as he was concerned only "One True Organization of Society"existed,

just as only one true church carried the mark of God' s favor. 63 In

spite of his unequivocal position that Fourier had developed the only

practical plan for social order that a New Churchman could pursue,

Hempel warned against excessive haste and ill-fated tactics in

forcing present society to seize Fourierism as the only solution to its

61Ibid•• pp. 236-238.

62 Ibid .• p. 271.

63Ibid•• p. 267.

 375

needs. 64 Probably with the images of LeRaysville and Canton in his

mind he cautioned New Churchmen about tactless irritation of the

powers in' control of society.

Blind attacks on those who wield power only doomed reform

to certain oblivion according to Hempel. Pressure by men sensitive

to the political realities of the day. yet with a sharply-defined

definition of their own objectives. would achieve more than crude

aggressive agitation.

There is progress whenever the social force succeeds in

causing the political force to receive into its order the
aspirations and tendencies of the former. 65

In this theory of social change Hempel revealed some basic premises

that he shared with other New Churchmen. One of the most important

of these was the concept that man could not be forced or coerced

without violating his dignity and God's laws. Only a free man could

fulfil! his destiny. On this basis Hempel advocated the repeal of all

debtor laws. 66

As articulate as Hempel was in his endeavor to link Fourier­

ism and Swedenborgianism. New Churchmen remained unconvinced.

They did not like being put into a box which allowed only one choice

64 Ibid .• p. 361.

65 Ibid . , p. 364.

66Ibid .• p. 371.
 o
376

in regard to social organization and might prove embarrassing to

Swedenborgianism if the scheme failed. Some New Churchmen had

unwittingly walked into that trap in 1843 and 1844. This early mistake.

and it was commonly regarded as such in the Swedenborgian community.

later served as a flag to warn men away from a similar trap in sub­

sequent years. No wonder New Churchmen reacted vehemently to

later efforts to link Swedenborg with Mesmerism and Spiritualism.

The reviews of Hempel's book concentraled on exposing the

author's distortions of Swedenborg's. thought. George Bush stressed

that Swedenborg's primary objective was to restore life to man

internally. The external organization of church or society did not

concern him. Bush would not rule out the possibility that Fourierism

would prOVide the outworking of internal life, but since Fourier had

completely ignored the moral causes of social evils Bush could not

comprehend 'how his system might complement Swedenborgianism. 67

( '"'
B. F. Barrett adamantly insisted that if any connection

existed between Fourierism and Swedenborgianism Hempel's tome had

done a remarkable job of failing to show it. He had the suspicion

that Hemple had probably distorted Fourier as badly as Swedenbcrg

so that the sum total of his work might be to successfully turn off

67 New Church Repository. I. N'o.3 (1848), 186-187.

 377
68
adherents of both groups. Barrett certainly would not have cared.

He felt Hempel's chie-f error, his suggestion that man was innately

good, was unpardonable for a reader of Swedenborg and led to the

gross mistake of attacking social evils without regard for their

spiritual causes. 69

Hempel was merely beating the air with True Organization

of the New Church, for the New Church was not in the mood to listen

and Fourierism as a movement outside the New Church was dying.

The New Church experience with Fourierism had been brief and bitter,

and for most Swedenborgians within the institutional church that one

taste of communitarianism was enough. From 1845 on the New Church

I
shied away from anyone answer to the disharmony of society which

expressed itself in concrete form. The Church preferred to talk and

w.ork for _~~~generationof in~~iduat~n, a process which

admittedly took generations at best. Fourierism had been an inter­

jection of immediatist thought into Swedenborgian circles; with its

rejection a step was taken toward making a gradualist theory of social

~ge normative for the New Church.

Swedenborgians did not oease to criticize competitive

~p~~ism and its concomitant ethical anarchism or immorality. But

68Ibid., I, No. 10 (1848), 610.

69Ibid., I, No. 9 (1848), 532, 535. See also the review in

the New Jerusalem MagaZine, XXI, No. 8 (1848), 298-304.
 378

instead of offe.r1ng a communitarlan model after which the rest of

society should pattern itself, New Churchmen tried t~ ~fus~w

life into the business community just as they were striving to do with

the Christian Church. The result was the promotion of what miC1E!..3e

called "Ethical Capitalism.

------,.---_ ....­
"

Richard DeCharms labeled the same thing "hea~y social­

~, .. as distinguished from the unhealthy variety represented in

Fourierism, 70 but the word has lost whatever precision it once had.

N~hurch so<j.alism ~ed for rQf~Land private ownership and

basical!y meant the injection of morality into ordinC!ry .£apital~sm.

DeCharms for example saw self-love and "morbid indi~idualism"': as

~ruling principles of current business life?l but Swedenborgian

socialism elevated the common g~d above private interest. Com­

lIJunitarianism hada noble end in view but erred in trying to build the

external shell before man had been r~gene~ted internally. 72

Except for DeCharms' systematic treatment of the relation of

the New Churchman to business life, few New Church ministers

explored the subject in depth. The most comprehensive coverage of

70Richard DeCharms, Genera.! Epistles of Richard DeCharms

for Pastoral Instruction in the New Jerusalem (Philadelphia: n. p. ,
1860), p. 11.

71 Ibid .

72Ibid., pp. 44-45.

 37$
r-- -:..­
"Ethical Capitalism" appears in the novels
--- -- 0 Timothy Shay Arthur.
--- ~

the popular New Church novelist. Arthur was not a disinterested·

figure. for rather than being an artist in his craft Arthurlwas a business­

~ whose work happened to be writing novels and stdries. J However.

i" New Church te·rms this was his particular use and he took it

seriously.
-
Arthur can properly be called the pioneer business novelist
'
in the United States. 73

Arthur's business novels and the many stories which refer to

the economic life of the ante bellum era do present a critique of

capitalist ethics bllt not a ~ritique...2..Lca italism itself. Arthur's

heroes are the successful men who only take a just profit, shun specu­

lation. avoid debts, live temperately, and conduct themselves with

integrity. His businessmen do not seek wealth as an end and when

they are rewarded by Providence with success they know how to use

their money for the common good.

A full exposition of "Ethical Capitalism" in Arthur's writings

is a subject in itself and relates to communitarianism only in the

sense that most New Churchmen favored this type guarded endorsement

of caPitali;~ ver utopia~alism. Swedenborgians Vigorously

attacked the Old Church establishment in religion because it predated

1757, but the Industrial Revolution seemed to take off about the middle

73warren G. French, "T. S. Arthur: Pioneer Business

Novelist, 11 American Quarterly, X, No. I (1958), 55-65.
 380

of the eighteenth century. Most New Churchmen saw "Ethical

--
~l1sm" as the refinement of the ec~nomic system which accom­

---
panied the religious and political liberty which flourished after 1757.
-.......

Since capitalism was basically sound, New Churchmen ·could reserve

,
their strength for assaults in other areas of life.
 CHAPTER XII

SWEDENBORGIANISM AND HOMEOPATHY

Swedenborgians considered antislavery a piecemeal reform

that failed to plumb the depths of society's ills. Fourierism was

without question a comprehensive reform of society but based upon

economic reconstruction which most Swedenborgians saw as unnec­

essary. Both of these reforms did attract New Church adherents but

not in great numbers. However, medical reform did catch the imagi­

nation of significant numbers of New Churchmen. especially that

branch of medicine called Homeopathy.

Allopathy. as orthodox medicine .came to be designated.

suffered from a severe loss of public confidence in the 1840's and

1850' 5.1 Medical ethics hardly existed, regulation of the profession

1Henry Burnell Shafer, The Ameri'can Medical Profession,

1783-1850 (New York: Columbia University Press, 1936), pp. 79 ff..
169. 236. .Richard Harrison Shryock. Medicine and Society in
America. 1660-1860 (Great Seal edition; Ithaca, New York: Cornell
University Press. 1962 [1960]), p. 143. Charles E. Rosenberg. The
Cholera Years: The United States in 1832. 1849. and 1866 (paper ed.;
Chicago and London: The University of Chicago Press. 1962), pp.
154-162. Joseph F. Kett, The Formation of the American Medical
Profession: The Role of Institutions, 1780-1860 (New Haven and
London: Yale University Press. 1968), pp. 79-80.

381
 382

was inadequate, personal jealousy and sectarian bickering discredited

orthodox medicine in general. and worst of all. physicans were

conspicuous for their failure to cope with dreaded epidemics of

cholera and yellow fever. Quackery and new medical sects flourished

in such an atmosphere. The orthodox doctor himself was affected

with a damaging loss of esteem and self-confidence. Only with the

formation of the American Medical Association in 1846 did orthodox

medicine implement a code of ethics and begin to seriously consider

reforms which were necessary to boost their own morale and regain

public trust. 2

The early nineteenth century was a "pioneering era" in

American medicine. Medicine was cutting itself loose from its

medieval moorings and searching for new foundations. The result

was confusion. clinical nihilism. and innovation. Generally the loss

of faith in old theorie s and remedies preceded new empirical solutions

because the medical institutions of the country had almost no concept

of systematic research. Richard Shryock argues that the self­

perpetuating mediocrity of American medical schools was not broken

until after 1870 and then because of a breakthrough of European

developments."3

2Shafer, American Medical Profession. pp. 93-95. 148.

3Shryock, Medicine and Society. p. 137.

 383

The crisis in confidence stemmed from internal problems in

medicine. Certainly it was not due to a scarcity of physicians, for

by 1850 the United States had too many doctors given the nature of

American society. 4 Many Americans would not consult any school­

trained doctor, so regularly trained men found competition for patients

keen, especially in towns and urban areas. 5 This overabundant supply

of doctors was due to the proliferation of medical schools in the United

States after 1820. and the rather loose standards of most of these

institutions. Philadelphia remained the medical center of the country

and continued to produce the finest physicians. It boasted the

largest and best single medical school in the nation in the University

of Pennsylvania Medical School. 6 Outside of Philadelphia, New

York, and Boston the excellence of medical preparation plummeted to

unbelievable depths.

In the midst of the medical confusion of the ante bellum era

a number of medical sects arose to challenge orthodox Allopathic

4Shafer, American Medical Profession, pp. 91, 166.

Number of Graduates from

U. S. Medical Colleges

1769-1799 221 .
1800-1809 343
1810-1819 1,375
1820-1829 4,338
1830-1839 6.849
1840-1849 11,128

5Kett, Formatioh, pp. 107, 131.

6Shafer. American Medical Profession, p. 178. Shryock,

Medicine and Society. pp. 139-140.
 384

practice and training. The first of these to attract a mass following

was the system of botanic medicine known popula.rly as Thomsonian­

ism. With the slogan "To make every man his own physician"

Thomsonianism was intertwined with the democratic movement of the

1830' s. 7 Its remedies were simple and cheap and the results gen­

erally harmless at worst, -so the movement appealed to a rural

population which had difficulty finding a doctor or affording him

once they located him. Thomsonianism also held a great appeal for

women because it opened to them a profession that had been solidly

closed previously. 8

Thomsonianism attracted a large following but it did not

offer a serious challenge to orthodox medicine in urban centers of

strength. A more alarming threat gathered momentum between 1840

and 1860 in the cities of America. This new school of Homeopathy

was the product of Germany and the result of a rebellion of regularly

trained physicians who had tried orthodoxy only to reject its premises.

The Homeopathic system of medicine originated in Germany

with the work and writing of Samuel Hahnemann. Hahnemann received

his degree in medicine from the University of LeipZig in 1780. but

only after 1790 did he begin to systematize his unorthodox thinking.

7Kett, Formation. pp. 107-108, 110.

8Ibid., pp. 107. 117-119. Kett estimates that by 1840

three to four million people were served by Thomsonianism.
 385

In 1810 he published a complete exposition -of his theories. Organon

2! the Homeopathic Art. According to Hahnemann. disease was caused

by the deterioration of an "immaterial vital principle" in man which

in a normal state prevented disease. To spur that principle oil to

restorative work the physician had to induce a similar disease in the

system. usually by means of small doses of drugs. From this treat­

ment came the slogan that characterized the Homeopathic movement-­

·siOO11a similibus curantur. ,,9

Homeopathy was especially critical of orthodox treatments

such as bleeding and blistering which scarred the patient for life if

they did not kill him. But little headway rewarded Homeopathic

criticism until cholera struck Europe in 1831 qnd 1832. Allopathy

recommended bleeding and emetics with little success; whereas

Homeopathy claimed that it could prevent the full development of

cholera if the proper drugs were prescribed at the first signs of the

disease. 10 The result was an internecine warfare between the two

schools of thought at the expense of a suffering people.

9Ibid•• pp. 132-133. This principle of "like curing like"

is an idea found in primitive and folk medicine. Homeopathy dignified
the concept into a system.

lOT. 1.. Bradford. The Life and Letters of Dr. Samuel

Hahnemann (Philadelphia: Boericke E. Tafel. 1895), pp. 253, 256.
Wil11am Ameke. History of Homeopathy; ~ Origins. Its Conflicts,
with an Appendix on. the Present State of University Medicine, trans­
lated by Alfred E. Drysdale (London: E. Gould and Son, 1885), pp.
235-236. 247-248, 259-261.
 386

The United States was supposed to be an enlightened

democracy compared to the decadent empire of Germany. When

orthodox attitudes toward Homeopathy are examined, the difference

between the two countries fades. The 'opposition to the new system

was intense and seemed exacerbated by Homeopathy's success.

Nevertheless, in the United States Homeopathy did not have to face

the same type organized repression it had experienced in Germany.

This helps to explain why a significant number of German Homeopaths

emigrated to the United States in the ante belIum period.

One of the first of these Homeopathic immigrants was

William Wesselhoeft. He had been a medical student at Jena, but

because of his association with the "Burschenschaften" movement he

was imprisoned. After his release Wesselhoeft sailed for the United

States, settling in Allentown, Pennsylvania. 11 About 1835 he was

instrumental in the founding of the first Homeopathic medical school

in the United States, the AlIentown Academy, but the initiation of

the school would have been impossible without his !riend Constantine

Hering.

Hering was born in Oschatz, Germany in January, 1800, to

a family of Moravian descent. Very early in life he developed an

interest ~n mediCine which found its fulfilIment in medical studies at

11Kett, Formation, p. 136.

 387

the Universities of Leipzig and W~rzburg. Curiosity over Homeopathy

converted into conviction at Leipzig when Homeopathic treatment

cured Hering's own gangrenous finger. 12 The cure was a spectacular

capstone to a research project which Hering had been assigned by

his illustrious professor at Leipzig, Dr. J. Henry Robbi. Robbi had

asked Hering to do an intensive study of Homeopathy, in particular

the writings of Hahnemann, with the object of refuting the system

once and for all. 13 By the time the cure took place Hering was

already quite sympathetic to Homeopathy or he would never have

submitted to the treatment in the first place.

After taking his final degree at W~rzburg in 1826 Hering

taught the natural sciences for a time, then accepted a commission

from the king of Saxony to conduct a scientific expedition to Surinam,

South America. In South America, far from authority, Hering ignored

some of his assigned tasks in order to experiment with Homeopathic

remedies. Eventually he resigned from his commission and decided

not to return to Germany. 14 In 1833 he migrated to Philadelphia, from

where he moved to Allentown to help inaugurate the North American

Academy of the Homoepathic Healing Art. At the same time he

12 .
Calvin B. Knerr, et al., eds., A Memorial of Constantine
Hering (Philadelphia: n. p., n. d.), p. 18.

l3Cleave's Biographical Cyclopedia, p. 7.

14Knerr, Memorial, pp. 19-20.

 388

maintained a practice in Philadelphia with the help of his brother-in­

law Dr. Hussman, also a Homeopathic physician. 15

Hering is recognized as the Father of Homeopathy in the

United States, largely because of his voluminous writing on the

subject, 16 his pioneering work in Allentown, and his lifetime devo­

tion to and leadership of Homeopathy in Philadelphia. 17 For example,

Hering helped found the Homeopathic College of Pennsylval"ia in 1848,

the leading Homeopathic institution in the United States before 1860.

The school later merged with the Hahnemann Medical College and

Hering served the merged institution as a professor and Dean.

As important as Hering was for the maturation of Homeopathy

in the United States, he was not the first Homeopathic physician of

note. The first Homeopathic doctor in America was probably Hans

Gram of Denmark. Gram had been born in the United States because

of his father's marriage to a Boston girl, returned to Europe to study

ISIbid., pp. 23, 27.

16Hering wrote over 400 published articles, poems, pam­

phlets, and books on Homeopathy, including scme medical satire.
Many of the articles were written for the North American Journal of
Homeopathy. Hering also edited the follOWing periodicals: (1) Cor­
respondenzblatt der Homopathischen Aerzte_ (Allentown, 1835-1837),
(2) Miscellanies on Homeopathy (Philadelphia, 1838). (3) The
Homeopathic News (Philadelphia, 1854-1856).

17 Knerr , Memorial, p. 129. Arthur M. Eastman, life and

Reminiscences of Constantine Hering (Philadelphia: n. p., 1917),
pp. 5-6.
medicine, and then moved back to New York City about 1825. 18 He

was especially important for Homeopathy because of his illustrious

career and his zeal for promoting Hahnemann's theories. He was

instrumental in bringing two other notable New York doctors into the

Homeopathic camp, John F. Gray and Abraham D. Wilson, both of

whom were friends of the renowned David Hosack. 19

A third avenue existed .1n the United States for the trans­

mission of continental Homeopathic influence to the United States.

In addition to the work of Gram, and the influx of German immigrants,

the writings of French Homeopaths circulated with success in New

Orleans. 20 But all of these channels of influence only laid the

groundwork for the wide-spread acceptance of Homeopathy. As in

Europe in 1831 and 1832 the chief impetus to the spread of Homeopathy

was the 1849 cholera epidemic in the United States. 21 Once again

Allopathy had nothing new to offer and by comparison Homeopathy

seemed to have remarkable success. 22

18Cleave's Biographical Cyclopedia, pp. 414-415.

19Kett , Formation, p. 135.·

20Ib1d., pp. 137-138.

21 Ibid ., p. 138.

22Rosenberg, Cholera, pp. 101-172 depict the helplessness

of America in 1849 in the confrontation with cholera. B. F. Barrett

to George Bush, July 17, 1849, BU5h Letterbooks, II, SSRA. William
H. Holcombe, How 1. Became:a Homeopath (Chicago: C. S. Halsey,
1866). p. 13.
 390

At first, at least in the work of Dr. Hqns Gram, Homeopathy

was intended to complement orthodox treatments of merit and introduce

new hope into the confused morass of orthodox medicine. But

gradually newly converted practitioners began making fantastic

claims for Homeopathy as the only true system of medicine. By 1876,

after amazing progress by Homeopathy. a leading doctor of that per­

suasion in Philadelphia could make the follOWing statement.

Homeopathy is a divine institution, and should be most

soundly held in trust by all its votaries. even as it was
held by Samuel Hahnemann, whom the Lord deputed to
impart it, and by his faithful disciple, whom we have
brought here tonight. • . (the speech was a testi­
monial to Constantine Hering).

This science. based upon the law similia similibus

curantur. is as true as the Bible! It comes from the
same source, and it must ever shine as the great beacon­
light in medical science, as the Bible is the great
beacon-light in the science of theology. It must ever
continue to heal more and more the suffering of the
human race. as we come more and more under its real
influence. It must ever alld ever continue to over come
all other methods of medical practice, until homeopathy
reigns supreme, as the grand and only law of cure for
-all manner of disease in all varieties of liVing creatures. 23

Orthodox medicine was not confident enough of its own posi­

tion to welcome Homeopathy with open arms. but the mild variety of

Dr. Gram, plus the obvious erudition of many Homeopaths trained in

Germany, made coexistence possible. However. in the 1850' s. the

number of Homeopaths. their aggravating popularity, and their

23Knerr• Memorial. pp. 37-38.

 391

increasing arrogance led to a reaction on the part of many medical

societies and -institutions. The Massachusetts Medical Society

contained both AUopaths and Homeopaths until in the 1850' s the

Society began excluding the latter.. Since the only provision for

exclusion related to a lack of medical skill, the Society had to turn

some intellectual somersaults. Homeopaths were excluded from

membership as "unskilled" practitioners, not because of inadequate

preparation but due to their dogmatism! 24

Massachusetts Homeopaths established a medical society of

their own in 1856 with legislative recognition, but the prestige of the

Massachusetts Medical Society was such that many Homeopaths

refused to leave it for one of their own brand. Finally in 1870 the

American Medical Association threatened the Massachusetts Medical

Society with disciplinary action if it did not purge itself of the offen­

sive Homeopaths. During the 1870's the state society complied, this

time expelling Homeopaths due to "dishonorable conduct" which could

only mean being Homeopaths. 25

The rapid progress of Homeopathy in the 1840's, before

cholera helped bring the new system to public attention, was chiefly

among those groups of people who found that the philosophical

24Kett, Formation, pp. 26-27.

25Ibid.• pp. 28-29.

 392

assumptions of Homeopathy had a certain affinity with aspects of

their own world-view. Fourierists as a group were attra?ted to

Homeopathy as a medical reform which corresponded to their efforts

at social and economic reconstruction. 26 The m;'st remark~ble

identification of anyone religious group with Homeopathy was that

of the Swedenborgians.

The two men most important in the early history of Homeo­

pathy in the United States, Hans Gram and Constantine Hering, were

both New Churchmen. Gram was a member pf the New York First

Society and Hering a member of the Philadelphia First Society. The

first Homeopathic pharmacy in New England was opened by OHs

Clapp in 1840; the first in Michigan was started by John Ellis, a

New Church physician, in 1850. 27 The firm which came to dominate

the Homeopathic drug industry after 1870 was Boericke and Tafel of

Philadelphia, and its owners were Swedenborgians. Clapp and

Boericke and Tafel also became two of the leading Homeopathic

publishers. 28

26Harbinqer, IV, No. 10 (1847), 158.

27 T• 1.. Bradford, ed., Homeopathic Bibliography of the

United States, 1825-1891 (Philadelphia: Boericke and Tafe!, 1892),
pp. 545-546.

28Bradford, Bibliography, pp. 350-352. See John pitcairn,

"Francis Edmund Boericke, " New Church life, XXII, No. 3 (1902), 0

113-J.l6.
 393

The number of New ·Church ministers in the ante bellum era

who endorsed Homeopathy is impossible to determine, but a majority

of the men wilom w.e have designated Free Spirits or Academy men

probably sympathized with tile new system of medicine. Certainly

Richard DeCharms, N. C. Burnham, David Powell, and B. F. Barrett

openly advocated Homeopathy in the 1840' s. Only the Orthodox

Convention group seemed at all hesitant about embracing the theory

which many Swedenborgians saw as the natural counterpart to Sweden­

borg's spiritual findings.

The New Church contained an extremely high proportion of

doctors in its total membership. Nearly all of these men rejected

Allopathy for some rival medical system and most of those who

rebelled chose Homeopathy. Some of the more prominent of these New

Church Homeopaths were Charles J. Hempel,29 Francis E. Boericke,

Samuel H. Worcester, 30 John Ellis, and William Ho1combe in addition

to Hering and Gram. This group does not exhaust the list. A. E. Small

in Philadelphia, John F. Gray in New York, and E. B. DeGersdorff in

Boston were a few of the others. The influence of nearly all these men

29See Bradford, Bibliography. pp. 141-143 for a list of

Hempel's translations and writings.

30S. H. Worcester was cured by Dr. Hans Gram in 1837, but

he entered teaching and the New Church ministry before ·studying
medicine at the University of Maryland and the Homeopathic Medical
College of New York. In 1861 Worcester entered practice full-time.
Cleave's Biographical Cyclopedia, p. 175.
 394

extended far beyond their practices, for many of them served as

editors of Homeopathic periodicals, assumed positions of leadership

in local medical associa Hons, _and published pamphlets extolling

their progressive views of life. 31

As might be expected, the first person in the New Church to

bring Homeopathy to the attention of the whole New Church community

.was Richard DeCharms. The subject was reviewed at length in the

Newchurchman in 1844. But given the Swedenborgian view of disease

as derived from spiritual causes, and New Church criticism of materi­

al1stic science since the 1820's, DeCharms' approach to Homeopathy

did fit into a context of assumptions about medicine, 32 even if the

specific subject was new.

The author of one of the early articles in the Newchurchman

set forth what became a fairly standard New Church position on

Homeopathy. He maintained that orthodox medicine committed a

fundamental mistake in treating external effects as the disease itself.

The error was based on Allopathy's refusal to consider the spiritual

31Bradford's Homeopathic Bibliography lists the writings

and editorial positions of these men. An interesting feature of this
bibliography is Bradford's listing of both Homeopathic and non­
Homeopathic works.

32For early articles on the spiritual cause of disease see

the New Jerusalem Magazine, Il, No. 3 (1828), 93-94; III, No. 4
(1829), 103-111; V, No. 1 (1831), 23-24; V, No. 4 (1831). 133-139;
V, No. 5 (1832), 169-175; and Precursor, Il, No. 36 (1840). 188­
189.
 395

dimension of man. New Church Homeopathy on the other hand

accepted'natural disease (really the effects of disease) as a sign of

spiritual causation, 33 and in doing so recognized that man is a

spiritual being.
.,

The heart of the article expounded three basic reasons for the

superiority of Homeopathy over any other system of medicine. the first

being the spiritual cause of disease. The second was Homeopathy's

recognition that each disease has a sPecifiC remedy and the secret for

discovering that remedy was the Homeopathic law that like cures

like. 34 The application of the specific remedy in infinitesimal doses

or highly diluted ones was the third merit of Homeopathy. 35 Even

though these three tenets left no doubt as to Homeopathy's excellence

the author was not prepared to advocate it as "unqualifiedly true, "

only superior to any other rival medical system now known. At this

early date some New Churchmen must have been practicing Hydropathy

and the article was directed at these men as well as doubting New

Church Allopaths. 36

DeCharms fails to indicate in his autobiography just when he

accepted Homeopathy but the frequency of references to the subject in

33Newchurchman. I!, No. 6 (1844), 510. 512. 523-555.

34 Ibid., pp. 555-562.

35Ibid., p. 563.

36Ibid., pp. 520, 564.

 ° 0

396

the Newchurchman ar~ strong evidence that by the early 1840' s he

saw Homeopathy as the new medicine to accompany the New Jerusalem.

He was too absorbed in ecclesiastical controversy to systematize his

thoughts on medicine until after he left the pastorate. Then in 1854

Defence of Homeopathy Against Her New-Church As~ailants appeared.

Once again the chief "sentinel in the outposts of the army of the Lord

of Hosts" 37 sounded forth loudly and clearly.

Defence of Homeopathy set forth an apology for Homeopathy

as the only medical system worthy of New' Church support. 38 DeCharms

intended the work to be a theological rationale for Homeopathy but he

also wanted to review the history of the New Church controversy over

Homeopathy. Just as the Homeopathic treatment begins with an

infinitesimal dose of medicine, so the debate in the New Church began

with a seemingly innocuous bit of doggerel in the New York Tribune of

September 14. 1850. Signed by a writer who called himself "Investi­

gator. " the snatch of verse placed Samuel Hahnemann at odds with

Jesus. Galens. and Swed~nbOrg!39

A Philadelphia Homeopath brought the offensive poem to

DeCharms' attention with the request that the New Church gladiator

37 Richard DeCharms, Defence of Homeopathy Against Her

New-Church Assailants (Philadelphia: The New Jerusalem Press, 1854),
p. 3.

38Ibid•• p. 6.
39°Ibid .• p. 11.
 397

reply to h. DeChanns' rebuttal was rejected by the Tribune, not

because of any lack of sympathy by Horace Greely, but because the

article was too long and theologically doctrinaire. 40 George Bush of

the New Church Repository agreed to publish it. Early in November,

1850. DeChanns confided in Bush how much he regretted being drawn

into another New Church dispute. "But if I must buckle on my armor

in defence of the truth--so be it, " he added. 41 DeCharms hoped he

could be the "skirmisher" for Homeopathy and that after his article'

appeared the heavy artillery and troops would provide more substantial

defense. He was probably thinking specifically of Constantine Hering

who had brought the verse in the Tribune to his attention in the first

place.

The first reply to DeCharms' initial attack came from a New

York physician. Dr. William Turner. Turner revealed himself as the

author of the provocative doggerel in the Tribune. He was a New

Churchman alarmed at the rapid spread of Homeopathy among Sweden­

bOl'gians. Turner's a'larm was probably based on the fact that New

Churchmen were bypassing the theory of medicine which he believed

to be "the true sys"tem of medicine. ,,42 Turner was a chronothermalist.

40 Ibid •• p. 12.

41Richard DeCharms to George Bush. November 5. 1850.

Bush Letterbooks. V (1850>' SSRA.
42
DeCharms. Defence. p. 21.
 ~98

Obviously New Churchmen were fleeing from orthodox medicine to the

many medical sects of the ante bellum period, and while they CQuld

not agree on the new system to replace orthodoxy, they did concur

that there was one medical position which would perf~ctly complement

the New Jerusalem.

Chronothermalism was the brainchild of a Dr. Dicks6n of

Edinburgh, Scotland, which stressed the periodicity of disease. But

its appeal for New Churchmen lay in Dickson's acknowledgment that

disease was ultimately the effect of evil, a similarity to Swedenborg

quickly noted by chronothermalists.

In a word, he (Swedenborg) showed that diseases are the

effects of evils; and are in the natural body, what evils
are in the spiritual. All diseases, therefore, are from
spiritual diseases, or evils in the human mind. But this
must be understood in a general, and not an individual
sense . . •

. If these premises. be true, then the conclusions follow,

that if evil had never found admission into the human mind,
then disease had never existed; • . . and when evil is
Wiped out so will its effect, 1. e. disease . • . 43

Evidently neither Dickson or Swedenborg located the origin

of disease in the specific evils committed by men. For example, just

because one man was ill and his neighbor was not would not necessarily

mean the former was more evil than the latter. All men are morally ill,

but some are tempermentally more susceptible to the effects of that

43T. D. Sturtevant, Dickson and Swedenborg on Periodicity,

Cause, and Cure of Disease (New York: J. S. Redfield, 1847), p. 10;
.,
399
~ -• pervasive moral sicknes:s. So the common argument ran. The basic

question had been stated as early as ihe 1844 series in the Newchurch-

Do diseases flow from and correspond to the internal

evils of the particular men on earth who are subject to
them; or do they flow from and correspond to the evils
prevailing in the spiritual world. through and by which
the natural world is created and sustained ?44

Most New Churchmen had no time for Chronothermalism.

William Holcombe accorded it some therapeutic value but flatly called

Dr. Dickson a "quack... 45 T.he debate in Bush's Repository did bring

at least one more New Church Chronothermalist out of hiding. Thomas

Wilks. but he and his system irritated Bush and DeCharms. In their

correspondence in regard to the series Bush and DeCharms frankly

expressed their contempt for the abilities of Wilks and Turner. Turner

was Ita very troublesome man in his perpetual boring everybody with

his Chronothermalism. " and a "mere chicken" when compared to some

of the "really formidable" opponents like William Holcombe. 46 Wilks

was not even worthy of the energy necessary to reply to his criticism

of Homeopathy. 47

44Newchu.rchman. n. No. 8 (1844). 771.

45william H. Holcombe to George Bush. January 2. 1851.

Bush Letterbooks. VI (1850-1851). SSRA.

46George Bush to Richard DeCharms. November 5 and 26.

1850. AA.
47 Richard DeCharms to George Bush. December 30. 1850.
Bush Letterbooks. V (1850). SSRA; Ibid .• February 24. 1851. VI (1850­
1851). Bush to DeCharms. September 19. 1851. AA.
 400

In'spite of his intention to turn the defense of Homeopathy

over to the regular army, DeCharms found himself trapped in a battle

with no prospects for reinforcements. His first inclination was to

surrender.

I had already resolved thatj would on no account

have any thing more to do with controversy in our church,
and as I discern that my "spirit" on homeopathy is likely
to bring on an endless strife, I am determined, here on
the threshold, to back out, and cry "enough. ,,48

This surrender accompanied an article which would open a second

round of the debate over Homeopathy in the Repository. DeCharms

asked Bush to reject it as too long and close the debate gracefully so

he did not appear to have been "~badly whipped. ,,49 Good inten-

Uons were not enough. DeCharms could not help himself when he felt

truth was at stake, and as a result the controversy in the Repository

and via correspondence continued into 1851 before Bush himself

called a halt to it. 50

48De Charms to Bush, December 30, 1850, Bush Letterbooks,

V (l850), SSRA.

49Ibid •

50DeCharms to Bush, January 1, 1851, Bush Letterbooks, VI

(l850-1851). SSRA. William H. Holcombe to George Bush, January 2,
1851. Bush Letterbooks, VI (1850-1851). SSRA. DeCharms to Bush,
February 24, 1851, Bush Letterbooks, VI (1850-1851), SSRA. Thomas
Wilksto George Bush, Apri14, 1851, Bush Letterbooks, VII (1851).
SSRA. Bush to DeCharms, September. 19; 1851, AA. For New Church
reactions to the 1850-1851 controversy in the Repository see the
following letters and articles: Alexander Wilder to George Bush,
November 18. 1850, Bush Letterbooks. IV (1850). SSRA; anon. to Bush,
 401

The chief protagonist for Allopathy in the 1850-1851 debate

was Willlam H. Holcombe. a physician in Cincinnat1. He had been

born into a Lynchburg, Virginia, medical family in 1825, the third son

of Will1am James Holcombe. Young Holcombe prepared himself for

entry into Yale but never made it due to a sudden alteration of family

circumstances when his father freed his slaves. The ire of local

residents in Virginia forced the family removal to Indiana. Here

Holcombe read medicine with his father and prepared for medical

school. He graduated from the University of Pennsylvania Medical

School in 1847. 51

Immediately upon graduation Holcombe entered practice with

his father who was still located in Madison, Indiana. By 1849 he

had become a New Churchman, chiefly because of the profound

impression made upon him by Bush's treatise on Mesmer and Sweden­

borg. 52 In that same year Holcombe's faith in Allopathy received a

jolt when cholera struck Madison and Allopathic remedies proved

fruitless. Up to this time Holcombe's only knowledge of Homeopathy

had been the negative references made by a medical professor. His

January 28, 1851, Bush Letterbooks, VI (1850-1851); William Benade

to J. P. Stuart, January 9, 1851, AA; Medium, Ill, No. 5 (1851), 72­
74; Messenger, II (June I, 1854), 112.

SlHolcombe, Became.9. Homeopath, pp. 3-4.

52Wllliam H. Holcombe to George Bush, July 10 and October 6,

1849, Bush Letterbooks, n (1848-1849), SSRA.
 402

teacher ridiculed H.omeopathy as a passing fancy of the day, like

Mesmerism, but since he now saw Mesmerism in a new light

Holcombe began to doubt a judgment which had been planted in his

mind without his own investigation of its truthfulne~s. 53

In the midst of the cholera epidemic Holcombe received

word from Cincinnati that the New Church congregation in that city,

under the pastoral care of Benjamin F. Ban-ett. was having remark­

able success with cholera. Ban-ett claimed he had 104 families under

his charge, 86 of whom (involving 476 people) relied exclusively on

Homeopathy. Out of these 476, 160 contracted cholera but only one

died 154 Holcombe was impressed. He journeyed to Cincinnati to

speak with Ban-ett and N. C. Burnham, the first Homeopathic physician

he had ever met. 55 Back in Madison he began to experiment with

Homeopathy late in 1849 and early in 1850. Then in the Spring of

1850 Holcombe left his father's practice and moved to Cinc1nnati

where he could enjoy the company of other New Churchmen. 56

His interest in Homeopathy intensified in Cincinnati but he

remained an Allopathic practitioner well into 1851. and it was during

53Holcombe, Became ~ Homeopath, pp. 5, 7, 13.

54 Ibid ., p. 16.

55 Ibid., p. 20.

56 Ibid., p. 23. Holcombe to Bush, October 6, 1849, Bush

Letterbooks, II (1848-1849), SSRA. Ibid., May 3, 1850, IV (1850).

 403

this time that he engaged in the running debate on medicine in the

Repository. The series must have just barely ended before Holcombe

Jumped the fence to accept the system he had been criticizing shortly

before. The break was a clean, irreparable- severance, for Holcombe

was convinced that orthodox medicine could not be reformed from

within. Allopathic journals refused even to discuss the merits of

Homeopathy.57 ActualIy the decision must have been similar to the

intellectual revolution which occurred when he became a receiver of

Swedenborg and severed all ties with the Old Church.

Homeopathy was not just a medical theory to Holcombe. He

considered it "a grand philosophic reform in the highest and last-

studied department of medicine--the application of remedies to the

cure of disease. ,,58 Yet while the ramifications of Homeopathy

extended beyond the field of medicine, Holcombe was not prepared

to endorse Homeopathy as the "perfect Science of Medicine, " nor was

he ready to rule out all the treatments of Allopathy or even Mesmer-

ism. 59 He admitted that Homeopathy had its limits, especially since

it could only cure what it could imitate in healthy bodies, but its

57Holcombe, Became ~ Homeopath, p. 29.

58Ibid ., p." 10.

59will1am H. Holcombe, What is Homeopathy? (New

Orleans: Bulletin Book and Job Office, 1864). pp. 7-8.
 404

greatness as a refonn lay in the potential of Homeopathy's therapeutic

law of similia similibus curantur. 60

Some of Homeopathy' s attractiveness resided in its potential

as a reform, but that alone would not have sustained the wave of

sympathy for Homeopathy which mushroomed in the cholera epidemic

of 1849. Regular medicine had fallen into a state of curative paralysis

and appeared inhumane in its frantic efforts to counteract its inade­

quacy. Homeopathy concentrated on cure rather than diagnosis and

its methods were generally less harmful than those of Allopathy

whether successful or not. Homeopathy instilled hope in a fearful

people.

William Ho1combe acknowledged that Allopathy excelled in

physiology and pathology, but he maintained that its approach to cure

was chaotic. This random and arbitrary treatment of disease was

symptomatic of regular medicine's failure to see man as both spirit

and matter. Homeopathy on the other hand recognized thf3 spiritual

dimension of man and employed" psychology" in its treatment. Thus

the Homeopathic physician could be called a physician in the "highest

and noblest sense of the word. ,,61 In addition the Homeopathic doctor

60Ibid., pp. 26-27. See also William H. Holcombe, On

. the Nature and Limitations of the Homeopathic ~ (New York: Henry
Ludwig, 1858). 15 pp. .

61Wllliam H. Ho1combe, Why Is Homeopathy More Curative

~ Other Systems of Medicine? (Cincinnati; Robert Clarke and
Co., 1875), pp. 16-17, 19-20.
 405

was more scientific than his orthodox counterpart, for Homeopathic

remedies were linked to a law of cure which removed a great deal of

uncertainty from medical practice. 62

Holcombe's interest in making medicine genuinely scientific

says a great deal about his thought. He loved science. But to avoid

distortion, one must recognize that he never pursued science for its

own sake. Holcombe's great passion was to reconcile science and

religion, to reveal how New Church truth unlocked the mysteries of

the universe, and to explore the depths of man's spiritual being

scientifically. Consequently, his interest in Spiritualism was not

unrelated to his medical experimentation, and both were viewed from

the perspective of Swedenborgian theology.

Holcombe and his wife, the former Rebecca Palmer of Cin­

cinnati, left Cincinnati in 1852 and returned briefly to Madison,

Indiana, before moving south to a post as resident physician on a

plantation· near Natchez, Mississippi. He had refused an invitation

from John B. Niles of LaPorte, Indiana, to establish his practice there

because the plantation offer in Concordia Parish, Louisiana, appeared

so attractive and the weather was less severe than in the North. 63 At

Hennitage Holcombe cared for 225 "unfortunate human beings 01 and did

62 Ibid., pp. 4, 6, 8.

63william Holcombe to John B. Niles, July 13, 1852, Photo­

copies of Niles Mss., SS RA.
 406

not like the close association with slavery, but he reveled in the

leisure time which afforded him opportunity to explore his favorite

64
themes of science and Swedenborgianism.

As much as he enjoyed the leisurely pace of the plantation.

Holcombe must have realized that it would be incapable of bringing

him the financial security he desired in order to carry on his writing

and research in the study of science and religion. In 1853 he entered

a partnership with Dr. F. A. W. Davis. a well-known Natchez

Homeopath.· The two men won a state-wide reputation for themselves

in the yellow fever scourge of 1853 and to the alarm of orthodox

medical men also garnered appointments as consulting physicians to

the Mississippi State Hospital. 65 Holcombe delighted in the success

of Homeopathy during the Yellow Fever epidemic but his enthusiasm

was tempered by the sobering fact that the real reason why the Fever

abated was that everyone had either fled the town or died. 66 Over

one hundred people had been buried in the last three weeks of August.

1853.

64Holcombe to James P. Stuart. October 8, 1852. AA.

Ho1combe to Bush. September 25. 1852. Bush Letterbooks. IX (1852).
SSRA.

65Holcombe to Bush. December 28. 1853. Bush Letterbooks.

XIV (1852-1854). SSRA.

66Ibid•• September 2. 1853. XI-(lS53).

 407

Holcombe still did not find the financial rewards he was

seeking, 67 and he did not care for the uncongenial New Church

atmosphere in Natchez. The tiny society in Natchez heidentifled

as ",perhaps the wealthiest and most fashionable in the South, and

consequently to a great degree worshippers of self and Mammon. They

, 68
are however enthusiastic homeopaths. . . . • " The year 1855

witnessed another move for the Holcombes as they left Natchez for

a plantation in Waterproof, Louisiana.

One of the reasons for Holcombe's lack of ease among the

Natchez aristocrats was his liberal spirit. In the 1850's he still

expressed an antipathy to slav'ery; he favored moderate socialism as

a means of lifting society from its foundation of self-interest; and he

believed that political and medical innovations since 1757 were part

of the human progress ordained by Providence. He regarded the recent

spirit manifestations, even those attended by error, as proof of

Swedenborg's reliability and evidence of the dawning of a new, bright

day for mankind. 69

Holcombe turned a sympathetic ear toward Spiritualism as

early as 1851, but like most Swedenborgians who at least gave

--
67 Ibid ., January 16, 1856, XVIII (l855-1856).
.

68Ho1combe.to J. P. Stuart, May 13, 1853, AA.

69william H. Holcombe, Human Progress Since the Last

Judgment in 1757 (Cincinnati; New Church Brethren in Ohio, 1851),
pp. 12. 14. 16.
 408

Spiritualism a hearing, Holcombe rejected the usefulness of external

spirit phenomena. However, until his death in 1893 he continued in

the belief that the New Church was coming internally in men and the

opening of man's celestial sense was possible. Holcombe also con­

tinued to irritate the majority of New Churchmen who saw him as

woefully misguided.

With his move to the vicinity of New Orleans in 1855,

Holcombe naturally came in contact with T. 1.. Harris and his Chris­

tian Spiritualist or New Era Movement in that city. Holcombe. in

1857 at least, felt that Harris was "thoroughly Swedenborgian" in

his views, and he did not doubt that the poetic Harris had made con­

tact with spirits internally. 70 When Harris struck his own path in

the 1860' s Holcombe remained in the New Church because he placed

the Word and Swedenborg above Harris. but he did not forsake the

conviction that a person could be a New Churchman and a true

_Spiritualist at the same time.

Holcombe's genteel manner and generous liberalism enabled

him to maintain friendships throughout the New Church in spite of

some of his questionable views. His pamphlets were among the most

popular written by American Swedenborgians up to the time of his

7OwUl1am H. Holcombe, "Mr. Harris' Wisdom of Angels-­

What Are New Churchmen to Think of It?" Crisis, VII, No. 4 (1857).

28-29.

 409.

death. 71 and Holcombe was probably the most prominent Homeopath

. . 72
outside the eastern seaboard in the late ninet~enth century. His

influence was significant enough in the General Convention that after

the Academy split. Holcombe and his friends were able to make

·celesttalism" a major force in the Conventlon i~ the 1880's. 73

The Academy resisted the views of Holcombe long before

its formal organization in 1876. Holcombe's only warm friend among

Academy men was J. P. Stuart and their relationship deteriorated

steadily from 1870 on. Their friendship dated from Cincinnati days

in the early 1850' s and continued into 1868 as Holcombe supported

Stuart financially. welcomed him into his home, and corresponded

with him. 74 By 1881, when the "celestial" movement of Holcombe

and George Christy had attained considerably momentum, Stuart no

longer countenanced Holcombe's pretentious claims. 75

71Benjamin F. Barrett. ed.• New Church Monthly, II, No. 2

(1868), 72; II, No. 7 (1868), 321 ff.• 325; Ill, No. 12 (1869), 558-567.

72william Holcombe to J. P. Stuart. March 25. 1868. AA.

Kett, Formation, p. 152.

73Odner, "Pitcairn," New Church life. XXXVII, No. 5 (1917),

281-283.

74 J• P. Stuart. "Diaries." XX, entries from April 13 to 23, 1867.

Stuart was on a preaching tour in New Orleans and lived with Holcombe
while there. In 1868 Stuart invited Holcombe to move to St. Louis and
join New Church activities there but Holcombe refused. (Holcombe to
Stuart, March 25, 1868, AA).

75Stuart, "Diaries," '}(X)0/, "Memoranda" contains Stuart's

report of a personal interview with Holcombe in September. 1881.
 410

The chief issue between the Academy and Holcombe was

~e same question that had marked the Spiritualist-Swedenborgian

debates of the 1850's. Stuart represented the Academy point of view

that Swedenborg had promised no new revelations to follow his and

consequently Swedenborg's system was complete. Holcombe stood

for internal revelation through the opening of man's celestial sense

and naturally he interpreted Swedenborg as a great but fallible teacher?6

In essence the two groups were arguing whether or not truth was

learned through "external instruction through the Word and the

Writings" or by the "interior way. ,,77 Holcombe's position lost out

in an intense struggle in the 1880' s and before his death in 1893

Holcombe had moved farther left in the New Church. He was part of

a small group which advocated the power of thought to control disease

and was' called the Mind-Cure movement. 78

Holcombe differed with the Academy on Homeopathy as well

as Swedenborg. The eminent doctor could not regard the work of

76william HOlcombe to John Goddard, June 14, 1881, AA.

77New Church Life, III, No. 5 (1883), 70-74; Ill, No. 8

(1883). 122-126; VI, No. 8 (1886), 113-116.

78wllliam Holcombe, The Power of Thought in the Production

and Cure of Disease (Chicago: Purdy Publishing Company, 1890);
21 pp. For a discussion of Mind-Cure and its relationship to Sweden­
borgianism and New Thought see C. Alan Anderson, "Horatio W.
Dresser and the Philosophy of New Thought" (unpublished dissertation,
Boston University, 1963). Anderson stresses the influence of Warren
F. Evans on Dresser, but Holcombe was part of the same movement
to which Evans belonged.
 411

Hahnemann as infallible either, even though he left no doubt that he

regarded Swedenborgianism and Homeopathy as the present ultimates

in their respective fields. The Academy in the late nineteenth

century elevated Homeopathy to such lofty heights that it appeared

to be a permanent graft into New Church theology, not as an optional

belief but as an essential of one's faith. This was a danger that some

New Churchmen had perceived in the early 1850' s but the fusion of

the two systems took place in spit"e of the warnings of men like

Constantine Hering. 79

The appeal of Homeopathy for New Churchmen lay partly in

the reason the new medical system appealed generally to intelligent

Americans in the ante bellum period.

The way in which homeopathy dealt with the relationship

of matter and spirit is at once its most confusing and
important aspect. The confusion arises from the lack of
precision wi th which Hahnemann's followers described
vitality; the importance comes from the fact that homeo­
pathy appealed to a wide segment of the American intel­
ligentsia in the forties, not in spite of its vagueness but
because of it. Disillusionment with the tidy categories of
eighteenth-century empiricism, nurtured by the influx of
German idealistic philosophy, was creating a desire for a
more profound approach to the mind-body problem. Indica­
tive of this yearning was the tendency of people drawn to
homeopathy to espouse also mesmerism and phrenology,
into which they read a far greater spiritual content than
either possessed. 80

79J. Adams AlIen to J. B. Niles, January 19, 1852, Photo­

copies of Niles Mss., SSRA. DeCharms, Defence, pp. 8-9 includes
a letter from Hering to Bush, January 26, 1851.
SOKett, Formation, pp. 141-142.
 412

Wide reading in Swedenborgian and Homeopathic literature

leaves no doubt that many former Mesmerists and Phrenologists

supported both movements, and no doubt that Swedenborgianism and

Homeopathy shared basic vague assumptions. Both were dissatisfied

with the mechanistic universe of materialistic science which appeared

to be careening chaotically out of man's control. They desired a more

predictable universe based on a unified concept of life, taking into

account spirit and matter. But Spiritualists and Transcendentalists

probably paid allegiance to the same vague presuppositions without

becoming so closely identified with Homeopathy.

Homeopathy and Swedenborgianism complemented each other

superbly. The affinity of their basic tenets leads one to wonder just

what influence Swedenborg might have had on the formation of

Hahnemann's thought. A crucial factor in their mutual attractiveness

lies in the timing of the births of the two systems. New Churchmen

could easily be persuaded that Homeopathy was raised up by the Lord

as a complement to Swedenborg's philosophy. For their part Homeo­

paths were attracted to the New Church because it seemed to offer the

comprehensive religious framework which Homeopathy lacked. Men

in the nineteenth century still sought for a total view of life.

."
 CHAPTER XIII

REFORM OF THE MARRIAGE REIATIONSHIP

I have a Bride in Spirit Land,

Whose dark hair hangs in curls;

She's fairer than the female band,

That grace these lower worlds.

Her eyes of hazel hue have cast,

Far mote resplendent beams;

Than any orbs that ever passed,

Through mortals earthy dreams.

All the affections of her Will,

Are gentle as the Dove,

Designed a place in heaven to fill,

She symbolizes love.

The tie conjugial I ween,

Will bind us ever more;
. Not like mere mortals now are seen,
But those whom God adore.

We'll roam through realms of heav'nly space

. In one perpetual youth; .
Appear before our Father's face,
llke goodness. joined to truth. 1

ISimon Snyder Rathvon, "Autobiography" (unpublished Ms. ,

Lancaster County Hil;tori<:al Society, 18S2~1860), p. 167.

413
 414

Man has always found it dHficult to surmount the banality of

marriage. Simon Snyder Rathvon of Lancaster. Pennsylvania, was no

exception, but his Swedenborgian philosophy provided an escape from

2
the torment of his marriage in the person of a "Spirit-Bride. "

For many years I have entertained an inner thought about

just such a docile and loving being (perhaps .the wish
was father to the thought) and I fear that only such an
one can purify me and elevate me to .the realms of purest
perfect bliss. She is somewhere roaming in the world
etherial [sic] and perhaps also yet in the natural tene­
ment of clay. She may be a wife. a moth~r. a grand­
mother or only yet a mis s in teens. whoever she is, and
wherever she is. may we both be enabled patiently and
resignedly to bide the good time of our Lord in bringing
us together--and in th·e meantime may the Good Lord
vouchsafe me the moral strength fully toorego the
\ temptations of "the world. the flesh. and the Devil. ,,3

Rathvon's dreams of his Spirit-Bride. and the pages of his

autobiography. served as outlets for the frustrations of his married

2Ibid.• p. 22. According to William H. Dixon, Spiritual

Wives (Second ed.; London: Hurst and Blackett, 1868). pp. 187-188.
spiritual wifery was European in origin. even though its fullest devel­
opment came in the United States in movements such as Sh~,
Spiritu~lism, Mormonism, Perfectionism. and Free Love. He sees
Swedenborg as one of the earliest proponents of the concept that true
love between a married couple is eternal. Spiritualists went beyond
Swedenborgian propriety by suggesting that man could seek his
spiritual wife in the flesh. The Mormons, like the Swedenborgians.
believed in three types of marriage: (1) for time only. (2) for time
and eternity, and (3) for eternity enl}'. However, Swedenborg posited
that every man could have only one true mate; Mormonism had no
limits on the number of wives a man could have, on earth or in heaven.
See Kimball Young, Isn't One Wife Enough? (New York: Henry Holt
and Co.; 1954), pp. 31-32.

3Rathvon. "Autobiography." p. 168.

 415

life. Frequently he poured out the melancholy or bitterness which

swept over him on account of his marriage in his sacrosanct" Loose

Sheets." In fact, the autobiography may have been a result of marital

tension, for from the outset ~_thvon regards his marriage as an

unfort~ o~e and many pages are used to provide space for his

rumination of the effects of his error. From the start he longs for a

woman with whom he can share his jo s and interests.

Catharine Fryberger, Rathvon's wife, was a native of Lebanon

County, Pennsylvania. She was petite, dark, and industrious in a

domestic way. She fulfilled her wifely duties faithfully, especially

as a childbearer. The Rathvons had ten children, two of whom died

early in life. Her family was unbearable in Rathvon's opinion,and

her mother was the crux of the problem, for he saw her as an infant

intellectug.l1y. Rathvon blamed his mother-in-law for his Wife's lack

o~llectu~l curiosity and dearth of spiritual interest. Catharine's

~other was ~~rude, materialistically-minded gossip, a domineering

shrew who had not permitted a new idea to enter her head for forty

years or more. 4

A tense situation was exacerbated by the presence of Mrs.

Fryberger in the Rathvon home for a lengthy period of time. Finally on

January 16, 1857, the eighty-year-old scourge of the household died,

4 Ibid_., pp. 242, 246, 249.

 416

with- subsequent gUi~ngs ~y Rathvon. He had not prevented her

from making a trip to Illinois to visit another daughter because he

felt that -her presence any longer in his home would do permanent

damage to the welfare of his children. She died in Illinois and the

trip probably hastened her dea th. He hoped she would find more

happiness in the Spirit World than her ignorance had brought her

while in this life. 5

Catharine's boorish family only helped topple over a marriage

that had been built on a shifting foundation. The same was true of

the severe burden of supporting a large family. Rathvon labored long

and hard at his tailoring trade and had little opportunity to enjoy his
- --- ---
family or cultivate a satisfactory relationship with his wife. She

was bogged down in oppressive domestic drudgery, and even if she

had been interested in his hobbies of music, entomology, and writing

she could hardly have found the energy to share in them with her

husband.

Both Catharine's family and the burden of domestic duties

helped squeeze the joy out of the Rathvon marriage, but other crucial

barriers to harmony existed. Long after his marriage Rathvon learned

- ---
his wife's true age by accidentally uncovering her "taufschein" and

to his surprise she was considerably older than Catharine and her

SIbid., pp. 417. 418.

 417

mother had admitted when the marriage was performed.

----
The trick,

which illuminated the utter contempt for integrity characteristic of

the Frybergers, disgusted Rathvon. 6 However, even this rude

-----
awakening came after the marriage had 'died. In Rathvon's mind their

lack of compatibility was rooted in the religious gulf separating them.

Rathvon became a receiver of Swedenborg after his marriage.

and Catharine evinced absolutely no sympathy for his unintelligible

beliefs. Her background was Methodist, a group whose revivalistic

emphasis ran counter to Swedenborgian rationalism and gradualism.

Embarrassment was no doubt mutual, because he belonged to a

- - _.
persecuted sect and she to the Old Church. She wore her Methodism

lightly and Rathvon seemed more disturbed by her penchant for buying

meat on the Sabbath or by her influence over the children than by her

Methodist background. 7 His concern for the spiritual welfare of his

children is a strain running. throughout the autobiography.

In May, 1859, Rathvon "celebrated" his twenty-fifth wedding

anniversary by describing the past quarter-century as "a quarter of a

'century bound in uncongenial chains--upon no single day of which I

could sincerely' say, that I had done a good thing or a wise thing in

getting married under the circumstances and at the time I did. ,,8

6 Ibid., pp. 252-253.

7Ibid., pp. 207-208.

8Ibid., p. 698.

 418

Catharine was "a simple hard working. poking, scraping, saving

woman, .. who inherited a "strong n0E-progressing (if not retrogcading)

tendency" from her family.

- ----
her family thought solely in materialistic patterns.
-
She was nearly illiterate and again like

For example.

Rathvon noted that she seemed to prefer "a bauble better than a babe.,,9

He eve c:onsidered~at after bearfngten "babes" a "bauble" might

be a welcome sight.

Rathvon's intention had long since been diverted from

pleasing his wife. How he longed for the opposite of Cathartne--a

young maiden of delicacy and sensitivity who was intell~ctually k=.:n

and spiritually discerning. a lovely companion devoted to him and

interested in him. His first visions of this "dream girl" were vague

but they were real enough to instill new purpose into"'his dull routine
/
-
..
of life. He set himself zealously to the task of .making himself worthy
10
of her. Some day, although not in this life. Rathvon would meet

her and love her eternally.

Finally in 1854 Rathvon saw the earthly representation of his

·Spirit-Bride." Suddenly he felt like "a boy" again. albeit a mature

"man-boy" for he was nearly twice the age of his future mate. With

sadness he realized afresh that the barriers to their union in this life

9 Ibid .

10Ibid.• pp. 167-168.

 419

were insurmountable but the dreams of her he could cherish for their

oWn sake. --
In addition_they.
-,
ke.pthim from marital
.
infidelity. 11

In the years that followed this vision where he recognized

his "Annie." Rathvon's dreams developed a streak of pathos.

I dreamed I had a visit from my "spirit Bride." • . .

I had ')ot seen her for a long time; and something had
transpired to make her sad. With the starting tears in
her large expressive eyes she confidingly reposed in
my arms when I bid her "come rest in this bosom my "
own stricken dear, " and poured the most soothing and
consoling words in to her willing ear. How fondly we
embraced each other, and how gently I wiped away her
limpid tears. 'It was no sensual amative embrace. It
was pure and spiritual and yet far above and more
exquisite than the merely natural. I sometimes_think
that these visits may be kindly youchsafed to gi.;e'
me a foretaste of celestial joy in order that I may be
encourageatOStruggIeon and render myself worthy of
a
such prize, ••" • Of all the works of art and nature
that I have gazed upon in this wide world. "although I
have seen many that were pretty. noble and maidenly,
yet I have seen none that sl1aadOws [Sic] forth the 'face
and form of ~he whom I meet in dreamland--I may say
that I have seenth-osE0"Nhom the world woulC: call
prettier. But in her there is a beauty that oozes forth
from the interiors of her mind, that captivates me,and
makes me ready to exclaim--"Perdition sieze my soul
how I love thee, and when I love thee not, chaos come
again. ,,12

The sadness of both Annie and Rathvon in his dreams stems

from his realization that they can never enjoy each other until after

death. On one occasion Rathvon envisioned the elegant home of Annie

~ ­

11Ibid., pp. 172,279.

12 Ibid ., p. 320.
 .420

bedecked in splendor for their wedding. The min{ster, the Rev.

Wil1iam Benade, waited patiently. The bride glowed with happiness.

Rathvon pleaded with her to understand that he had obligations he

could not ignore and she kindly promised to wait for him. 13 In other

dreams she would beckon him to come and he could not move, or she

would sit quietly weeping and he sat frozen to his chair unable to
14
console her.

The force of inertia which kept Rathvon from ending his

domestic misery had little to do with his wife, although he recognized

that his end~r:c:-.<:!.their unhappy relationship would aid his own

regeneration process. 15 His children proved to be a sturdy tie to

his present marriage. They even invaded his dreams, one time

walking into the room where he and Annie had met just as he was

about to respond to her indication that he should come to her. 16

Another very disturbing feature of his love for Annie was her age; she

was only fifteen and society would frown on their marriage.

As serious as all these barriers were, others existed which

were insurmountable. Annie was really Ann E. Kramph, born December

16, 1841, in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, to Frederic J. Kramph, Ra thvon , s

13Ibid. , pp. 484-485.

14 Ibid • , p. 675.

15Ibid. , p. 756.

16Ibid•• p. 677.
 421

best friend and his employer. Her step-mother had taken Kramph'.s

financial succe_ss and used it to elevate the family to an upper class

status in Lancaster society. Had Rathvon been willing to impinge

upon a friendship he would have run into a wall of status that would

have prevented his marriage to Annie. Rathvon contented himself with

dreams. Nothing in his autobiography suggests that in real life he

and" Annie carried on an affair. H~robably would have been ashamed

to reveal to her the sec~t of his love. and as long as she did not

know about his love she could not reject it. Rathvon's happiness lay

largely in that security.

All this detail about Rathvon's marriage and his Spirit Bride

may appear superfluous. but it is important for the insights it dis­

closes about what the Swedenborgians called the "conjugial,,17 relation­

ship. While Rathvon. and other New Churchmen who talked of Spirit-

Brides, were freque.!!.tly conservative on the question of divorce. seeing

it as an alternative only in cases of adultery. 18 these same men did

17The word "conjugial" is taken from Swedenborg's work

entitled Conjtigiai Love_. one of the most Widely-known of Swedenborg's
books outside the New Church. The frank discussion of what he called
"scortato "love scandalized manY-;;-on-Swedenborgians, e. g .• in the
famous Kramph WrU Ca~e of the early twentieth century when portions
of the book wer~entered in the court as evidence that Swedenborgians
undermined public morality. The word conjugial refers to the true,
spiritual. eternal bond or union between two minds as c'ontrasted with
conjugal love. ~ natural physical and emotional affection of the two
sexes.
IBRathvon, "Autobiography." p. 762. New Jerusalem Maga­
~ine. XLIII. No. 9 (1871), 647-648. Block, New Church, pp. 341-342.
 422

view marriage in a totally different light than most of society. Rathvon,

in a long letter to a brother who had just lost his wife through death,

advi~ed that ~is3emarriage be as soon as possible, for marriage was

vital to man's regeneration, and man could not experience total ful-

fillment without a mate.

A man is only half a perfect human being, and a woman

is the either half. The man represents the cold under-
standing, the hard intellectual principle; and the
woman the soft and yielding affections of the will
19

In spite of their tenacious defense of marriage as an institu-

110n the Swedenborgians who tried to inject a true spiritual principle

into the marriage relationship were grossly misunderstood by people

outside the New Church. Most Swedenborgians did want to reform

marriagJLb~p..!iftingthe role of women in the complementary partner-

ship and stressing the eternity of true conjugial marriages, but in the

eyes of the public the Swedenborgians were lumped with the Mormons,

the Perfectionists, the Spiritualists, and various types of socialists.

All of these groups were guilty of "free love. "

Most of the commentators of society who worried about "free-

love" or the "anti-marriage" ~ovementElamed socialism for unde~ing

arriage. The specific, spectacular representation of it, whether

19Rathvon, "Autobiography," p. 749. See also pp. 751-758.

r

423

Mormonism or something else, was secondary. 20 The real culprits

were usually not the American founders of cultic, free love movements
__ r­
llk '--'--_ _ - Smith, I A. J. Davis, .--li
Joseph or Albert
_ Brisbane, but degraded

Europeans such as Robert Owen, Charles Fourier, and Emanuel

Swedenborg.

Opinion varied on Swedenborg's responsibility for encouraging

free love. He did teach tha t spiritual compatibili ty outweighed legal

ties in determining a true marriage, but in this present life Sweden­

~g advocated monogomy as the preferred condition for man. As a

writer for Littell's Living Age explained the situation, Swedenborg

should not be faulted for the failure of his followers to keep his pre­

cepts. 21~n Eu;>writer of a lengthy treatise entitled Free Love

and Its Votaries; Q[, American Socialism UnmSisked, disagreed with

this moderate view of Swedenborg. He blamed Swedenborg and his

New Church disciples for providing the ideas which gave rise to

Spiritualism, and in his mind no group was any more guilty of under­

20 John B. Ellis, free Love and Its V~taries; or, American

Socialism Unmasked (New York: U. S. Publishing Co., 1870), 507 pp.
Ell1s did concentrate on attacking the morality of the Oneida Com­
munity. New Jerusalem Magazine, XXVIII, No. 4 (1855), 236-242.
"Free Love System," Littell's Living ~ Second series, X, No. 592
(1855), 815-820.

21Living Age, X, No. 592 (1855), 818.

22Ell1s, Free Love, pp. 405-406, 425.

 424

Placing the origin of the anti-marriage movement in the minds

of European socialists did absolve American culture from the stigma

of having given birth to such a horrible child, but the defenders of

marriage were not about to allow American promoters to escape their

wrath. J;;.llis .lasted nearly every leader of women's rights or social­

ism in America prior to 1870 but he singled out John Humphrey Noyes

and 'the Oneida Community. Oneida was subversive of morality,

marriage, and social order. In his opinion the community should be

overthrown because it threatened society and degraded women and

children. 23

Many people did identify the anti -marriage movement wi th

women's rights and the basis for such an identification did exist.

Foc example, Oneida maintained marriage but of a complex variety

which bore little resemblance to the marriage known in society gen­

erally. and its definition of marriage was built on a new concept of

women. On the other hand, a significant number of American

feminists sympathized with the religious and socialist groups which

. 24
were accused of advocating free love. Some of these feminists

were anti-marriage but not because they favored free love. They may

have deplored the bondage of contemporary marriages or refused to

23 Ibid., pp. 140-141, 208 ff., 334-335.

24Robert E. RiegeL Ameri::an Feminists (paper ed.; Lawrence,

Kansas: The University Press of Kansas, 1968 [1963]), pp. 190-191.
 425

marry because it would distract them from devoting full tim':! to the
\
struggle for women's rights. A few had reacted so far against male
-1
dominance that they were now "anti-man." In short, while many

feminists were anti-marriage for various reasons, 25 they did not

promote free-love.

Whether the religious and socialistic groups were as innocent

of the taint of free love as the feminists is doubtful, although a fair

appraisal of the question must wait more objective research than men

like John Ellis were willing to conduct. Spiritualism was notoriously

lax in upholding pennanent monogamy but even its leaders and

periodicals never advocated free love. Part of the problem is the

definition of free love. To the majority of society anything but per­

manent monogamous marriage was free love. To the ~.?e

reformers that was slavery, so they redefined marriage, usually to

accentuate the internal or spiritual ties between man and wife over

the external attachments. For the reformers free love meant prostitu­

tion. Naturally they recoiled against such an identification, for

while the reform efforts frequently had prostitution in mind they hoped

to wipe out that great social evil through marriage reform, not

encourage it.

Since Swedenborgians were part of the overall movement in

nineteenth century America endeavoring to elevate women and marriage,

25For a summary of these reasons see ibid.. pp. 193-195.

 426

their identification with "free love and its votaries" is understand­

able. But the Swedenborgians generally refused to recognize that they

were part of a greater movement. and they adamantly disclaimed any

sympathy for free love. 26 They believed their concept of marriage

was unique. and of course superior to that of any of the other marriage

refonn groups. The same held for their view of women. so with a few

exceptions. 27 Swedenborgians shied away from the organized women's

rights movement.

Before 1870 the woman's place in the New Church was not

clearly defined. but Swedenborgians were agreed that men and women

were not equal. New Churchmen paid scant attention to the physical

differences between men and women; these were but manifestations

of cfUcial spiritual differences. The distinctions between men and

women stemmed from their spirits. Christianity generally acc.epted

as fact the belief that spirit was sexle~s and marriage between sexes

26Thomas Worcester. anxious to prevent public rumor from

becoming reality in the New Church, accused Henry Weller, one of
the most liberal Swedenborgian marriage reformers. of complicity in
the free love movement. Weller. of course. denied it. Crisis. IV.
N. 15 (1856). 232. In the same year rumors circulated that George
Bush was preaching free love to New Churchmen in Brooklyn. S. S.
Carpenter to George Bush. April 8. 1856, Bush Letterbooks. XVIII
(1855-1856). SSRA.

27 Reigel. Feminists. p. 190. Margaret Fuller. Charlotte

Gilman. Harriet Hunt. and Lydia Maria Child were the most prominent
feminists who took Swedenborgianism somewhat seriously.
 427

would end at death. Swedenborgians posited that spirits had sex

and sex was eternal. 28 .

Sexual differentiation of spirit or mind allowed the Sweden­

borgian to assert that men and women were "equal, but.not aHke. "

This phrase meant the sexes were not equal as the reform-ers supposed,

that is identical except physically, but they were two equal halves

of one whole. The two sexes were equally useful and excellent in

their separate ways, and such a complementary q.rrangement prevented

rivalry and disharmony. Man represented intellect (understanding)

and women affection (will) and each was superior to the other in

those dominant qualities. 29 Identical qualities in both men and

women would make a true conjugial relationship between men and

women impossible. 30

This position that the sexes were equal but not identical,

and that each_sex excelled in certain functions which did not overlap,

could provide for a very ambiguous attitude toward women's rights.

28 New Terusalem MagaZine, Ill, No. 7 (1830), 218. Wood­

bury Fernald, God in His Providence (third ed.; Boston: Otis Clapp;
New York: D. Appleton and Co., 1860 [1859]), pp. 390, 397.

29wllliam Hayden to George Bush, November 21, 1853, Bush

Letterbooks, XII (1852-1854), SSRA. Sabin Hough, "The Marriage
Relation, " The ~ of the New Jerusalem, I, No. 10 (1854), New
York Tract Series, No. 34, 4-5. ~ [erusalem Magazine, }()(XV,
No. 4 (1862), 195-199.

30Maskell M. Carl!, "The Modern 'Woman's Movement,'"

!'!.ew Church Repository, VI. No. 9 (1853). 403.
 428
- "./ --::::-.y
Most Swedenborgians probably agreed that m~~g..:. was legal slavery

~..RrQ.§!!!-~on, and they desired to expand female opportunities for

usefulness. How far that expansion should go was the question which

sparked debate. The matter of woman's suffrage was a subject which

stretched liberal Swedenborgians to their limit.

Charle~ He~ the Swedenborgian Fourierist, in his book

The True Organization of the New Church, saw the elevation of female

status as one of mankind's inescapable duties. His cardinal principle

_in regard to women read that "woman must be allowed to regulate her

existence. " But Hempel should have qualified existence with the

word married. He was not tempted to give women free reign politically.

Wha t I claim for woman, is not a political privilege, a

sea t in Congress, the right to poll her vote or such like
usages, which man would be foolish to grant, and which
he could not grant without debasing still more the charac-
ter of woman, withOUtlessening, by this contact with
t e pestiferous miasm of political strife, the respect
which he is instinctively, not politically, led to bestow
upon her; without increasing to a fearful extent the
moral degradation of therace. What I claim for woman
is the free expansion of her natural gifts, the independent
exercise of her mind, the spontaneous manHestation of
her sentiments; what I claim for woman is the enjoyment
of her love, without which woman's life is a blank. It js
time that woman should be elevated to that social grandeur
for wl:ich she is ever panting, and which man, in obed~ence
to his noble instincts, cannot fail in realizing for her. 1

Very few Swedenborgians seemed inclined to support woman's

suffrage before the Civil War, but as with abolitionism it did have its

31Hempel, True Organization, p. 213.

 429

New Chl,U'ch adherents. Alexander Wilder hesitated to be too dogmatic

but he felt that if women were granted the legal rights they deserved,

and were taxed, then they must also be given the vote or they would

be little better than serfs. 32

Rather than wholehe-.rtedly support the women's rights move­

ment which they believed to be founded on a false conception of

human equality, Swedenborgians preferred to blaze their own reform

path. In their scheme of things marriage reform was the cornerstone

of all reform, the starting point of their attempt to sway the world to

a Swedenborgian world-view. True marriage was a primary means to

""'­

the regeneration of individuals and the perfectability of the human

race, for man was not even ~ total person let alone a perfect v.-.e

without his complemen~ 33

Marriage was of course a means of populating the earth but

Swedenborgians saw more purpose to marriage than procreation. It

was an institution designed to be mutually beneficial for parents and

children, individuals and society. Since Swedenborgians believed

that man inherited evil tendencies, a proper marriage was crucial for

preventing the transmission of undesirable traits. A child inherited

32Alexander Wilder, '''l"he Modem Women's Rights Move­

ment, " New Church Repository, VI, No. 10 (1853). 461.

33Z1na Hyde, "Marriage, or Conjugial Life,'" New Ierusalem

Magazine, XXIV, No. 9 (1851). 361; XXIV, No. 10 (1853). 442.
 430

spiritual qualities as well as physical characteristics from his parents,

so the excellence of both parents was necessary to insure the effective­

ness of education and regeneration after the child was born. 34 .The

theory reflected the thinking that reform after a child was born was

relatively fruitless compared to the creation of a properly-formed new

life.

New Churchmen took evil more seriously than many of their

perfectionist peers in the ante bellum period, but to them evil was

relative good. Consequently evil could be eradicated in time if each

generation took care to promote the refinement of human nature through

breeding, education, regeneration and other progressive measures. 35

Perfected humanity would be "impregnable to evil. ,,36 The key to this

human purification process was marriage based on "spiritual con­

geniality. ,,37

34 Ri c;hard DeCharms, "Why Do Children of New-Church

Parents So Often Grow Up Out of ttje New Church?" Precursor, 1, No.
10 (1837). 174-176. Woodbury M. Fernald, 8. View at the Founda­
tions: Q[, First Causes of Character, as Operative Before J2.irth, from
Hereditary and Spiritual Sources (Boston: William V. Spencer, 1865).
pp. 26, 31.

35Fernald, Foundations. pp. 51-52.

36 Ibid ., p. 99.

37 Ib1d., pp. 58, 61, 203, 210. Joseph Pettee, "The Union.
of Goodness and Truth in the Marriage Relation, " New Jerusalem
Magazine, XXXV, No. 12 (1863). 578-581. This article is a Report of
the Committee of Ministers to the Massachusetts Association of the
New Church. The Academy was generally the most strict of the three
New Church groups about both partners of a marriage being members of
a New Church society.
 431

Marriage was thus a means of imparting to children the influ­

ence of a combined life of goodness. The parents fought the evils of

life together and the quality of their regenerative progress passed to

the offspring. Then after childbirth the parents tried to surround the

. child with the type environment designed t,) encourage the development

of good and hinder the influence of evil. 38 Education, friends, job

associations, and of course the choice of a life mate provided parents

with further opportunities to aid in the regeneration of their progeny.

The education of New Church children naturally became an important

consideration to Swedenborgians early in their history. 39

Viewed in such light marriage served the purpose of popu­

lating the earth with angels of light rather than the demons of darkness

which the Christian doctrine of original sin created. But marriage

served the parents as well, if the union was a true one.

The marriage relation, while affording the highest means

for drawing out and strengthening the good affections,
appeals also to the best and most effectual motives for
controlling the evil propensities. Its obligations· and
duties require a constant denial of selfish gratification

38Hough, "Marriage Relation,"~, 11. Little,Auto­

biography of .9.. New Churchman, p. 15. Hyde, "Conjugial Life," New
Jerusalem Magazine, XXIV, No. 10 (1851), 412.

39The history of New Church education has been ably

surveyed by Richard R. Gladish in the following three volumes: (1)
"A History of the Academy of the New Church." (2) "A History of New
Church Education, " Sections I and n. All three volumes have been
mimeographed by General Church Religious Lessons, Bryn Athyn,
Pennsylvania, 1967-1968.
 432

and evll temper~ for the sake of promoting the welfare

and happiness of the husband ar.d the wife. It thus
affords the very best opportunity that is ever given
to mortals. for mutually aiding each other in preparing
for a life in heaven. 40

A true conjugial relationship. as the SwedeT!borgians denoted

it. continued after death. 41 A false union, a mere conjugal marriage.

dissolved in the face of death, and in the Spirit World men and women

were reunited with more compatible partners. No soul was born with­

out a partner of the opposite sex being created also, so even single

men and women on earth would be mated in eternity. Such a concept

of marriage explains why unhappy men like Simon Rathvon might long

to meet their Spirit-Bride in this life. No responsible New Church

minister ever openly advocated the cultivation of a Spirit-Bride rela­

tionship except Thomas Lake Harris, but the practice did exist and

at times it led to more explicit affairs than the one carried on secretly

by Rathvon in his autobiOgraphy.42 The whole theory of Spirit-Brides

40Hough, "Marriage Relation, " Herald, 12.

41Ibid.

42Alexander Wilder was accused of living with an earthly

representation of his Spirit-Bride in the mid-1850's while he forced
his wife to be their se'rvant. Sampson Reed, ·"The Crisis, " New
Terusalem Magaz.ine, XXVIII, No. 10 (1856), 516-522. Dr. A. L.
Rohrig. friend of George Bush. commented in 1856 that his faith in
the New Church was being eroded by the behavior of New Church
people in the West. He was especially offended by their "queer and
sinful notions in regard to Spiritual wives." Rohrig to Bush. October
25, 1856, Bush Letterbooks, XIX (1856-1858), SS RA.
 433

was enough to repulse most orthodox Christians and lead them t'O

identify Swedenborgianism with free love. The unfortunate incidents

involving overzealous New Churchmen simply added coals to an

already hot fire.

As has been noted, New Churchmen were quick to disclaim

any association with free love or the anti-marriage movement,

especially if that association happened to be part of the Swedenbol"g­

ian community. For this reason Henry Weller bore the brunt of New

Church efforts to avoid any taint of free love. His former affiliation

with Spiritualism made him doubly suspect. For example, an article

in the Boston Advertiser by a New Churchman of the General Conven­

tion assumed Weller' 5 guilt in regard to free love and tried to write

him out of the New Church entirely.

He [Weller] was formerly a Swedenborgian minister, but

latterly has become deeply immersed in what ·some call
Spiritualism, but what I call infernalism. And when it
became known to the General Convention of the New
Church, that he had taken this course, and that he was
teaching and acting according to it, his name was struck
from the list of ministers.

Gentlemen, I have been a member of the New Church for

nearly forty years; I have been a teacher of its doctrines
in this city for thirty-seven years; and during all this
time I have been extensively acquainted with my spiritual
brethren in all parts of this country, and with many in
Europe, and yet I have never known or heard of anyone
in the church who looked upon the anti-marriage senti­
ments referred to with any favor; nay. I have never
known anyone, who would not look upon them with as
 '.

434

.much disfavor and abhorence as any persOn in this

commuiuty.43

While the article was signed "W~ " " the identity of the author

was apparent· to Weller and anyone else acquainted with New Church

history. Thomas Worcester penned the indktment of Weller and he

was correct that New Church people had no sympathy for anti-marriage

sentiments. He misjudged Weller. Like other Swedenborgians Henry

Weller defended th~ity of marriage for this life and eternity,

even though he thought the majority of present marriages were false. 44

The true conjugial marriage of two spirits internally in the

Lord was the exception in society, argued Weller. If they were

normative the anti-marriage movement, polygamy, comple~ marriage,

an~ the women's rights movement would never have grown so rapidly

because the ground of discontent for such movements would not have

be~n present. 45 Weller realized that old m~al foundations were

crumbling in th"e mid-nineteenth century; the old faiths of men had

lost their appeal. The ferment of the time was the natural confusion 1

of a people seeking new roots. Weller believed he had the new faith

which could reinstate moral stability, a faith built on reason rather

46
than naked authority.

43CriSis, IV, No. 15 (1856), 234.

44Crisis, n, No. 12 (1853), 92.

45Ibid.

46Crisis, n. No. 11 (1853), 84.

 435
\
When this new faith triumphed, society would be ordered on

principles superior to those which had supported the status quo, and

the bedrock precept of the new society would be the conjugial rela­

tionship. Marriage reform must precede and undergird all other

efforts to remake man's life. 47 Naturally Weller regarded attempts

to reverse the process as naive, but he understood the urge to reform

which prompted them. He criticized the Convention tendency to

denounce anything new with a sweeping condemnation that ignored

any merit the reform might have. 48 Weller himself kept aloof from

the organized women's rights movement but he tried to sift the accept­

able from the unacceptable and support what he could in his magazine,

the Crisis. He followed the same procedure with other reforms.

In the matter of women's rights Weller endorsed all activity

geared toward elevating women intellectually. 49 No academic subject

should be closed to female scrutiny. Yet he could not accept the

notion that woman should be a separate, independent being with the

freedom to compete equally with men in careers such as medicine. He

saw medicine as an open field for women but he refused to grant her

47
Ibid., p. 85. Crisis, n, No. 9 (1853), 68. Crisis, n,
No. 12 (1851), 93.

48Crisis. n. No. 9 (1853), 68.

49.Qllill, V. No. 17 (1856), 265. For a debate on this very

issue see the New Church Repository, VIII, No. 4 (1855), 186; VIII,
No. 10 (1855), 461-465; VIII, No. 11 (1855), 530.
 436
~ ~
the freedom to practice independently of male guidance. Such an

idea was -repulsive to our perceptions of the true female character... SO

As important as women's rights of a limited sort were to

WeBer. he maintained the priority of a n'ew concept of marriage. How­

ever. a disturbing question arose in'regard to true marriage. Could

the partners ever know if the marriage was internally sealed for

eternity; if so was man free to dissolve one relationship to seek for

a purer one? Also related was the matter of Spirit-Brides. Weller

was adamant on this point.

But it is not until the celestial plane is opened. in which

the Lord reigns supreme in the thoughts and the affections.
and love is the predominant quality of the spirit; that
open. known and acknowledged conjugial unions can
exist. SI

Actually. WeBer believed that such true marriages were

exceedingly rare. Since they were rare, and one could not know for

sure if he had one. WeBer saw no hindrance to remarriage. 52 This

did not mean he encouraged divorce.

" External marriage /'served as a

SOCriSiS. V. No. 17 (1856). 265.

SICrisis. n. No. 12 (1853). 93. Thomas Lake H",rris sur­

mounted this qualification by claiming..!h.2Lh!s celestial sense had
been op~~d. While Harris publicly proclaimed contact with his
Spirit-Bride he and his followers tended toward celibacy rather than
free love.

S2Henry Weller, Marriage.Q!! J:arth; Marriage in Heaven;

Troubles of Human Life; Three Discourses Delivered Before the New
Church Society and Congregation of Grand Rapids, Michiga,n (n. p. :
Jacob Barnes and Co•• 1849). p. 16.
"means of transition to a purer form of marital union and had to'be

preserved. True it was a corrupt institution but it was the only way

to restrain the unregenerate. Natural marriage also aided the regen­

era~e man to destroy self-love, a necessary condition for the realiza­

tion of true conjugial love. 53

Henry Weller illustrates the fact that Swedenborgians could

be marriage reformers of a moderate type without being ~ce

reformers. Probably the only New Churchman to speak publicly on

an easing of divorce restrictions was Timothy Shay Arthur, the

r-->

popular Philadelphia novelist. Arthur was cautious but his work is

important because he was probably the first American novelist to

"flaunt sentimental taboos by writing extensively and analytically

about divorce. ,,54

Arthur 'held the traditional New Church view of the equality

of the sexes. In ~ to Young Women he rails at the "intellectual

ladies" and their "perniciou!; views" that see only the physical

differences between men and women. 55 Arthur insisted on a crucial

mental distinction. Of the two major faculties of the mind, will and

53"Marriage and Divorce, " Crisis, VII, No. 19 (1858),

149-150. This article is a reprint from Thomas Lake Harris' Herald

of Light.

54Warren Fren'ch, "Timothy Shay Arthur's Divorce Fiction,"

The University of Texas Studies in English, XXXIll (1954), 90.

55Timothy Shay Art,hur. Advice to Young Ladies on Their

Duties and Conduct in Li'fe (Boston: Philips and Sampson, 1848),

p. 125.
 438

understanding, will dominated in women and understanding in men.

Affection originated in the will and thus its corresponding moral quality,

goodness, was also dominant in women. Understanding, intellect, or

truth distinguished men. Real equality for the sexes was the "equal

right of both to be useful and happy in the particular spheres for which

God created them. "56

His Swedenborgian philosophy permitted Arthur to regard

women as superior to men in the moral" sphere." In practice in

society women were not given their due and were tre~ted as inferior. 57

Women fared badly in the marriage relationship because they had no •

legal rtghts and the same was true of employment. Job opportunities

were scarce and competition keen. Since the women had no legal

protection they had no recourse when cheated out of wages. Prostitu­

lion naturally proved to be a more reliable source of income in some

cases than regular employment.

-S-.
Caught in the marriage from which there was no escape was
. -s- ~
an experience parallel to that of being driven·to the brothel, except

that the former was legal prostitution in the eyes of the feminists.

From 1840 to 1860 numerous solutions were proposed to deal with the
~ '1
serious social problems of prostitution and marital bondage. Societies

56Ibid., pp. 127-131. The quote is taken from p. 126.

57E. Douglas Branch, The Sentimental Years,. 1836-1860

(New York: D. Appleton-Century Co., 1934), p. 266.
 439

of the benevolent variety were established to rescue the fallen

maidens from sin and feminists fought to expand the legal rights of

women. Others saw the expansion of economic opportunity as the

key to rend~r1ng prostitution unattractive to destitute women. John

Humphrey Noyes conjured up a unique solution which made prostitu­

tion unnecessary. 58

Timothy Shay Arthur's answer to prostitution and marital

_ $­
bondage lay in the Swedenborgian concept of marriage. but Arthur

realized that ages might ~ss until that view prevailed. He was

prepared to be'realistic. His first mention of divorce in his novels

appears in love in High Life (1849), a work which was published the

year society wa s shocked by Pierce Butler's divorce of actres s

Fanny Kemble. 59 ' Before 1858 Arthur never sanctioned divorce per se.

but he did permit his characters to remarry their original mate after

a separation or divorce.

The Hand but Not the Heart (1858) bucked the prevailing

norms of society with the marriage of a divorcee to a new partner.

but only after the woman's first husba~d had died. 60 In the 1860' s

Arthur went so far as to permit divorce for incompatibility and

58 '
Ibid•• p. 356.

59French. "Divorce." Studies in English, XXXIII (1954), 91.

6Orbid •• p. 93.
 440
61
infidelity. He never yielded on the principle that di~e was

wrong, but unlike orthodox Christians Arthur saw evU as relative. In

the case of marriage a lesser evil (di~e) might be allowed to pre-'

vent a greater evil (hereditary dama.ge to children, for example).

Neve.rtheless, Arthur preferred to see laws strict on ~ce.

• Arthur interpreted his role in life to be that of encouraging

young men and women to seek cO:::Jpatible marriages. This way the

nasty question of divorce could be avoided. In two do-it-yourself

manuals Arthur presented his "advice" on personal habits and court­

ship to both young men and women. 62 In general they accorded with

the Victorian morality prevalent in the ante bellum period, with one

important difference from similar orthodox literature on the subject.

Arthur stressed the role of "amusements" in the proper development

of young people. He, and other SW'edenborgians, were not moral

legalists. 63

6I Ibid ., pp. 93, 95.

62Arthur , Advice to Youna Lcdie~, 204 pp. -', Advice

to Young Men on Their Duties and Conduct in Life (Boston: Philips,
Sampson and Co., 1852), 172 pp.

63Swedenborgians encouraged dancing {n partic~lar to the

offense of many Christians. See T. S. Arthur, "The Maiden, " The
Three Eras of ~ Woman's Life (Phila'Clelphia: J. W. Bradley, 1857),'
pp. 46-48. For the Boston philosophy on amusements see Sampson
Reed, New Church Pleasures (Boston: Otis Clapp, 1838). 14 pp., a
reprint from the New Jerusalem M~::azine, XI (1837-1838). 188-20!.
See also Sabin Hough, The Necessity and Right Use of Amusements
(Columbus, Ohio: W. Siebert, 18-l8) , 24 pp.
 441
Arthur's perfect, heroine modestly graces the pages of his

The Three Eras of ~ Woman's Ufe. Her name was Anna Lee. Anna

wisely spurns a wealthy merchant's son who smokes, drinks, and

plays whist for money. -Her father thinks she is crazy and pleads her

reconsideration, but her mother realized that Anna's purity had been

repulsed by the crudeness of her male suitor. Anna was so sensitive

to moral quality as the odor of a rose might have been to someone

else's sense of smell. 64 She finally latched on to a struggling junior

partner'in a mercantile firm, young James Hartley. With no family

ties or inherited wealth James on his own gained an education, won

his firm i s respect, and a major promotion. When a comparison of

, 65
moral "affinities" tests positively, they marry.

The stress on moral compatibility stemmed from Arthur's

effort to elevate marriage above the natural plane. By extolling the

home, mothers, and sisters; by portraying women as pure and noble;

.------­
Arthur encouraged men to identify their women with mothers and

sisters. rnTrue " love was pure, beautiful, and spiritual. Best 0f all,

this kind 0 i~ve was waiting for all men and women if they

would just listen and receive the teachings of Emanuel Swedenborg

and the New Church. Given freedom to flow through regenerate men

64Arthur. "Maiden," Three Eras, p. 74.

65 Ibid., pp. llS, 125, 150-151.

'

 442

true conjugial love would bring harmony and happiness to mankind.

The pro'gress to perfection would perhaps be slow, but it was inevi­

table. And at least before the Civil War, Arthur and certain other

Swedenborgians, especially Academy men and Free Spirits, seemed

to sense that the day of glory might be closer than the more conserva­

tive Orthodox Convention men dared to hope.

 CHAPTER XIV

CRISIS OF CONSCIENCE: THE CIVIL WAR

The freedom of conscience enjoyed by New Churchmen per­

mUted an open discussion on the nature of American society in the

1840' sand 1850' s. Debates over specific reforms and the means of

implementing desired changes figured prominently in the dialogue of

the Swedenborgian community. Generally Swedenborgians favored

the current political and economic development of the United States,

but they hoped to infuse a new spirit into the operation of American
~ . r--..,;J.­
~J'!I and democracy to eliminate the human waste of excessive

economic and political competition. Religion, medicine, marriage,

and certain social habits and attitudes needed more radical trans­

formation.

The means to a sweeping reform of American life depended

on one's theory of social change. Generally Swedenborgians felt that

change was an evolutionary progression toward ultimate perfection and

naturally they spurned revolutionary or immediatist tactics. But at

least until 1870 a significant number of Swedenborgians believed that

/" ,
the triumph of their world-v!.ew lay in the immediate future. These

men supported all the broad reform efforts in the fields of medicine,

443
 444

education, and marriage as well as specific reform movements, and

-a few of them were immediatists.

Regardless of their convi,ctions as to when Swedenborgianism

would triumph, most New Churchmen talked and wrote mO,re about

reform than they tried to carry out in action. Nevertheles s before

~--

1860 a sprinkling of Swedenborgians could be found on the front ~es

of all the major reform movements of the period. 1 Another feature of.

New Church reform thinking was its separatism. Swedenborgians of

~

the Academy and Orthodox Convention camps differed on the timing

of New Church victory but both felt that the Church must be kept pure
cf
--- --
from non-Swederiborgian influences. This separatist attitude hindered

the cooperation of refor.!!!-minded Swedenborgians and reformers of

other backgrounds./The Free Spirits accepted allies in the cause of

!
----/
reform, and they 'were as a group the most active reformers in the

Swedenborgian community, but even they chose friends warily.

Since ~ one configuration of principles governing reform

held absolute sway in the New Church. Swederiborgians did exercise

freely their penchant for reform~ But even befOre 1860 they generally

lent more energy to broad reforms in education, medicine, religion,

1The following quotation from Armytage, Heavens Below,

p. 277 is an exaggeration: ". • • Swedenborgi~sm was th.e gospel
for AmeriS;a_ social refQLmers of every colour, from the anti-slavery
crusad~s to the German communitarianSOf Ohio and Iowa." The
source of this exaggeration is Hine, Utopian Colonies, p. 14.
 445

and family life than to specific reforms like temperance or slavery.

The latter were piecemeal reforms which did not strike at the ruling

spirit of the age.

Temperance, especially the emphasis on total abstinence,

offended many Swedenborgians. They regarded it as a legalistic

device to infringe upon the personal liberty they guarded so jealously.

Yet the New Church sported two of the most influential temperance men
- - '\
in the country in Timothy Shay Arthur and Otis Cl~. Arthur wrote
~.
dozens of temperance novels and tales, including the most famous

piece of temperance literature in American history--Ten Nights in £.

Bar-Room (lB54). 2 0Us Clapp) druggist and New Church publisher

and distributor, helped to found and direct the Washingtonian Home

of Boston. This institution, founded in IB57, endeavored to reha­

bilitate a'lcoholics by helping them regain self-control. 3

Since temperance was regarded as a piecemeal reform it

gained no full hearing in the New Church press until J.fohn Elli~ forced

the issue in the lBBO' s. 4 Slavery was the only piecemeal reform to

ZTimothy Shay Arthur, Ten Nights in £. Bar-Room (John Harvard

Library edition; Cambridge, Massachusetts: Belknap Press of Harvard
University Press, 1964 [lB54]), 240 pp. This edition includes an
important introduction by Donald A. Koch.

3 0us Clapp, Prevention (Boston: Wright and Potter, lB72),

pp. 4, 7.

4Block, New Church, pp. 2BO H.

 446

win anything like. a systematic airing in New Church literature

between 1840-1870. Once again an unintimidated personality, in

this cas~, had to force the matter. As we have noted,

the comprehensive reforms such as communitarianism. Homeopathy,

and conjugial love t?Ok precedence both in the press and the lives

of the people. One of the most important. education. we have skipped

entirely because it is a study of its own.

Much that passed for,'refonTl ~n the United States in the pre­

.
war period was regarded as
/ ­
"pseudo-r:'f~" by New Churchmen. The

following quotation from the Messenger in August, 1853, reflects the

distinction Swedenborgians made between reform and "pseudo­

reform. "

By modern reform, we mean the attempts of the numerous

philanthropists of the day, to change the present condition
-c; ociety. yve regard it as a self-evident propositio""n,
that society ~tands in great need of reformation. Indeed.
none deny it; all admit it; and hence the numerous efforts
that are made to accomplish it.

Nevertheless. these reforms will amount to nothing unless

they are made to reach the root of the evil: and th-e rOOt
of the evil is a false religion, standing as the basis of a
false socie~ Henc~not only claim that the world
needsreformation; but first of all. the Church needs
refpjJ.Tlation; and whatTS-more;-- we claim tha~eds
positive renovation. Before the world can be reformed,
to any purpose. (fhe Church must be made new. . 5

SMessenger. I. No. 13 (1853), 196.

 447

True reform would of course come on the heels of acceptance of New

Church truth and most Swedenborgians were willing to concede that

the desired revolution in faith "cannot be effected in a moment. ,,6

~\
Shortly after the above article was published, <Henry Welle

of LaPorte. Indiana. traveled through the East to observe American

reform activity in person. Late in the year and into 1854 Weller

editorialized on his findings. He made one of the initial attempts in

:\ -::­
New Church literature to develop a theory of social change, starting

with the distinction between true and false reform.

The grand distinction between true and false Reform is,

that the one is from the inner to the outer, and begins
with the individual; but the other is from the outer:~nd
- begins with~ the world at large. 7

The importance of Weller's thought is that while trying to

avoid "the mania of external~ge" which he saw as characteristic

of Fourierism. he also repudiated the other extreme of individual

sovereignty. Freedom of the individual carried far enough could thwart

any external reform of society. Weller contended that true reform

"begins" with the individual but can only be true reform when accom­

panied by external reform as well.

Therefore we accord to these Reforms of the day, which

aim at the extirpation of vicious habits, a large measure

6 Ibid•• p. 197.

7Crisis. n, No. 10 (1853). 76.

or
448

of true and legitimate usefulness, working in

accordance with the Divine Providence. 8

rh true Swedenborgian style what was true of man was applicable to

society also, as Weller was quick to point out. Society was not in

the process of molting. The process of shedd!ng its skin of evil was

slow and gradual, but Weller was one of the Swedenborgian's who

believed the United States was in the throes of just such a crisis.

Victory might not come through violent revolution but triumph was

imminent.
"'­
Weller's theory sounded good, as did most N~~ch
r
pla~s, and if New Churchmen had followed their rhetoric they
~
would have been more deeply involved in reform activity than they

actually were. Less liberal Swedenborgians than Weller frequently

contented themselves with rhetoric only. They were not as certain

as he that "The Crisis" was at hand so they remained within the walls

of their religious fortress until the day of victory clearly dawned.

Outsiders jumped critically into this obvious gap between New

Church theory and practice•

. Henry Welle~ was sensitive to these barbs. rAdin Ball;u, by

. ,.-/

,no means hostile to Swedenborgianism, asserted that the New Church

was no better than the Old in showing to man a "more excellent way. "

He even challenged Weller directly.

8Ibid., p. 77.
 449

The Crisis says it "believes as firmly as any of the

most ardent reformers can do, that s c t~ergo
an entire change of structure." Very good. --We are
pJ.easea afSomuchOf a confessi;; ;;;i1Cerning the
I comprehensive question of Socialism. But we submit

\
that~.!dS:J! a_c;onfes~n ought to be backed u by-an
ear:nest.and consistent pra~cal endeavor to realize
J the needed change. g- .
r­
(W~ took up the challenge immediately and carried the

argument to Ballou's home ground, the commu!1itarian-experi!!!ent. He

pointed out the two New Church efforts in Fourierism at LeRaysvill;.;

and Canton that had failed, and maintained that some New Churchmen

had tried "practical" measures such as communitarianism. The

majority of New Churchrr.en were not indifferent to external reform

but Weller felt that the high ratio of publications to membership in

the New Church demonstrated the fact that Swedenborgians excelled

in other activities. He could not understand why the New Church

press and Swedenborgian thought could not complement and guide

. I .

the efforts of others' to rest~ure American ~ociety:10

In spite of the barbs of men like Adin Ballou, many talented

New Churchmen stuck to their editorial tasks. Others individually

supported reforms which seemed to partially alleviate particular

social problems. The New Church as an institution remained silent

--
on social questions.
//
Then suddenly in 1861 a holocaust broke upon

Ci'n,id.• IV. No. xn (l855), 185.

10Ibid•• p. 186~
 450

American society, for which the New Church and most New Churchmen

were not prepared. The Civil War presented a severe crisis to a

~

religious body which generally believed that the regeneration of

~ "/

individuafs had to precede social reform or at least accompany reform,

and that regeneration needed time to accomplish its goal. The sudden,

violent upheaval did not fit into the New Church time table.

In order to properly understand the impact of the Civil War on

toward war and civil government.

---
the New Church, one needs to examine the Swedenborgian attitude

In regard to war New Churchmen

--
definitely were not pacifists, although in the early nineteenth century

Thomas Newport played a prominent role in both the New Church and
11
the organized peace movement in Ohio. On the other hand wy

were not ~ongers either. The New Church attitude on war related

to their thinking on civil authority; they generally accepted the stand

of their national government with little question. 12

New Churchmen deprecated the prevalence of partisan

politics in government but the one institution in America which was

IlThomas Newport of New Lebanon, Ohio was a for!'!l-er

Quaker who was ordained a New Church minister in 1B1B. -if small
but important collection of his letters from IB1B to 1B25 in th~my
Archives reveals the in!ensity of his peace commitment.

12ror every generalization about New Churchmen there are

exceptions. Some Swedenborgians objected strongly to "Polk's War"
1ilT8'4a:-' See Samuel Hemple to E. A. Vickroy, January 12, 1B4B,
AA.
 '" 451

not criticized by New Churchmen was its republican form-£!.. govern­

ment. Structurally that government was sound. Bad men (usually

Democrats) might g.ain control temporarily and foster a sec~an

spirit, but civil libe[1:y in a re ubl1can form was considered to be a

gift of Providence which accompanied the entrance of the New Church

~
( on to the world stage. The Rev. 'John R. HibbaE9 stated it plainly in

I 1862.

the IDEA of our government came forth from the

Lord • • • through the civil plane of the minds of our
fathers, that it might be a new, free, civil government

- as a plane for the new andfree Jerusalemchur~

--- . . 13

Without doubt New Churchmen accepted the United States as

'the focal point for the working out of man's political and religious

) freedom.
---
The American Revolution was unquestionably a gian step
­
in the spiritual emancipation of man. 14 Such a view of one revolution
.

naturally le~ door open for future ones but the general rule of

thumb was support for the civil authority in power. Acquiescence did

not mean blind endorsement of every government action and attitude,

13John R. Hibbard, Causes and Uses of the Present Civil

War (n. p., n. p., 1862), p. 6.

14Richard DeCharms, The True Grounds of National Union

and Prosperity (Philadelphia: Barret and Tones, 1843). p. 25. William
Hayden, ~ aI., Centenary of the New Jerusalem. Twelve Addresses
in Commemoration of the LasJ Judg.ment in the Spiritual World, 1757.
Delivered Before the General Convention of the New Church at Its
Annual Session in Cincinnati 1857. (New York: General Convention
of the New Jerusalem Church, 859), p. 274.
 452

however. The New Church had a duty to hold up high ideals before

its government in order to insure activity which served the common

good. 15

Until the Civil War occurred New Church thinking on politics

remained rather vaguely defined. The war situation forced the New

Church to hammer out and refine attitudes many would have preferred

to leave hazy for the sake of freedom of conscience. The institutional

New Church was under grea t pressure to is sue pronouncements on

slavery, the South, and the Union cause. The result of the war for

the New Church took on momentous proportions, for the pressures of

... r
the war affected New Church thinking on refonn as well as politics.

The Free Spirits of the New Church, for example the Henry

Wellers and the Benjamin F. Barretts, interpreted the war as the last

bold effort of evil to prevent the triumph of Swedenborgian precepts .

. Weller in particular had glorious hopes for the end of the war. In

his mind the Lord had permitted a great evil (war) to be the instrument

for bringing the ultimate triumph of good. 16

Academy men matched WeBer's zeal for the Union cause.

While they could not accept the Free Spirit concept of what the New

~sCaleb Reed, Add~ess Delivered Before the Boston Society

of the New Jerusalem, .I!!!Y....!, 1837 (Boston: Otis Clapp, 1837). pp.

5. 9-10.

16Henry Weller's view of the Civil War as the final death

gasp of evil can be seen in the Crisis and the ~ Church Independent,
XI (November 1, 1863). 8; XIII, No. 1 (1865). 21; XVI, No. 7 (1868),
106.
 453

Church should be like as an institution, Academy men did see the

Civil War in the same light as the Free Spirits. Union victory. no

matter whe~!~:, ~eant the tr~umph of human freedom an_d Sweden­

borgi.an principles.
- - -
Lack of support for the Union was interpreted as
--
~son. To William Benade such an offense against the civil author­

ity was tantamount to heresy against God.

During the warfBenade led an offensive in the New Church

~
against ministers who refused to wholeheartedly support the Union

cause. The Rev. Sabin Hough provided one of his favorite targets ..

Hough was formerly of Columbus, Ohio. and before the war he had

roamed the New Church as a Free Spirit editor and minister. Very

early in his experience in the New Church Hough ran head-on into

Convention authority in his effort to establish a weekly paper under

Convention auspices. 17 Hough launched his own paper, the New

Church Herald. in Philadelphia, which took a moderate anti-Conven­

tion stance.

At least from 1856 Hough tried to relate to Free Spirits like

George Bush and B. F. Barrett. He did get along well enough with

Bush to receive the editorial responsibility for the New Church

Repository when Bush retired in 1857, but the ~per lost it3~ng

17Sabin Hough to George Bush, May 10, 1855, Bush Letter­

books, XVI (1855), SSRA. Sabin Hough, ~Special Messenger (Phila­
delphia: privately printed, 1856), 8 pp.
 454

edge under Hough, as Henry W~ller had predict~d it would. 18 Hough's

problem was his ability to antagonize all three major segments of the

New Church. He was at odds with Barrett. Weller, Fernald and Clapp
19
among the Free SPirits and he was not at home in the Convention

with either the Orthodox party or the Academy. ~e thought it a

scandal that Hough was even permitted to call himself a New Church

minister. 20

As tension mounted toward war in 1861 Hough took a position

-
publicly which infuriated Benade. He asserted that the only way to

avert war was to revise and amend the Constitution so as to "permit,

sanction and defend" the institution of slavery in every state and

----
territory o'f the United States. 21 Benade's wrath only simmered in
'

1863 when he heard that Hough had been arrested on charges of treason

in Columbus. Ohio. 22 He did not spare any sympathy for the imprisoned

Free Spirit.

18HenryWellerto George Bush. April 15, 1857. Bush Letter­

books. XIX (l856-185~ SS_R!'-. --~

19Chauncey Giles to William Benade, September 19, 1860.

AA. Sabin Hough to B. F. Barrett. May 25, 1857, AA. '

20william Benade to J. P. Stuart, August 14. 1859" AA.

21Sabin Hough, "The Union--The Last and True Remedy, "

(newspaper clipping from unidentifiable source. January 21. 1861).
U~ .

22Benade to Stuart. November 30, 1863. AA.

 455

During the war Benade fought other "copperheads;' as well,

1nclUdi~9 John J~:>t, Willard ~y, Frank sewa..0 and ; G. Cath­

_eartJ3 One of his chief aims was t2 prevent such "traitors" from
? being newly ordained into the New Chur.ch. A case in point was the

request for ordination b(Willard- Hinkley, of Baltimore in 1862. The

Committee of Ministers and Laymen of the Pennsylvania Association

examined Hinkley and found him sound theologically. Hearing that

he was regarded a secessionist by some New Churchmen, they put

the following question to him: "Are you wi.!Iing and ready to sustain
-)
\ the government of the Country by word and deed, in its eff~s to
I
! suppr-ess th.=... eXiSting~llion 1" When Hinkley refused to answer,

the committee postponed action on his request for ordination. 24

Benade had no doubt that Hinkley was a secessionist even'

though he had committed no overt act of treason. To ordain such a

rebel against the United States government would have given aid and

comfort to the enemy and made him a traitor! 2S Benade also worried

about what a man like Hinkley would teach once he gained the badge
." ---..,.:;...-~---
of authority. In his mind in a time of war only loyal citizens were

needed in the New Church.

23Ibid. Benade to Stuart, December 4, 1863, AA.

to Stuart, May 30, 1864, AA. to Hugh Johnson, November 26,
1866. AA..,.
24Benade to John L. Jewett, March 19, 1862, AA.

2S.Benade to Jewett, March 19, 1862, AA. Benade to Stuart,

May I, 1862, AA.
 456

Our country is engaged in a struggle for life; & he

that is not for.!.L is ag,ainst it. There is no question,
& can be none, of opinions. The Executive has called
upon the people, not, to express their opinions, or to
say what they think, but to take ~ in their hands, &
to give their means, --to defend thei common parent
against the assaults of a murderer. Every man is bound
to ooey fl1fs call. He who hesitates, --or does not obey;'
because he thinks the murderer has good reasons, &
sufficient cause to make the assault, is particeps
criminis, --& as such, self-prescribed. . • • The
Church is not only authorized, but bound to r Qllire its
members to lov_e t ~r country, as the Neighbor in ~
hig est natural s~e;--& to do good to it, by obeying
its laws, & acting as good citizens. 26

The decision of the Pennsylvania Association caused some

stir in the General Convention among the small but influential "copper­

head" element.
.,/ - - - - --- -
Hinkley Uied to bypass Benade by appealing to
.."

Thomas Worcester. 27 The move was futile, for the Orthodox Conven­

lion party aligned itself with the Academy on the matter of patriotism.

Worcester did submit Hinkley's application for ordination to the proper

committee but the outcome was a foregone conclusion. Worcester had

no more respect than Benade for Hinkley's silence and he too felt that

patriotism to the Union was at this time an "indispensable" qualifica-

Hon for membership in the New Church, not to speak of ordination.

He advised Hinkley to answer the question and reapply to the

26Benade to Jewett, March 19, 1862, AA.

27Willard H. Hinkley to the General Convention, April 24,

1863, Hinkley Family Correspondence, SSRA.
 457
28
Pennsylvania Association. Hinkley retorted that his political

opinions were none of the New Church's business as long as he

obeyed the laws of God and his country. 29

The zealous patriotism'of Benade and Worcester was no

quirk of fate; it was a hallmark of New Churchmen based on the

-
redemptive role the United States was to play and on the Sweden-
-
borgian definition of the nation as a collective man. One's nation

was the neighbor spoken of in the commandments of Christ in the New

Testament.

That every man is bound to love his country. not as

he loves himself. but in preference to himself, is a
law inscribed upon the human heart . . .30

--
Love of country thus took precedence over love for any other human
-'

agency or individual. ~ch love proved whether ()r not a person

really loved the Lord's Kingdom. the heavenly counterpart of an earthly

nation. and the Lord Himself. That love had to be strong enough that

the New Churchman would readily die for his country if necessary. 31

28Thomas Worcester to W. H. Hinkley. May 2, May 28.

1863. HFC. SSRA.

29Hinkley to Worcester. May 30. 1863. HFC. SSRA.

30DeCharms. National Union. p. 21. This is a quotation of

Swedenborg's True Christian Religion.

31 John Westall. "Report on the Relation of the Christian

Citizen to His Country. " New Jerusalem Magazine, XXX:V. No. 11
(1863). 545, 547. 550.
 458

When war came many Swedenborgians volunteered their

services. They were of all ages and both sexes, and some of the

older men could not find a place of service so they contented them­

selves with drumming up patriotic fervor at home. A number of

-_.
minister's sons entered the service, at least one minister
.
became a
­ ~

chaplain, and a few New Church girls worked as nurses. 32 Within

the institutional New Church sentiment ran strong for a forthright

declaration of Union support from the General Convention. A small

Opposition party in the Convention succeeded in blocking a statement

each year until 1865. They had precedent on their side since the

New Church had refrained from issuing proclamations on all the

controversial matters of the years 1840 to 1861. They also had the

Swedenborgian predilection for unanimous action and strong leader­

ship favoring them:

The single mos t important man thwarting the New Church

desire to spea.k officially on the Civil War was John Hough James of
. ~

Urbana, Ohio. James had been reared in Cincinnati where his father,

32Theophllus Parsons, Memoir of Emily Elizabeth Parsons

(Boston: Little, Brown and Co., 1880), 159 pp. Parson's dcughter,
Emily, served in military hospitals in New York and St. Louis during
the Civil War. J. P. Stuart's sons, Julius and Lyman, and Richard
DeChanns' son, George, were three of the minister's Sons to see
active duty. Henry Weller supposedly served as a chaplain for
Shennan's army for a time. The Rev. A. O. Brickman, former Lutheran
clergyman and minister to various German New Church congregations,
was the only official New Church chaplain in the-CiVrrWar. See
New Church Life, LXXI, No. 5 (1951), 216-219.
 459

I.evi James, was a prominent Whig politically and a leader of the

community economically and culturally. 33 John attended Cincinnati

College, which his father had helped found, and studied law with

David K. Este, son-in-law of William Henry Harrison. After being

admitted to the bar and marrying Abbe Bailey, James and his young

-
wife moved to Urbana, Ohio, in 1826. 34

i~hn H. James kept his father's political faith. As a staunch

Whig he supported Harrison and Clay locally and as a State Senator.

By 1842 James sensed that the Whig Party was dying in the face of

new political alignments, but he never became anything else. From

either the Democrats or the Republicans.

--
1854 to 1860 he was without a party because he could not support

In 1860 he supported John

Bell's Constitutional Union Party, then in 1864 he favored George

McClellan's bid for the Presidency. He was still not a Democrat in

1864 or after the war even though he opposed Republican reconstruc­

tion policies. 35 John James remained an Old Whig all his life. As

an Urbana paper put it, that position was a lonely one in 1870.

33 Levi James was a bank director, insurance executive, and

steamboat entrepreneur in Cincinnati, as well as a founder of Cin­
cinnati College and the Cincinnati Medical College. He and his wife,
Rachel Hough Jalr.es, came from Virginia in 1813. See William E. and
Ophia D. Smith, !l Buckeye Titan (Cincinnati: Historical and Philo­
sophical Society of Ohio, 1953), pp. 19, 28, 80.

34Smith , Titan, pp. 80, 91, 102, 132-133, 297.

35 Ibid.,
. pp. 152, 353, 386-388, 427, 447-448, 474, 478,
514, 524, 529-530.
 460

It 1s now pretty 'well known that the bId Whig Party

has its headquarte.rs in Urbana and may be seen
daily, driving about in an old buggy, drawn by an
old horse, that 30es his old ways and will stand only
at his 'old post. 6 '.

The pertinent fact about James politically during the Civil

War i~ his anti-Republican stanc~. 'He never questioned Lincoln's

personal integrity but he believed the man to be under the sway of

misguided advisors. The Lincoln Administration had no regard for t~e

.\

Constitution as he read that document. 37 As one reads deeper into

James' thinking during this period two assumptions seem to undergird

his anti-Republican feeling. The first was a distrust for democracy

Southern pol1ticans and commercial interests.

--
and the second was his interpretation of secession as the plot of
---
James' distrust of democracy stemmed immediately from the

intense opposition he had experienced in Ohio from the Democrats.

James figured prominently in banking and railroad development

around Urbana and in the state as a whole, so he was a frequent

target for Democratic attacks. 38 But James was also influenced

by anti-democratic strains running through Swedenborgian thought.

When Swedenborgians lauded the m'erits of the American political

36 Ibid ., p. 539.

37 Ibid., pp. 185, 474-475, 492, 520.

38 Ib1d ., pp. 300, 318, 323, 363, 432-433.

 461

system most of them m~ant- the system of republicanism represented

in the checks and balances of the Constitution. They seemed to

assume that only the "best men" would operate the system. and these

chosen few were selected by God and given special endowments for

the purpose of ruling wisely for the common good. In their Whiggish

thinking Swedenborgians were not very distinctive. The writings of

Thomas Worcester reflect this turn of mind. 39

The second assumption underlying James' anti-Republican

'---'"' --" --
sentiment was his attitude toward slavery. the South. and secession.

Jame~ felt that slavery would have died out peacefully if .left alone

so he had consistently decried abolitionism before the Civil War.

He was not anti-Negro for he supported the extension of the vote in

Ohio to free Negroes. and he did not protest John Fremont's move of

freeing the slaves of rebels. 40 For him the war was not to eradicate

slavery or force the South into conformity with the rest of the nation.

War was necessary to destroy the secessionist leadership. 41 James

failed to see the complexity of the ye:'!rs since the Missouri Compromise

39"Address by Rev. Thomas Worcester, DD.," New Jerusalem

Messenger. VIII, No. 4 (1862), 15. This address. delivered before
the General Convention in June, 1862, dealt with the source of civil
authority. It sparked a vigorous debate in the New Church. partly
because of its explicit expression of distrust for democracy.

40Smith• Titan. pp. 430, 447-448. 476. 525.

41 Ibid•• pp. 184. 452. 507.
 462

of 1821 and thus never realized"how deeply rooted in Southern life

the secessionist leadership was. He hoped in vain that the defeat

of the rebellion would s_olve the maze of problems facing the United

States in the 1860' s.

These two premises, that democracy could be dangerous and

that secession was a conspiracy foisted on the South by a few evil

men, were enough to keep James a Whig long after his party disap­

peared. He could not support Democratic "mobocracy" nor Republican

vengeance against the South. During the war another situation

developed to reinforce James' anti-Republican views. Personal

tragedy stalked the family and James resentfully linked it to the

Lincoln Administration. His son John Henry was not sent home from

the Union Army until he was fatally ill. His daughter Ellen and wife

Abbe died caring for John Henry in 1863, within four days of one

another. James considered all three victims of Republican incompe­

42
tence.

Knowing the background of John Hough James makes it

difficult to understand how fellow New Churcl1'men could regard him

)
as a traitor. He was not even a "copperhead" for he distinctly

refused to support the activities of Clement Vallindingham in Ohio

" 43
although a few New Churchmen ~id so. His son fought with the

42Ibid., pp. 499-501.

43Ibid., pp. 474, 478, 503, 516, 519.

rv" ,,--'0 L.... "'-<-­

"""-:-bl.... <Y4 ~ ( ",1

 463 .

Union army and his family at home supported the United States

Sanitary Commission efforts to aid the Union cause. 44 One suspects

that as with Willard Hinkley, John Hough James was accused as much

for what he was not, namely a loyal Lincolnite, than for any activities

smacking of genuine treason.

James was a stalwart of the New Church and the General

Convention. . H~as instrumental in founding both Urbana Uniyersity

45
and the Urbana New Church Society in 1850. During the 1850's at

Urbana University he and Milo Williams led the struggle against

Academy tendencies at the college and successfully defeated the

aims of J. P. Stuart. Over the years he became the most powerful

r­
layman in the General Convention outside Boston, with the possible

exception of J. Young Scammon, the Chicago lawyer who became the

Vice President of the Convention in 1863.

With this tradition of loyalty to the Convention and his own

considerable skill as a politician, James was able to prevent the New

Church from officially declaring itself a Union affilia.te. Not even

all his good friends at Urbana suppo:ted him in his campaign, for the

society there was split into Lincoln and anti-Lincoln factions. Senti­

ment for overriding James' objections increased steadily until 1865

44 Ibid ., p. 477.

45 Ibid., pp. 169, 171.

 464

when a Unionist resolution was passed. James submitted a minority

report protesting the acti·on. 46

One of the leaders during the 1860's for a Unionist stand by

the New Church was the president of Urbana University, Chauncey

Giles. Giles and James were old friends from the Urbana battles of

the 1850's against J. P. Stuart, and both sustained the wrath of the

Academy in the 1860's. But the two men did not agree politically,

at least not. during the war. Giles regretted New Church silence

once the war had begun even though he was no more eager for agita­

tion of the political scene before the war than James had been.
r~hauncey ~ graduated from Williams College in the early

1830' s full of religious doubts and wanderlust. - He fell into the

catch-all occupation of purposeless college students of his -generation

--teaching. Giles flitted from one academy to another unt.il in 1840

he settled for a time in Hamilton, Ohio, where he married. Up to this

time his diary is characterized by an inner gloom similar to that

expressed by Simon Snyder Rathvon, but in Hamilton he founcl a

stabilizing happiness in his family and in his new Swedenborgian

46For the resolutions of 1865 and a reference to James'

report (the report was not printed with the other Convention pro­
ceedings) see the New Ierusalem Magazine, XXXVIII. No. 1 (1865).
14-17.
 465

faith. Very likely he was introduced to Swedenborg by his friend

and fellow townsman William C. Howells. 47

From the time Giles became a receiver of Swedenborg in the

early 1840' s to his appointment as President of Urbana University

in 1858. his life story is one of gradually deepening involvement in

New C/hurch affairs. Giles proved to be a progressive educator.

following the ideas of education espoused by Horace Mann. and he

supported Urbana University enthusiastically from the first organiza­

tional meeting in 1849. 48 Yet Giles came to the realization that

teaching was not enough to satiate his desire for self-fulfillment and

a life of usefulness. Through the encouragement of J. P. Stuart and

David Powell, Giles began to preach. 49 In 18S3 he took his first

-~

pastorate in Cincinnati where he remained until going to New York

In 1864. From 1858 on he handled the dual responsibilities of pastor

and college president.

Giles entered the New Church at a time when the Church

was split into three ideological and two organizational factions. He

47Carrle Giles Carter. ed .• The Life of Chauncey Giles ~

Told in His Diary and Correspondence (Boston: Massachusetts New
Church Union. 1920), pp. 21. 23. 26. 53. 57. 62. 64. 75. 78-79.

48Ibid., pp. 79-81, 83. 90. 98, 129, 131. 135.

49Chauncey Giles to J. P. Stuart, January 20, 1852. AA.

Official copies of the ordination proceedings of 1852 and 1853 by
David Powell exist in SSRA.
 466

deplored the infighting and from the start refused to completely

identify with anyone group, hoping that differences could be recon­

ciled. 50 This attitude of tolerance and patience characterized his

entire life, and h}s pastorates were generally long, successful ones. 51

In many ways he was the direct opposite of Richard DeCharms.

DeCharms agitated to purify; Giles smoothed over differences to

," I

prevent self-destruction. He tried to avoid sides in the Urbana debate

of the mid-1850's, to·Stuart's dismay, but with his decision to accept

the top post at Urbana in 1858 Giles committed himself to the Orthodox

party of the General Convention. He would prove to be one of the

ablest leaders of the Convention after Worcester's death, and in that

capacity he became the symbol for much Academy antagonism. 52

A more unlikely man to help marshall support for a political

resolution in the New Church could hardly be imagined. In January,

50C hauncey Giles to J. P. Stuart, July 30, 1849; July 25,

1850; November 15, 1852, AA.

5 1Giles served pastorates in Cincinnati from 1852-1864,

New York from 1864-1877, and Philadelphia from 1877-1889. For a
character sketch of Giles see the undated typed "Memorial Address"
by William McGeorge of Philadeiphia in SS RA, especially pp. 6, 8-9.

52The correspondence of Chauncey Giles and C. H. Meday

from 1880-1884, SSRA, reveals the extent of Academy antagonism to
Giles snd Giles' refusal to take._tbftAc.ademy seriously. Hi~eneral
attitude was that the~m" was or y. 0 osition. It would
work out its course and then die. (Giles to Meday, December 25,
1881, Glles-Meday Correspondence, SSRA.)
 467

1861, Glles exposed his lack of political sophistication to Dr.

Wllliam Holcombe.

I do not take much interest in politics. I expect the

South will secede, and I sincerely hope a"ll the good
results you predict from this revo"iUUon and rebellion
may follow. and many more. I think r ag r ; ; ) with you
in many things concerning the negro nature, and the
bad effec~s of abolitionism. 53

Gtles went on to explain to Holcombe what he sensed about Northern

sentiment, and his comments show sound judgment in spite of his

political inexperience. For example, he assured Ho1combe that the

great majority of Northerners were no more antislavery than he, and

Lincoln's election was no great mandate of the people to tamper with

slavery as Southerners feared. 54

Glles was shaken out of his complacency by the ho.n:OLOf

the protracted civil war which ensued. He became iqcreasingly dis­

turbed with New Church reluctance to talk about the war in its

periodicals, more so as his own attitude toward the war defined

itself sharply. In spite of his assurance that the result of the war

would be a glorious triumph of republican principles in politics and

a victory of the principles of "heavenly life" in the affairs of men,

Glles was angered by the scourge which the South had brought upon

53Carter, ed., Life of Giles, p. 179.

54 Ibid., p. 180.

------~---------

"­ 1
468

the United States. He concluded that the New Church was guilty of

being too abstract in its teachings. 55

From 1863 Giles became more militant and insisted that the

New Church publicly and officially lend its support to the great war

against evil which was raging. 56 He found ready allies in Academy

mTn and in the Orthodox Convention party in New England, most of

whom had been champing for Convention action since 1862 at least.

These men disagreed with each other politically and the differences

were serious enough for N. C. Burnham to ask if Thomas· Worcester

believed in the old theory of the divine right of kings. Burnham

certainly thought so by reading Worcester's sermons relating to

political order. As far as he was concerned the Boston men were as

mistaken on the source qf civil authority as they were on most

spiritual subjects. 57

In spite of the differences the Academy a.nd the Orthodox

party did agree during the war that slavery needed tobe rooted out

55Ibid., pp. 188, 194.

(~~id., p. 205. Chauncey Giles, The Problem of American

Nationality, and the Evils Which Hinder Its Solution (Cincinnati: n. p. ,
1863). 24 pp. , "The Lesson of the Hour, " New Jerusalem
Messenger, X, No. 44 (1865), 173. This article is a. sermon by Giles
on Lincoln's assassination.
57!'t C. Burnham to J. P. Stuart, September 24. 1862, AA.
to William Benade, October 25, 1863, AA. J. P. Stuart,
"Address of the General Convention of the New Church in the United
States of America to the General Conference of the New Church in
Great Britain, 1862," New Jerusalem Ma-gazine, XXXVI, No. 1 (1863).
48.
 469

of American life, 58 that loyalty to the Union was required of New

Churchmen, 59 and that the result of the war would be a new era of

freedom politically and religiously. 60 Resolutions to this effect were

adopted by the Massachusetts Association of the New Church in

April, 1865,61 and again in modified form by the General Convention

of 1865. 62 An additional resolution offered by J. Y. Scammon of

I

Chicago was adopted unanimously at the 1865 Convention and is of

such importance in understanding New Church thought at the end of

the war that it bears quotation in full.

58Theophilus Parsons, Slavery: fu Origins, Influence, and

'Destiny (Boston: William Carter and Bro., 1863), 36 pp. Thomas
Worcester, "Address," New Jerusalem Magazine, XXXVII, No. 6 (1864),
293-300. "What Are the Teachings of the New Church with Regard to
Slavery?" New Jerusalem Magazine, XXXVII, No. 9 (1865), 472-483.

59In the early years of the war the editor of the New Jeru­
salem Messenger, John Jewett, tried to resist the wave of New Church
enthusiasm for the Union cause. Jewett avoided discussion of the
war and warned of overzealous patriotism of the "my country right or
wrong variety." See Mes senger. VII, No. 5 (1861), 18; VII. No. 33
(1862), 130. In 1863 Jewett was replaced by the more "patriotic"
J. P. Stuart. For an official General Convention resolution on patri­
otism see New Ierusalem Magazine, XXXVII, No. 1 (1864), 12-13, .

60parsons, Slavery, pp. 32, 34. B. F. Barrett, Love Toward

Enemies and the Way to Manifest .ll (Philadelphia: J. B. Uppincott
and Co., 1864), p. 22. Thomas Worcester, "The PreSident's Address,"
New Ierusalem Magazine, XXXVIII, No. 1 (1865), 26.
"Sermon. " New Jerusalem Magazine, XXXVII, No. 11 (1865), 554.

61 New Jerusalem Magazine, XXXVII, No. 12 (1865), Appendix,

2-3.

62Ibid., XXXVIII, No. 1 (1865), 14-17.

 470

R~sol,!:~d, That as the Revelation made to the New

Church was the first that was addressed through the
Press tOJhe rational_understa?d~~s...£LJ!l~n, and for
the first time in the History of the World, NUNC
UCET (it is now lawful to enter with the understanding
into the things of Faith), is written over the portals
of the Church; and, as until Science could be enlight­
ened by the influence of the New Dispensatioil, the
Doctrines of Genuine Truth could not be brought down
and illustrated and confirmed by the natural Sciences:
so, until the principles of the New Church had
sufficiently descended into the minds of men to ~le
the American Peq2J.e to examine the form and operations
of our Institutions in rational light from sPiYffii'al­
grounds without violating in their judgment the Constitu­
t1O'il: the Church was not in a state to discuss the great
questions which are now agitating the American People.
But now the effects of the Last Judgment have become
so operative in our country, that henceforth the Church
and the American People are in greater freedom; and
we may now, without [email protected], place the mottO:­
"Nunc licet, " over all our portals, and discuss all
questi~· in the freedomand rationality of the New
Dispensation. 63

The resolution promised to open the Convention to the free­

dom of conscience and discussion which Acad~my men and Free

Spirits had been urging upon it for years. For the first time since

the 1820' s, when the Boston clique imposed an unofficial censorship

over all controversy in the ~ Jerusalem Magazine due to the shock

which its claims to leadership in the New Church received, the

Orthodox party seemed willing to hope for the imminent victory of

Swedenborgianism. The doors thrown open so widely in 1865 were

63 Ibid ., p. 17.
 471

closed almost immediately, for several new shocks dashed the

sparks of hope.

----
The first blow came in the form of Lincoln's assassination.

New Churchmen recoiled in horror but several reflected that Lincoln

had been permitted to fulfill his destiny in that he had suppressed

the Southern rebellion. They felt that Providence intended someone

else to lead the country through the crucial R~construction period. 64

The second shock came in the quality of leadership and the policies

of vengeance pursued in the years following the war. Enthusiasm of

New Churchmen for the glorious new era of human development hardly

outlasted the year 1866. 65 From 1866 to 1870 the New Church slid

back into pre-war patterns.

The crisis of the Civil War for the New Church was one of

conscience. The Church had great difficulty coping with the cruel

joke the Civil War had played upon them in a~ousing their hopes and

letting them fall flat. By 1870 the New Church was frozen into' its

64william B. Hayden, b. Brief AbstracJ of Remarks .Qy Rev.

Wm. ],. Hayden at the New Terusalein Chu~ch on the Funeral of the
President, April ~ 1865 (Cincinnati, Ohio: Mallory, Power and
Company, 1865). pp. 3, 9. Messenger, X, No. 43 (1854). 170.
William Benade, The Death of Abraham Lincoln; What-h"Represents
(Pittsburgh: W. G. Johnston and Co., 1865), pp. 12-13, 22-23,
26-27.

65Hon. T. A. plants, Speech of Hon. 1.. A. Plants, of Ohio,

Q!l Reconstruction; Delivered in the House of Representatives,
February 1i. 1866 (Washington, D. C.: Congressional Globe Office,
1866). 16 pp.
 o
472

pre-war mold of three distinct segments and the common dreams of

the war years were again laid aside for some future clay. Neither

the Academy or the Orthodox party suffered greatly in numbers. but

the war signaled the last opportunity for preventing the eventual

split of the two groups into two separate bodies. The Free Spirits

were hardest hit. George Bush died Just before the war; Henry WeBer

died in disappointment in 1868; and Sabin Hough was thoroughly dis­

credited because of his political views. Others like(Ternald left the

......1 ------ ,--...-.

New Church by 1870. With the decline of the Free Spirits went New

Church chances for maintaining contact with American society and

enthusiasm for reforming that society. After 1870 the New Church

became increasingly isolated from the mainstream of life and lost the

abrasiveness of the period 1840 to 1870.

 c

CHAPTER XV

CONCLUSION

--
According to the United States census of 1870 some 18,700
---
people considered themselves Swedenborgians in that year, compared

to 850 in 1840. Even this substantial leap hardly does justice to the

impact of this small band of people upon American society. Due to

their high edu~ona~nd ~ocial levels of achiev~ment, their con­

centration in key urban centers, and their proclivity for publishing

and distributing their views, Swedenborgians exerted influence far

out of proportion to their size.

Prospects seemed bright for the New Church in 1870 on the

surface. Outside of Philadelphia, the base of operations for B. F.

Barrett's tirades against the General Convention, and the home of

the large, independent Philadelphia First Society, the General Con­

vention ruled supreme. Geo~e Bush was gone from New York and

Henry Weller from LaPorte, Indiana. Academy men seemed to be

working vigorously but peacefully within the Convention to implement

their aims. Spiritualism had been driven underground or outside the

Convention. The many passing temptations of the ante bellum period

473
 ...

474
which would have harnessed Sw<0p.nborgianism to spectacular social

theories 01' faddish enterprises had generally been resisted success­

fully.

By 1870 New Churchmen had made their point that Sweden­

borgianism had to be accepted as a comprehensive ~ocia~system or

not at all. Each new effort to inject new in sights into Swedenborg's

cosmology aroused opposition, frequently in forms which reinforced

isolationist or sectarian attitudes already present. The shock of

unbridled optimism and bitter disappointment brought on by the Civil

War and its aftermath further strengthened the forces of withdrawal.

Immediatism in any form became suspect, gradualism was enshrined

as the normative theory of social change for the New Church, and

fetters were placed on New Church consciences.

This retrenchment ideology benefitted the Convention because

it was essentially the policy the Orthodox party under Boston leader­

ship had been advocating since the 1820's. The Academy fared well

also. Even though before the war they had been immediatists in the

sense that they believed ultimate victory was imminent, Academy men

had forged out a positive program which overshadowed that slight error

in judgment. They seemed to have the answer for the confusion which

had prevailed in the Swedenborgian community for nearly fifty years,

namely an infallible Swedenborg. Such a high view of Swedenborg

was more appealing in 1870 than it had been in 1840 and one of the
 Q

475

reasons was its tendency to prevent violations of New Church

tradition.
~ ~
The Free Spirits disappe~d as a distinct entity after 1870.

They were a phenomenon of -the ferment caused by the interaction of

Swedenborgianism and society. In a sense the Free Spirits committed

suicide in that they never saw the need for a coalition based on a

program that could be pre',ented to the New Church community. As

long as strong leaders such as Bush and Weller were alive their

individual stature and appeal enabled the Free Spirits to serve as a

countervailing force against the other two segments of the Church.

When these individuals passed away the movement slowly died.

With the disintegration of this common enemy for the AcadeJ!ly

and the Orthodox Party. and the exis tence of the two remaining groups

within the General Con~eE!~on. the possibility of antagonism within

that Convention were greatly increased. Naturally the chances of a

physical split were also maximized. In the 1870' s the Academy had

sufficient strength to launch a school of its own. The final break with

the Convention occurred in 1890.

Marguerite Block's The New Church In the New World.

written from old-line liberal assumptions. championed the libera:

elements of the Convention and castigated the narrow-mindedness of

~e Academy. This survey has tried not to single out heroes and

villains. However. the study does suggest a reappraisal of the role

 \\ -::.­
.fLc..e.-~/1 ~ t ~ tV, c
.., rr-. - .a..C-<.. ~ I ' -(

( 'I'~ Jr,~f) --/) 416

of sectarianism in any social mov.ement. It is worth noting that the

New Church reached the pinnacle of prestige in 1840 to 1870 while

.......":'--
split into
" .

ree '\:varring se..gments.

-- ­
What was to most Swedenborgians

unwanted controversy and undesirable confusion was in fact a source

of strength. Instead of being its Achilles heel, the free conscience

of these years was its Samson's hair.

Any damage to the New Church of the free operation of the

--
-
consciences of its members was more than offset by its benefits as

long as at least three groups existed to balance one another and

prevent anyone view from capturing the minds of American Sweden­

borgians. As we have seen in the struggle with Spiritualism all three

segments could act together to resist the most spectacular dangers

to the core of Swedenborgian teaching.

The clash of at least three different interpretations of Sweden­

. borg, within a broad framework of acceptance of his authority and

world-view, proved to be 'a creative experience. Swedenborgians

reveled in it enthusiastically for the most part and they generally

maintained an optimistic attitude toward their chanc~s of triumphing.

They saw themselves as agents of Providence working out the destiny

of mankind.

After 1870 the New Church lost its balance with the Free

~
Spirits decimated. It polarized with both groups moving into their

own version of fully-matured sectarianism. The New Church lost

 ...

477

interest in reform, indeed, in society as a whole. The Swedenborgian

critique of society, which might well be called" Spiritual Socialism, "

lost its cutting edge to patriotism and social conservatism. The New

Church lost its ability to move with the world and effectively challenge

its alien premises.

Swedenborgians naturally stress the role of external factors

when explaining their failure to capture the Old Church or supersede

it, and certainly movements like Spiritualism did hurt the New Church

in Europe and America. Swedenborgians also had difficulty coping

with the piecemeal reforms of the ante bellum era, for these programs

and their leaders denied the Swedenborgian concept of totality. In

return New Churchmen, fearing compromise, struck out alone. Their

results in terms of achieving any of their specific reform goals in

soc.~ety at large were minimal.

Swedenborgianism rendered itself impotent at the very point

in history wnen its influence was at its peak, or one should more

properly say that the New Church as an institution rendered itself

impotent. It permitted itself to retreat into near oblivion after the

crisis of the Civil War era, taking ideas of merit with it into relative

obscurity. The vaunted Swedenborgian conscience was bound by

in-group conformity. External factors were influential in that process,

especially in helping to crystalize the form the conformity would take,

r-
but internal pressures were decisive. ~The years 184~
(
-----
Witnessed (a m".ljestic struggle'within the consciences of noble men •
.----­
the conflict of freedom versus institutionalization.
----- ------------
New Churchmen
478

faced one of the crucial questions of any social organism. how to

reconcile the freedom of man with the implementation of a program of

social redemption.
This is an authorized facsimile and was produced
by microfilm-xerography in 1974 by Xerox University
Microfi lms, Ann Arbor, Michigan, U.S.A.